GR 103174; (July, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 103174 July 11, 1996
AMADO B. TEODORO, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Amado B. Teodoro, corporate secretary, was charged with slander by deed for slapping corporate treasurer Carolina Tanco-Young during a heated board meeting on August 17, 1984. The Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) convicted him of simple slander by deed and imposed a P110.00 fine. Petitioner appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC). While the appeal was pending, petitioner filed a motion to withdraw his appeal and paid the MeTC-imposed fine. The RTC denied the motion, noting the appeal was already perfected and the prosecution had submitted its memorandum. The RTC then rendered a decision modifying the conviction to grave slander by deed, considering the victim was a woman seven months pregnant, and sentenced him to three months of arresto mayor. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
ISSUE
Whether the RTC committed reversible error in denying petitioner’s motion to withdraw his appeal and in subsequently modifying his conviction and penalty.
RULING
The Supreme Court upheld the RTC and the Court of Appeals. On the procedural issue, the Court ruled that while the withdrawal of an appeal from an inferior court lies within the sound discretion of the RTC, such discretion was not abused in this case. Petitioner sought to withdraw his appeal only after the parties were required to file memoranda and the prosecution had already filed its brief. Allowing withdrawal at that late stage would have permitted an apparent error in the MeTC judgment to go uncorrected, as the facts clearly constituted the graver offense. The Court cited Rapirap v. People, emphasizing that appeals cannot be withdrawn at pleasure to avoid adverse judgments.
On the substantive issue, the Court affirmed that the act constituted grave slander by deed under Article 359 of the Revised Penal Code. The slap was committed against a woman who was seven months pregnant, a circumstance that could cause severe emotional distress, thereby making the offense serious and insulting in nature. However, the Court modified the penalty. Considering the crime is punishable by arresto mayor maximum to prision correccional minimum (4 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months), and with one mitigating circumstance (voluntary surrender) and no aggravating circumstance, the penalty should be imposed in its minimum period. Thus, the prison term was adjusted to six months of arresto mayor. The fine paid to the MeTC was ordered returned.