Case Digest (G.R. No. L-53525)
Facts:
Bienvenido Sasi v. The People of the Philippines and the Honorable Santiago Gayomali, G.R. No. 53525, October 30, 1981, the Supreme Court Second Division, Abad Santos, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Bienvenido Sasi was convicted by the Municipal Court of San Joaquin, Iloilo in Criminal Case No. 911 for the crime of serious physical injuries; the municipal decision as reported in the record imposed "an indeterminate sentence of two (2) years and four (4) months to six (6) years" and ordered him to pay damages and attorney's fees. Sasi applied for probation, but the municipal court denied his application.
Sasi sought relief from the Court of Appeals by a petition for certiorari, alleging grave abuse of discretion in the denial of probation; the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. SP-10077-R denied relief. Sasi then filed the instant petition to the Supreme Court seeking reversal of the Court of Appeals and admission to probation.
After the petition reached the Court, the Solicitor General filed a comment recommending dismissal for lack of merit. The Court received a letter from Municipal Judge David A. Alfeche, Jr. of San Joaquin informing that Sasi had been granted parole by the Board of Pardons and Parole on August 8, 1980. The Court directed Sasi to comment and to state whether the appeal had become moot and academic. Counsel for the petitioner manifested that he could not contact Sasi and that, in view of the parole, the issues appeared to be moot and academic.
The Court further noted a discrepancy between the sentence recited in the municipal decision (2 years 4 months to 6 years) and the certified receipt of prisoner and the discharge on parole, which reflected an indeterminate sentence...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Has the petition for relief become moot and academic by reason of the petitioner's having been granted parole?
- Should the Municipal Judge be ordered to explain the discrepancy between the penalty stated in the decision and that shown in the prison receipt and d...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)