ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 124703. January 20, 1999]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROLANDO DE LARA, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 20, 1999.

G.R. No. 124703 (People of the Philippines v. Rolando de Lara, et al.)

Accused-appellant Rolando de Lara was convicted of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, while accused-appellants Carlito Villas, Magno Tamares, and Eduardo Villas were convicted of the crime of forcible abduction, by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 44, of Mamburao, Occidental Mindoro. On August 5, 1998, after their counsel had filed an appeal brief, one of the accused-appellants, Eduardo Villas, wrote a letter to the Court, dated July 27, 1998, for leave to withdraw his appeal, stating:

I am EDUARDO VILLAS co-accused-appellant in the case G.R. # 124703 (People of the Philippines vs. Rolando de Lara). May I have the honor to respectfully come to your Honorable Office to appeal that my appealed case as one of the accused appellant in the above mentioned case be withdrawn.

May I have respectfully state to the Honorable Court that I opted to withdraw my appeal for waiting for 3 years now without the benefit of knowing the result and have already served one-half of my prison sentence and already eligible for the petition for Executive Clemency.

For this reason, the Court required accused-appellants' counsel, Atty. Wilfredo C. Andres of the Public Attorney's Office (PAO), to verify the voluntariness of the execution of the said letter and the Solicitor General to comment thereon.

On November 23, 1998, Atty. Andres of PAO manifested that he believes that the brief for plaintiff-appellee contains no new issues that would warrant the filing of a reply brief. On December 8, 1998, he informed the Court that he visited accused-appellant at National Bilibid Prison on November 25, 1998; that accused-appellant Eduardo Villas confirmed to him that he (accused-appellant) had voluntarily written the letter in question; and that he wrote again a letter to express his desire to withdraw his appeal with the hope that he be granted executive clemency. A copy of the second letter was attached to counsel's manifestation. Written in Filipino, the letter reads:

Nov. 25, 1998

Sa mga ikinauukulan,

Ako si Eduardo Villas, kasalukuyang nakapiit sa Cell 114, Bldg. I ng Camp Sampaguita ay kusang nagpapahayag na talagang nais ko nang iatras ang aking apela sa nakapending kong kaso sa supreme court na ma[y] pamagat na People vs. Rolando de Lara, et al at may bilang na 124703 upang ako ay masakop ng posibleng benefits ng "executive clemency."

Salamat po.

(Signed)

EDUARDO VILLAS

On the other hand, on December 17, 1998, the Solicitor General submitted the following comment on the motion to withdraw the appeal:

5. Appellant's conclusion that he has already served one-half of his sentence is apparently mistaken because he has been sentenced by the trial court to a prison term of 10 years and 1 day of prison mayor, as minimum, to 20 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.

In any case, it does not appear that the letter of appellant Eduardo Villas to withdraw his appeal was intended to avoid the imposition upon him of a higher penalty.

. . . .

If allowed, the withdrawal of appellant Eduardo Villas' appeal will make the decision of the trial court convicting him of forcible abduction final and executory. Considering that the affirmance of the said decision is likewise sought by plaintiff-appellee, therefore the letter will not be prejudiced by the grant of appellant's request to withdraw appeal, which will also serve the interest of justice.

PREMISES CONSIDERED, the undersigned counsel for plaintiff-appellee interposes no objection to the grant of appellant Eduardo Villas' request to withdraw appeal.

After considering the foregoing facts, the Court RESOLVED to (a) GRANT the motions for extention of time to comply with the resolution of October 19, 1998 filed by the Public Attorney's Office and the Solicitor General; (b) as prayed for by the Public Attorney's Office, DISPENSE with the filing of the reply brief and CONSIDER the appeal of accused-appellants Rolando de Lara, Carlito Villas, and Magno Tamares submitted for resolution; (c) NOTE the respective compliance with the resolution of October 19, 1998 separately filed by the Public Attorney's Office and the Solicitor General; and (d) GRANT accused-appellant Eduardo Villas' motion to withdraw and DISMISS his appeal in this case. In appeals from the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, before the records are forwarded to the appellate court, the accused may withdraw his appeal in the trial court. Thereafter, but before the case is submitted for decision, the accused may withdraw his appeal in the appellate court. (United States v. Sotto, 38, Phil. 666 (1918)) As this Court held in People v. Redulosa (255 SCRA 279) (1996)), as appellant has the right to continue with his case as an appealed one, so does he have a right, subject to the approval of this Court, to terminate the appeal by withdrawing it.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA B. MAGAY-DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE