You are on page 1of 2

G.R. No.

169519 July 17, 2009


IRENORIO B. BALABA, Petitioner,
vs.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES Respondent.
TOPIC: APPEALS (Rule 122-125)
o!"#$%&: The S'%($)'%*'y'% shall exerise exlusive appellate !urisdition over "inal !ud#$ents,
resolutions or orders o" the #&)$o%'l "#$'l !ou#"+ %hether in the exerise o" their o%n ori#inal !urisdition
or o" their appellate !urisdition as provided in RA &2'(. (e.#. !'+&+ $%,ol,$%) -u*l$! o..$!&#+). An
appeal erroneousl) ta*en to the +ourt o" Appeals +/'ll %o" *& "#'%+.&##&( to the appropriate ourt ,ut
shall ,e ($+0$++&( ou"#$)/".
FACTS:
1. State Auditors onduted an exa$ination o" the ash and aounts o" the '!!ou%"'*l& o..$!&#+
o" the -uniipalit) o" .ohol.
2. The) disovered a ash shorta#e o" P5/,021.1', unaounted ash ti*ets o"P2,&/5.01 and an
unreorded he* o" P51,111 pa)a,le to .ala,a (a pu,li o""ier), or a total shorta#e
o" P11',1&/.0'.
0. 3e$and letters %ere sent to .ala,a as*in# hi$ to explain the disrepan) in the aounts.
'. 4nsatis"ied %ith .ala,a5s explanation, he %as har#ed %ith the ri$e o" -alversation o" Pu,li
6unds.
5. RTC: #uilt)7
/. .ala,a "iled his 8otie o" Appeal ,e"ore the +A
2. Then, he "iled his Appellant5s .rie".
&. The 9S:, instead o" "ilin# an Appellee5s .rie", "iled a $otion pra)in# "or the ($+0$++'l o. "/&
'--&'l .o# *&$%) $0-#o-&# +$%!& "/& S'%($)'%*'y'% /'+ &1!lu+$,& 2u#$+($!"$o% o,&# "/&
'--&'l.
(. CA: 3is$issed7
'. Sandi#an,a)an has exlusive appellate !urisdition over the ase.
11. SC: .ala,a ontends that
'. +ourt o" Appeals erred in dis$issin# his appeal instead o" erti")in# the ase to the
proper ourt.
ISS3E: ;hether the appeal to +A %as proper
HEL: 8o. <e should have "iled it to the Sandi#an,a)an
4pon .ala,a5s onvition ,) the trial ourt, his re$ed) should have ,een an appeal to the
Sandi#an,a)an. Para#raph 0, Setion '() o" Repu,li At 8o. &2'( (RA &2'(),
1'
%hih "urther de"ined
the !urisdition o" the Sandi#an,a)an, reads=
The Sandiganbayan shall exerise &1!lu+$,& '--&ll'"& 2u#$+($!"$o% over "inal !ud#$ents, resolutions or
orders o" the re#ional trial ourts %hether in the exerise o" their o%n ori#inal !urisdition or o" their
appellate !urisdition as herein provided.
There is nothin# in said para#raph %hih an oneiva,l) !usti") the "ilin# o" .ala,a5s appeal ,e"ore the
+ourt o" Appeals instead o" the Sandi#an,a)an. +learl), the +ourt o" Appeals is ,ere"t o" an) !urisdition
to revie% the !ud#$ent .ala,a see*s to appeal.
>n Melencion v. Sandiganbayan, %e ruled=
An error in desi#natin# the appellate ourt is not "atal to the appeal. <o%ever, the orretion in
desi#natin# the proper appellate ourt should ,e $ade %ithin the 15-da) period to appeal. 9ne $ade
%ithin the said period, the desi#nation o" the orret appellate ourt $a) ,e allo%ed even i" the reords o"
the ase are "or%arded to the +ourt o" Appeals. 9ther%ise, the seond para#raph o" Setion 2, Rule 51 o"
the Rules o" ourt %ould appl). The seond para#raph o" Setion 2, Rule 51 o" the Rules o" +ourt reads=
?A% '--&'l &##o%&ou+ly "'4&% "o "/& Cou#" o. A--&'l+ +/'ll %o" *& "#'%+.&##&( "o "/& '--#o-#$'"&
!ou#" *u" +/'ll *& ($+0$++&( ou"#$)/".?
>n this ase, .ala,a sou#ht the orretion o" the error in "ilin# the appeal onl) a"ter the expiration o" the
period to appeal. The trial ourt pro$ul#ated its 3eision on ( 3ee$,er 2112. .ala,a "iled his notie o"
appeal on 1' @anuar) 2110. The +ourt o" Appeals issued the 3eision delarin# its la* o" !urisdition on
15 3ee$,er 211'. .ala,a tried to orret the error onl) on 22 @anuar) 2115, learl) ,e)ond the 15-da)
period to appeal "ro$ the deision o" the trial ourt. There"ore, the +ourt o" Appeals did not o$$it an)
error %hen it dis$issed .ala,a5s appeal ,eause o" la* o" !urisdition.
S9 9R3ERE3.

You might also like