Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Lourdes A. Sable Vs People of The Philippines G.R No. 17796, April 7, 2009

    Uploaded by

    Wena Mae Cristobal
    427 views1 page
    Petitioner Lourdes Sable was accused, along with three others, of falsifying an extrajudicial declaration of heirs. The trial court found Sable guilty and sentenced her to 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day to 6 years imprisonment. Sable appealed to the Court of Appeals seeking to avail of probation benefits but her application was denied as untimely. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also dismissed Sable's petition, finding that the Court of Appeals did not grave abuse its discretion in denying her probation application.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    GROUP-3LOURDES-A-SABLE-vs-People-of-the-Philippines

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Petitioner Lourdes Sable was accused, along with three others, of falsifying an extrajudicial declaration of heirs. The trial court found Sable guilty and sentenced her to 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day to 6 years imprisonment. Sable appealed to the Court of Appeals seeking to avail of probation benefits but her application was denied as untimely. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also dismissed Sable's petition, finding that the Court of Appeals did not grave abuse its discretion in denying her probation application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    427 views1 page

    Lourdes A. Sable Vs People of The Philippines G.R No. 17796, April 7, 2009

    Uploaded by

    Wena Mae Cristobal
    Petitioner Lourdes Sable was accused, along with three others, of falsifying an extrajudicial declaration of heirs. The trial court found Sable guilty and sentenced her to 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day to 6 years imprisonment. Sable appealed to the Court of Appeals seeking to avail of probation benefits but her application was denied as untimely. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also dismissed Sable's petition, finding that the Court of Appeals did not grave abuse its discretion in denying her probation application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    LOURDES A.

    SABLE vs PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

    G.R No. 17796, April 7, 2009

    FACTS:

     Petitioner, together with Concepcion Abangan (Concepcion), Ildefonsa Anoba (Ildefonsa) and
    Valentine Abellanosa (Valentine), is accused in Criminal Case No. CBU-35455 of Falsification of Public
    Documents under Article 172(1) in relation to Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code.
     Petitioner and co-accused Ildefonsa were arraigned on 20 July 1994 while co-accused Concepcion was
    never arrested. During the initial trial, Atty. Gines Abellana, counsel for all the accused, manifested
    that co-accused Valentine was already dead and requested that his name be... dropped from the
    information.
     Petitioner, together with her co-accused Ildefonsa, allegedly falsified an Extrajudicial Declaration of
    Heirs with Waiver of Rights and Partition Agreement, as the signatures contained therein were not the
    signatures of the true owners of the land.
     Petitioner filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 before the Court of Appeals docketed as CA-G.R.
    CEB-CR No. 81981, raising the sole issue of whether or not the respondent court acted with grave abuse
    of discretion in denying the application for probation.

    ISSUES: WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ACTED WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF
    DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION IN AFFIRMING THE TRIAL
    COURT'S ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR PROBATION

    REASONS OF DENYING OF THE PROBATION

    • The filing of the application after the time of appeal has lapsed is injurious to the recourse of the
    applicant.

    • The application was instituted; petitioner already filed a Notice of Appeal before the RTC on 17 June
    2003.

    • The petitioner is unable to make up her mind as to what recourse she will pursue.

    RULLING OF COURT: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the court finds accused Ildefonsa Anoba not
    guilty. However, the court finds Lourdes Abellanosa Sable guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
    charged and hereby sentences her to suffer an indeterminate penalty of FOUR (4) YEARS, TWO (2) MONTHS
    and ONE (1) DAY to SIX (6) YEARS.
    WHEREFORE, accused's motion for reconsideration of the Order dated July 22, 2003, motion to recall warrant
    of arrest and motion to allow accused to avail of the benefits of the Probation Law, all are hereby denied.
    WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 is hereby DISMISSED.
    The Decision dated 14 December 2006 and Resolution dated 21 February 2007 of the Court of Appeals are
    AFFIRMED. No cost

    You might also like