GR 39003; (December, 1933) (Digest)
G.R. No. 39003, December 16, 1933
Laureano Elegado, Simeon Galero, and Ariston Rabdon, petitioners-appellants, vs. Nicanor Tavora, Justice of the Peace of San Fernando, La Union, respondent-appellee.
FACTS
Petitioners were convicted in a criminal case by the Justice of the Peace Court of San Fernando, La Union, and sentenced to four months and one day of imprisonment. Immediately after the sentence was pronounced, their lawyer verbally announced in open court their intention to appeal to the Court of First Instance. The justice of the peace fixed the appeal bond and later authorized another justice of the peace to receive it. The bond was filed and approved within the 15-day appeal period. However, the petitioners never filed a written notice of appeal. The justice of the peace subsequently refused to allow the appeal and ordered the execution of the sentence. Petitioners filed a petition for mandamus in the Court of First Instance to compel the justice of the peace to allow their appeal, which was denied. Hence, this appeal.
ISSUE
Whether a verbal notice of intention to appeal, coupled with the filing and approval of an appeal bond within the reglementary period, constitutes a valid perfection of an appeal from a judgment of a justice of the peace court in a criminal case.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court, affirming the lower court’s decision, held that the appeal was not perfected. Under Section 43 of General Orders No. 58 (the Code of Criminal Procedure), an appeal from a judgment of a justice of the peace requires the filing of a notice of appeal within fifteen days. The Court, citing Ricaña and Glory vs. Provincial Warden of Tayabas, ruled that the term “filing” necessitates the deposit of a written notice with the court. A mere oral announcement of intent to appeal, even if followed by the submission and approval of an appeal bond, does not comply with this mandatory requirement. The perfection of an appeal in the manner and time prescribed by law is jurisdictional, and failure to do so renders the judgment final and executory. The dissenting opinions argued that the approval of the bond, which itself recited the intent to appeal, constituted a substantial compliance with the law, but the majority adhered to the strict interpretation requiring a written notice.
AI Generated by Armztrong.