Case Digest (G.R. No. L-2073)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Pedro T. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-2073. October 19, 1953, the Supreme Court En Banc, Montemayor, J., writing for the Court.The case arose from a conviction by the Fifth Division of the defunct People's Court on November 19, 1947, which found Pedro T. Villanueva guilty of the complex crime of treason and murders (citing Article 114 in connection with Article 48, Revised Penal Code) and sentenced him to death with accessory penalties, indemnities and fines. Villanueva appealed to the Supreme Court; because the trial court had imposed the death penalty, review by the Supreme Court was also invoked under the automatic-review provision (Rule 118, § 9, Rules of Court).
When the records reached the Supreme Court, the Court discovered that the stenographic notes of testimony taken October 8, 1947 could not be located. Following the recommendation of the Solicitor General, on August 1, 1952 the Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Iloilo for retaking the testimony of the missing witnesses.
While the case was pending again in the CFI, Villanueva filed a petition dated August 24, 1953 stating that, about July 4, 1953, the Chief Executive had granted conditional executive clemency to prisoners convicted of treason, conditioned on withdrawal of pending appeals. Villanueva asked to withdraw his appeal; the CFI, by order dated September 10, 1953, returned the record to the Supreme Court for whatever action it might take, noting both the petition to withdraw and the Court’s statutory duty to review death-penalty cases.
On September 21, 1953 the Supreme Court acted on a motion for withdrawal of appeal prepared by the Clerk’s Office and granted the withdrawal (the briefs had not yet been filed). Subsequently on the same date Villanueva filed a petition with the Court attaching Exhibits A and B (a copy of the conditional pardon and a letter from the Office of the President). Upon considering these papers the Court realized that the case involved a death sentence and that its automatic review jurisdiction applied; it then confronted the question whether the withdrawal and the conditional clemency could oust ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Can an accused who has been sentenced to death withdraw his appeal so as to preclude the Supreme Court's mandatory review of a death sentence?
- Does a conditional pardon conditioned on withdrawal of an appeal, together with such withdrawal, render the trial court's judgment final so as to permit executive clemency to take effect?
- Where stenographic notes of certain testimony are lost and the case is remanded for retaking of that testimony before a new judge, must the case b...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)