Professional Documents
Culture Documents
R Llamado vs. Ca - Case Digest
R Llamado vs. Ca - Case Digest
Morada
vs.
FACTS:
He sought advice from another counselor that also assisted him in filing
a probation petition invoking Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended. The
Petition was not, however, accepted by the lower court, since the records of
the case had already been forwarded to the Court of Appeals.
Page | 1
ISSUE:
Whether or not petitioner's application for probation which was filed after a
notice of appeal had been filed with the trial court, after the records of the case
had been forwarded to the Court of Appeals and the Court of Appeals had
issued the notice to file Appellant's Brief, after several extensions of time to
file Appellant's Brief had been sought from and granted by the Court of
Appeals but before actual filing of such brief, is barred under P.D. No. 968,
as amended.
RULING:
Yes, the application for probation is barred under the law. There were
two amendments that happened to the law, and the present law allows
applications for probation “after the TC shall have convicted and sentenced a
defendant and—within the period of perfecting an appeal”. It prohibits the
grant of an application for probation if the defendant has perfected an appeal
from the judgment of conviction.
Page | 2
even after judgment has been rendered by the appellate court and after
judgment has become final.
- In this last situation, it provides that “the application for probation shall be
acted upon by the trial court on the basis of the judgment of the appellate
court”
“after the shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant and—within the
period of perfecting an appeal”
The court has lost jurisdiction over the case when petitioner perfected his
appeal. The oral manifestation made after judgment was rendered was
considered by the RTC as being equal to a written notice of appeal.
Page | 3