Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PEOPLE Vs CA and Dacanay Vs People
PEOPLE Vs CA and Dacanay Vs People
140285
Facts:
Petitioner filed an information for estafa against respondent who acted as Rufinas stockbroker
where in fact he was just a telephone clerk at Bernard Securities, Inc. She made a profit out of
their transactions, prompting her to trust respondent in handling her stock investments. After
several attempts, she was able to contact him, he admitted that he spent the money. At any
rate, he issued two checks as payment but when she deposited them in the drawee bank, they
were dishonored for insufficient funds. Trial court rendered a Decision convicting respondent of
estafa. During the promulgation of the judgment, respondent and his counsel failed to
appear despite notice prompting the prosecution to file for cancellation of bail, which was then
granted. A warrant of arrest was then issued against respondent for the reason that he
has not surrendered despite the lapse of the given period (five days) as provided in the
Omnibus Order dated May 28, 1999.
Issue:
Whether the Court of Appeals erred when it rendered its assailed Resolution of September 20,
1999 directing the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction enjoining the arrest
of respondent.
Held:
Yes. The Court of Appeals certainly erred in enjoining the arrest of respondent. Its declaration
that respondent might flee or commit another crime is conjectural utterly lacks
merit. Respondent already demonstrated that he is a fugitive from justice.
He violated the condition of his bail that he must appear before the proper court whenever so
required by that court or the Rules. As such, his arrest, as ordered by the trial court, is proper.
This is in accordance with Section 6, Rule 120 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure
which provides in part, thus:
SEC. 6. Promulgation of judgment. The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence
of the accused and any judge of the court in which it was rendered. x x x
The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the accused personally or through his bondsman or
warden and counsel, requiring him to be present at the promulgation of the decision. x xx
If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was without
justifiable cause, he shall lose the remedies available in these rules against the judgment
and the court shall order his arrest. Within fifteen (15) days from promulgation of judgment,
however, the accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these
remedies. He shall state the reasons for his absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he
proves that his absence was for a justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies
within fifteen (15) days from notice.