Case Digest (G.R. No. 128938)
Facts:
Ronald Soriano v. Court of Appeals, and People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 128938, June 04, 2004, Supreme Court Second Division, Tinga, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Ronald Soriano was convicted by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iba, Zambales, Branch 69, on December 7, 1993, of homicide, serious physical injuries and damage to property through reckless imprudence, and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Instead of appealing, Soriano filed an application for probation on January 12, 1994; the RTC granted probation on March 8, 1994, conditioning it, inter alia, on his indemnifying the heirs of the deceased in the amount of P98,560.00.On April 26, 1994, Provincial State Prosecutor Benjamin A. Fadera moved to cancel Soriano’s probation for failure to pay the civil indemnity. The RTC denied the motion on June 20, 1994 but ordered Soriano to submit a program of payment within ten days. Soriano’s counsel acknowledged receipt of that order on June 23, 1994, yet no program was filed. The Zambales Parole and Probation Office sought an explanation; on August 15, 1994, the RTC issued an order directing Soriano to explain within ten days why he should not be held in contempt and to submit the payment program within the same period.
Soriano filed a Motion for Reconsideration asserting he had not personally received the June 20 order and claiming financial incapacity; he did not appear at any hearing because none was scheduled. On October 4, 1994, the RTC found him in contempt, ordered ten days’ detention, revoked probation, and directed Soriano to serve the original sentence. Soriano filed a Notice of Appeal dated October 12, 1994, contesting the contempt judgment (docketed before the Court of Appeals as CA G.R. C.R. No. 17595), and separately filed a petition for certiorari (C.A. S.P. No. 35550) attacking the revocation of probation.
The Court of Appeals Eighth Division dismissed the certiorari petition on October 29, 1995; the Court of Appeals Tenth Division denied the appeal from the contempt judgment on September 11, 1996. Soriano then filed a petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court challenging the contempt conviction, docketed as G.R. No. 128938. Separately, in G.R. No. 123936 this...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was Soriano validly convicted of indirect contempt where no hearing was conducted?
- If counsel received the RTC order, did that notice satisfy the requirements of Section 3, Rule 71 of the Revised Rules of Court as to notic...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)