G.R. No. 82216 - Abad vs. Somera

The case arose from an Information filed before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Bauang, La Union, charging petitioner Marlon Curammeng y Pablo with Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code.
On the night of September 25, 2006, the incident occurred when a Maria De Leon bus—driven by Francisco Franco y Andres—experienced a blowout of its rear left tire, which subsequently caught fire. This led Franco to park the bus on the northbound side of the national highway along Santiago, Bauang, La Union, where he then proceeded to unload cargoes.
At a little past midnight on the following day, an RCJ bus driven by Curammeng, while traversing the southbound lane of the highway, struck the parked bus. The collision resulted in the death of Francisco Franco.

Curammeng contended that he was driving at less than 60 kilometers per hour, and upon seeing the stalled Maria De Leon bus, he decelerated. He asserted that, just as he approached the bus, a closed van suddenly appeared from the opposite direction, forcing him to steer his bus toward the west shoulder, which inadvertently led to the fatal collision.
Out of fear and apprehension of reprisal, Curammeng surrendered to the Caba Police Station in the next town. He was subsequently arraigned and pleaded not guilty.

In a Decision dated November 26, 2013, the MTC found Curammeng guilty beyond reasonable doubt. He was sentenced to suffer a penalty ranging from four (4) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor (minimum) to four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional (maximum), and was ordered to pay damages to Franco’s heirs (P100,000.00 in civil indemnity and P200,000.00 in actual damages).
The court based its decision on evidence that showed Curammeng’s inexcusable lack of precaution, noting that he failed to slow down adequately, as corroborated by testimony indicating he was still travelling at around 60 kph at the moment of impact. The presence of barangay tanods near the stalled bus, who would have been signaling for caution, further undermined his defense.

Dissatisfied with the MTC’s decision, Curammeng appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bauang, La Union, Branch 33. On June 3, 2014, the RTC affirmed the conviction, emphasizing the driver’s duty of care as a common carrier and the proximate cause of Franco’s death due to his negligence.
Curammeng subsequently filed a petition for review under Rule 42 before the Court of Appeals (CA). His petition was dismissed in a Resolution dated October 20, 2014 on procedural grounds—notably, his failure to attach a certification of non-forum shopping and material portions of the record.
Despite filing a Motion for Reconsideration with Compliance on November 6, 2014, wherein he provided the omitted documents and explained that the oversight was due to his counsel’s secretary, the CA upheld its initial dismissal in a Resolution dated June 30, 2015, holding that the explanation was insufficient to merit a relaxation of the procedural rules.

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly dismissed Curammeng’s petition for review on technical procedural grounds, specifically for failing to attach a certification of non-forum shopping and required material portions of the record.

Whether the strict application of procedural rules in this case, particularly when the lapse was attributable to counsel’s oversight, should yield to considerations of substantial justice, given that the petition concerns a criminal conviction with significant penalties.

The broader question of whether procedural defects that arise from clerical or administrative lapses should automatically bar a substantive review of the case, especially in scenarios where an appellant’s liberty or fundamental rights may be at risk.