Case Summary (G.R. No. L-36052)
Procedural Posture
The Court is tasked with addressing a motion from the petitioner aimed at allowing him to represent himself and argue orally in favor of his second motion for reconsideration, which had previously been denied due to its late filing. The petitioner asserts that the allowance of his motion aligns with the “interest of justice and expediency,” but the Court finds this argument unsubstantiated in legal precedent.
Argument for Self-Representation
The petitioner expresses a desire to be heard personally, suggesting that the late filing of his second motion for reconsideration was improperly characterized and attributing negligence to his legal counsel, Attorney Sergio L. Guadiz. However, the Court emphasizes that the motion does not present sufficient legal grounds or persuasive arguments to warrant a change in its earlier ruling.
Defense of Counsel's Conduct
Attorney Guadiz, upon being prompted to clarify the alleged negligence, refutes the assertion, claiming he submitted the second motion for reconsideration within the designated periods. Yet, the Court underscores the importance of adherence to procedural timelines and points out that the attorney's claim contradicts the established filing dates established in the case record.
Denial of Motion and Admonishment of Counsel
Ultimately, the Court denies the petitioner's urgent motion for leave to argue and admonishes Attorney Guadiz for failing to fulfill his obligations with due diligence. The Court cites key principles—specifically that a client bears the consequences of their counsel's delays a
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-36052)
Case Citation
- G.R. No. L-36052
- Date of Resolution: December 28, 1973
- Jurisdiction: Philippine Supreme Court
Parties Involved
- Petitioner: Severino Macavinta, Jr. (a member of the Philippine Bar)
- Respondents: The People of the Philippines and the Court of Appeals
Procedural Background
- The case presents the procedural aspect of a motion for leave filed by Severino Macavinta, Jr. to represent himself and argue in support of a second motion for reconsideration.
- The second motion for reconsideration had previously been denied due to late filing.
- The Supreme Court's resolution addresses the validity and timing of the motions filed by the petitioner.
Motion for Leave Overview
- The petitioner sought to appear on his own behalf due to what he described as "the interest of justice and expediency."
- The Supreme Court found this assertion lacking in legal foundation, leading to the motion’s denial.
- The petitioner’s claim of negligence against his counsel, Attorney Sergio L. Guadiz, was a significant point of contention.
Analysis of Petitioner’s Arguments
- The petitioner submitted a three-page urgent motion that was criticized for its lack of persuasive q