APPEAL

Section 1Who may appeal. Any party may appeal from a judgment or final order, unless the accused will be placed in double jeopardy.

What is an appeal?Appeal means a review of a decision of a lower court by a higher court. The higher court will determine whether the decision of the lower court is correct or just.

Appeal:Purely statutory and may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provision of lawPerfection of an appeal in the manner and within the period laid down by law is not only mandatory but jurisdictional

Appeal:Once granted, it becomes part of due process and should be liberally applied in favor of right to appealOrdinary appeal is a matter of right if allowed by lawRight to appeal is compellable by mandamus

Appeal by People:When a decision is appealable by the People, it is the Solicitor General who represents the StatePP must be impleaded as respondent to enable SolGen to comment on the petition; failure to implead is fatal to petitioners cause

May an accused appeal from a judgment of acquittal?Normally, NO, because a judgment of acquittal becomes final immediately upon promulgation.It cannot be called for correction or amendment because of the doctrine that nobody may be put twice in jeopardy for the same offenseThe said doctrine extends to an appeal in the same case by the prosecution after jeopardy had attached, thereby in effect viewing such appeal as presenting a new and separate jeopardy

May an accused appeal from a judgment of acquittal?Kepner vs US: appeal of the prosecution from a judgment of acquittal would place the accused in double jeopardy

May an accused appeal from a judgment of acquittal?PP vs Meneses 74 phil 119Issue: Whether a competent court, while acquitting an accused, may permit itself to criticize or reprehend his acts and conduct in connection with the transaction out of which the accusation arose Ruling: The reprehension is not intended as a penalty because it is not embodied in the judgment or dispositive part of the decision. But since it reflects upon and affects the accused, he has the right to question it and to move for its elimination from the court's opinion if he thinks it is unwarranted and uncalled for, and to appeal to a higher tribunal if his motion is denied.

No reopening to modify judgments:After judgment had become final, the reopening of case to modify accuseds sentence would place him in double jeopardy

No reopening to modify judgments:PP vs PaetTo reopen the case for the purpose of increasing the penalty, as is sought in the Governments appeal, would be placing the accused in double jeopardy, and under Rule 118, section 2 of the Rules of Court, the Government cannot appeal in a criminal case if theDefendantwould be placed thereby in double jeopardy.

Order granting or denying new trial is NOT appealable:Not an interlocutory order; thus, cannot be subject of appealIn deciding the case anew, the court may acquit the defendant and the prosecution would have no more opportunity of questioning the legality of the order because the defendant may plead double jeopardy

Order granting or denying new trial is NOT appealable:PP vs Bocar, et althe first jeopardy was never terminated, and the remand of the criminal case for further hearing and/or trial before the lower courts amounts merely to a continuation of the first jeopardy, and does not expose the accused to a second jeopardy.

Erroneous dismissal after trial constitutes double jeopardy:Erroneous dismissal may no longer be disturbed in a petition for certiorari and mandamus for it would violate his constitutional right to be exempt from double jeopardyAlthough it is erroneous, decision may not be annulled or set aside because it amounted to a judgment of acquittal; it became final and executory upon promulgation

Erroneous dismissal after trial constitutes double jeopardy:PP vs Pedro Laggui

Motion to QuashAppeal may be availed of esp. when it is a dismissal on a technicality for it is not considered as an acquittalBut if it is based on the grounds of extinction of criminal liability or double jeopardy, then prosecution cannot appeal because that would place the accused under double jeopardy

Appeal by prosecution because penalty is wrong:e.g. accused is convicted but penalty is very lowCannot be appealed as this will place the accused under double jeopardy

When judgment of acquittal is null and voidPP vs Balisacan: the accused had first entered a plea of guilty. Subsequently, however, he testified, in the course of being allowed to prove mitigating circumstances, that he acted in complete self-defense. Said testimony had the effect of vacating his plea of guilty and the courta quoshould have required him to plead a new on the charge, or at least direct that a new plea of not guilty be entered for him. This was not done. It follows that in effect there having been no standing plea at the time the courta quorendered its judgment of acquittal, there can be no double jeopardy with respect to the appeal herein.judgment of acquittal is null and void, then appeal is allowed because void judgment does not give rise to double jeopardy

Review or Certiorari likewise prohibited:Remedy of certiorari to annul judgment of acquittal is prohibited because reopening of which is forbidden by the doctrine of double jeopardyRamos vs Hodges: The judgment acquitting the respondent, necessarily concluded the case charging him with usury in such a way that it can no longer be reopened by certiorari for any reason because it is forbidden by the doctrine that a person cannot be placed twice in jeopardy.

Review or Certiorari likewise prohibited:Central Bank vs CA: Ordinarily, errors of judgment may be corrected in a timely appeal from the judgment on the merits. Such remedy, however, is not available in the case at bar, the decision involved being one of acquittal. An appeal therefrom by the People would run counter to the accused's constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy.

Review or Certiorari likewise prohibited:Grant of Rule 65 of Rules of Court is premised on the conclusions that:Findings of facts were based on speculations and conjecturesExhibit relied upon by appellate court has not been offered nor admitted in evidence during trialAppellate court gave a meaning to it contrary to its contents

No right to appeal by offended party where accused was completely exonerated:Sadio vs RTC of Antique: criminal complaint was dismissed making the accused completely exonerated from the criminal charge and thereby extinguishing the civil action connected with the criminal case; complainant cannot appeal except when double jeopardy had not yet attached and that he must do the appeal within the reglementary period.Where no reservation is made and accused is convicted on the criminal aspect, it is error not to award damages thus decision is appealable as to the civil aspect

Exception where judgment made reservation:Lim vs OretaAccused is not yet in double jeopardy when judgment against him was not yet final, for it left something to be done

Exception:Appeal shall not constitute double jeopardy if:Dismissal is made upon motion, or with express consent of defendantDismissal is not an acquittal or based upon consideration of the evidence or on the merits of the caseThe question to be passed upon is purely legal so that should the dismissal be found incorrect, the case would be remanded to lower court for further proceedings to determine guilt or innocence of defendant

Plea of Double Jeopardy in Certiorari Premature:Where validity and legal effect of the orders of dismissal issued by respondent judge are in issue, defense of double jeopardy is prematureGR L-46882*

Who else can appeal?Offended party may appeal from any judgment, order or ruling which is adverse to his civil rights or to the civil liability, or on pure questions of law. Provided he has not waived or reserved the right to file a separate civil action and the civil action is deemed instituted, because the civil aspect is different from the criminal aspect. So the offended party can appeal from that portion of judgment adverse to his civil liability.

Who else can appeal?PP vs Madali January 16 2001

Who else can appeal?Bondsmencan appeal in case of judgment against the bond in a forfeiture caseEmployer of the accusedcan also appeal from any order of the court making him subsidiarily liable for the civil liability of the accused under art 103 of RPC

Solicitor, not fiscal or private prosecutor, represents PP on appeal:PP vs Mendoza Mar 14 1994Republic vs Partisala 1982

Petition filed by offended party allowed:Private offended party retains the right to bring a special civil action for certiorari in his own name in criminal proceedingsGR 127899PP vs Calo JrSecs 1 and 2 of rule 65: persons aggrieved include the offended party in criminal cases

Right of Offended Party to Appeal:Ramos vs GonongJust because accused waived his right to appeal thus making the decision become final as to its criminal aspect, it does not follow that the trial court could not order the defendant to indemnify the offended party

Right of Offended Party to Appeal:PP vs Rodriguez Gr 155309PP vs UrsuaPP vs AmistadPP vs Roy Padilla et alMaximo vs GerochiCalalang vs IAC

Right to Appeal Limited to Civil Liability:Interest of the private offended party is limited to civil liabilityIn prosecution of offense, complainants role is limited to that of a witness for the prosecution

Right to Appeal Limited to Civil Liability:In case of dismissal or acquittal, appeal on criminal aspect may be undertaken only by the SolGenBernardo vs CA: complainant may appeal the civil aspect despite the acquittal of the accused and may file petition for certiorari in his own name

Right to Appeal the Civil Award:Right of the injured persons in an offense to take part in the prosecution and to appeal for purposes of the civil liability of the accused, necessarily implies that such right is protected in the same manner as the right of the accused to his defenseSuch appeal can be done by private prosecutor on behalf of offended party thus it dispenses the authority and representation of the SolGen

Right to Appeal the Civil Award:Civil indemnity may be increased only if it will not require an aggravation of the decision in the criminal case on which it is based; meaning, accused may not be convicted of a more serious offense or sentenced to a higher penalty to justify the increase in civil indemnity

Right to Appeal the Civil Award:Adequacy of award may be challenged on the ground that it is not commensurate with the gravity of injuries sustained as a result of the offense committedHeirs of rillorta vs judge firme

Right of Prosecution to Appeal:Martinez vs CA

Section 2 Where to appeal. The appeal may be taken as follows:(a) To the Regional Trial Court, in cases decided by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court;(b) To the Court of Appeals or to the Supreme Court in the proper cases provided by law, in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court; and(c) To the Supreme Court, in cases decided by the Court of Appeals. (1a)

Section 3How appeal taken. (a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.(b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review under Rule 42.

(c) The appeal to the Supreme Court in cases where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court is death,reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of death,reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed, shall be by filing a notice of appeal in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.

(d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the death penalty is imposed by the Regional Trial Court. The same shall be automatically reviewed by the Supreme Court as provided in section 10 of this Rule.(e) Except as provided in the last paragraph of section 13, Rule 124, all other appeals to the Supreme Court shall be by petition for review oncertiorariunder Rules 45.

MTC RTC: ordinary appeal by a notice of appeal (rule 40)RTC original RTC or CA: notice of appealRTC appellate CA: petition for review (rule 42)RTC imposed reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment SC: notice of appealRTC imposed death SC: no notice of appeal because of automatic review

All other appeals not mentioned above, meaning:CA SC: petition for review oncertiorari(Rules 45)RTC directly to SC on questions of law only: petition for review oncertiorari(Rules 45)Sandiganbayan SC: petition for review oncertiorari(Rules 45)Nunez vs Sandiganbayan and Cesar vs Sandiganbayan