Title
Evaristo vs. Lastrilla
Case
G.R. No. L-14682
Decision Date
Nov 29, 1960
Petitioners convicted of murder appealed; trial court lost jurisdiction after appeal perfection, barring new trial motion, but allowed filing in Supreme Court.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-14682)

Facts of the Case

The petitioners were charged alongside six others with the murder of Pastor Muyot in Criminal Case No. 1246. On March 11, 1958, the Court rendered a judgment convicting the petitioners and sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and ordering them to indemnify the heirs of the victim. Their co-defendants were acquitted due to insufficient evidence.

After being notified of their conviction, the petitioners filed a notice of appeal on the same day, March 29, 1958. Subsequently, they moved for a new trial citing newly discovered evidence on April 10, 1958, and sought to amend this motion on July 28, 1958. However, the respondent court issued an order on August 7, 1958, declining to consider the motion for a new trial, stating it lacked jurisdiction because an appeal had been perfected.

Legal Framework

The case is governed by the Rules of Court, specifically Rule 67 which relates to petitions for a writ of certiorari and mandamus. Under the rules, an appeal is perfected when a notice of appeal is filed and a copy is served to the adverse party within the 15-day period following the judgment. The importance of this deadline is underscored by the transfer of jurisdiction after appeal perfection, with the trial court losing its authority to rule on pending motions related to the case.

Court’s Findings

The court found that the petitioners had indeed perfected their appeal with the filing of the notice of appeal and the corresponding service to the Provincial Fiscal on March 29, 1958. This action led to the respondent court losing jurisdiction to entertain the subsequent motion for a new trial. The court cited precedents, including the decisions in Director of Prisons vs. Teodoro, Sr. and People vs. Aranda, which established that once an appeal is perfected, the trial court retains jurisdiction only for limited purposes such as protecting the rights of parties involved.

Rulings on Relevant Legal Precedents

The petitioners invoked rulings from previous cases to argue for the reinstatement of their motion for a new trial. However, the court differentiated these cases from the petitioners’ situation. In People vs. Bocar, the court held that in cases involving the death penalty, a trial court retains jurisdiction before the record is transmitted following an appeal. Yet, in the petitioners' ca

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.