a collections of case digests and laws that can help aspiring law students to become a lawyer.
Maruhom vs. People
G.R. No.206513, October 20, 2015
On September 24, 2005, in the City of Las Piñas, accused, with lewd designs, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commit a lascivious conduct upon the person of one AAA, who was then a sixteen year old minor, by then and there embracing her, touching her breast and private part against her will and without her consent and the act complained of is prejudicial to the physical and psychological development of the complainant. After trial, the RTC promulgated its Decision which convicted petitioner of the crime charged. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) arguing, among other things, that even assuming he committed the acts imputed, still there is no evidence showing that the same were done without the victim’s consent or through force, duress, intimidation or violence upon her. The CA rendered a Decision adopting the recommendation of the OSG. Petitioner received a copy of CA Decision on July 6, 2012. Instead of further appealing the case, he filed on July 23, 2012 before the CA a manifestation with motion to allow him to apply for probation upon remand of the case to the RTC.
Whether or not the petitioner can avail the benefits of Probation Law
No. Section 4 of the Probation Law prohibits granting an application for probation if an appeal from the sentence of conviction has been perfected by the accused. In this case, petitioner appealed the trial court’s judgment of conviction before the CA alleging that it was error on the part of the trial court to have found him guilty of violating Section 5(b), Article III of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7610. Accused already perfected his appeal and it is late in the day to avail the benefits of probation.