People vs. Mahusay and Paspos

When an accused-appellant withdraws his appeal and the appellate court grants such withdrawal, the judgment of the lower court becomes final and executory as to that accused; consequently, the accused must be excluded from the appellate court's dispositive portion when it subsequently renders judgment on the merits of the co-accused's appeal.

The case originated from a criminal prosecution for the complex crime of robbery with rape where two accused were jointly tried and convicted by the Regional Trial Court. While the appeal was pending, one accused sought to withdraw his appeal, which was granted by the Supreme Court, rendering the trial court's judgment final as to him before the Court resolved the merits of the co-accused's appeal.

• Appellants Samuel Mahusay y Flores and Cristituto Paspos @ "Toto" y Catarig were charged with the complex crime of robbery with rape before the Regional Trial Court of Naval, Subprovince of Biliran, Leyte.
• On November 7, 1989, the trial court rendered judgment finding both appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged.
• From this conviction, the appellants filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court.
• On May 12, 1995, appellant Mahusay filed an urgent motion to withdraw his appeal, which the Supreme Court granted in a resolution dated July 17, 1995.
• Consequently, an entry of judgment was made as to Mahusay on September 7, 1995, and the letter of transmittal was sent on April 18, 1996, rendering the trial court's judgment final and executory as to him.
• On November 18, 1997, the Supreme Court rendered a decision affirming the conviction of both appellants with the modification that each suffer three terms of reclusion perpetua and indemnify the victim Maria Luisa Bughao in the amount of P50,000.00 each.
• On December 29, 1997, Action Officer Homobono R. Lachica Jr. addressed a letter to the Court seeking clarification regarding the imposition of the penalty insofar as Mahusay was concerned, given that his appeal had already been withdrawn and judgment had become final as to him.
• The Supreme Court resolved to modify the dispositive portion of its November 18, 1997 decision to reflect that only Cristituto Paspos remained as the appellant, as Mahusay was no longer a party to the appeal proceedings.

• Procedural Issues:
  • Whether the Supreme Court could modify its earlier decision to exclude an appellant who had already withdrawn his appeal and whose judgment had become final prior to the rendition of the decision.
• Substantive Issues:
  • N/A

• Procedural:
  • The Court granted the clarification and modified the dispositive portion of its November 18, 1997 decision. The Court explained that since Mahusay filed an urgent motion to withdraw his appeal on May 12, 1995, and such withdrawal was granted on July 17, 1995, with entry of judgment made on September 7, 1995, the judgment of the trial court had become final and executory as to him. Consequently, he could no longer be included in the appellate court's dispositive portion when it rendered judgment on the merits of the co-accused's appeal. The decision was corrected to apply solely to Cristituto Paspos.
• Substantive:
  • N/A

• Finality of Judgment Upon Withdrawal of Appeal — When an accused-appellant withdraws his appeal and the appellate court grants such withdrawal, the judgment of the lower court becomes final and executory as to that accused. Thereafter, the accused is no longer a party to the appeal proceedings and must be excluded from any dispositive portion of the appellate court's decision resolving the merits of the co-appellant's appeal.

• "WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the appeal is DISMISSED and the decision of the trial court finding appellant Cristituto Paspos guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of robbery with rape is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that appellant shall each suffer three (3) terms of reclusion perpetua."

• People v. Malabago, G.R. No. 108693, April 18, 1997 — Cited as controlling precedent establishing the amount of civil indemnity for rape at P50,000.00.
• People v. Romua, G.R. No. 126175, May 29, 1997 — Cited alongside Malabago as recent jurisprudence confirming the P50,000.00 indemnity for rape victims.