G.R. No. 84850 - Llamado vs. Court of Appeals

Ricardo A. Llamado, petitioner, was the Treasurer of Pan Asia Finance Corporation.
Jacinto N. Pascual, Sr., President of the same corporation, was co-defendant but fled the country, and thus jurisdiction over him was not obtained.
Both were prosecuted for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 in Criminal Case No. 85-38653 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 49.
The charge arose from issuing a postdated check amounting to P186,500.00 payable to respondent Leon Gaw, which was dishonored due to insufficient funds.

Petitioner was convicted alone since Pascual was not found.
Sentence imposed: One (1) year imprisonment in prision correccional, a fine of P200,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
Required reimbursement of P186,500.00 plus cost of suit to respondent Gaw.

On 20 March 1987, immediately after pronouncement of judgment, petitioner orally manifested intent to appeal; the trial court ordered the records forwarded to the Court of Appeals (CA) the same day.
The CA issued a notice requiring petitioner to file his Appellant’s Brief within 30 days; several extensions were granted, the last expiring on 18 November 1987.
On 30 November 1987, petitioner, through new counsel, filed a Petition for Probation in the RTC invoking P.D. No. 968 (Probation Law), but the RTC did not accept it since records were already with the CA.
On 16 November 1987, petitioner filed with the CA a "Manifestation and Petition for Probation," requesting either the granting of probation or remand of the petition to the RTC together with the records. He also prayed to hold in abeyance the filing period for the Appellant’s Brief pending resolution of the probation petition.
On 3 March 1988, petitioner formally withdrew his appeal from the CA, conditional on approval of the Petition for Probation.

The Solicitor General filed a Comment having no objection to the probation petition.
Private complainant filed Comments opposing the petition; petitioner replied.
On 17 June 1988, the CA denied the Petition for Probation, with a majority opinion denying probation and a dissenting opinion by Justice Bellosillo.
Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied on 23 August 1988 with a further dissenting opinion by Justice Bellosillo.

Whether petitioner’s application for probation filed after notice of appeal with the trial court, after records were forwarded to the CA, after the CA issued a notice to file Appellant’s brief, and after extensions to file the brief but before the actual filing, is barred under P.D. No. 968, as amended.

Whether petitioner Llamado’s application for probation, filed after notice of appeal and forwarding of records to the Court of Appeals but before filing the Appellant’s Brief, is barred under Section 4 of P.D. No. 968, as amended by P.D. Nos. 1257 and 1990.
Interpretation of the phrase "within the period for perfecting an appeal" and the prohibition against granting probation if the appeal has been perfected under P.D. No. 1990.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in denying the application for probation and whether it had jurisdiction to resolve the probation petition instead of remanding it to the trial court.