Facts:

• Daniel Cucio is the petitioner, with the Court of Appeals and the People of the Philippines as respondents.
• Cucio was convicted of acts of lasciviousness by the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija on May 16, 1972.
• He filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals, receiving a notice on June 15, 1973, to submit his appellant's brief within 30 days.
• Due to his counsel's health issues and other commitments, the appellate court granted two 30-day extensions for filing the brief.
• The second extension was granted on August 29, 1973, with a warning that it was the final opportunity to file.
• On August 27, 1973, Sansano filed an urgent motion for an additional 30-day extension, citing his age and health concerns.
• The appellate court denied this request on September 17, 1973, stating Cucio had not utilized the last chance given.
• Cucio's brief was filed on October 1, 1973, within the time frame of the extension sought.
• On October 8, 1973, Cucio filed a verified motion to reconsider the denial of the extension, which was opposed by no one.
• The appellate court denied the motion for reconsideration on December 6, 1973, asserting Cucio had ample opportunities to file.
• Cucio subsequently filed a petition to set aside the appellate court's resolutions.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Cucio, finding that the appellate court acted with grave abuse of discretion in denying his request for a third extension and dismissing his appeal.
• The Court annulled the appellate court's resolutions dated September 17, 1973, and December 6, 1973.
...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The Supreme Court emphasized that the appellate court's discretion in granting extensions should prioritize justice and fairness over strict procedural adherence.
• Cucio's requests for extensions were timely and based on valid reasons, including his counsel's health issues and logistical challenges.
• The brief was filed within the tim...continue reading