CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BALA V. MARTINEZ, 181 SCRA 459

BALA V. MARTINEZ,

181 SCRA 459

TOPIC/DOCTRINE

Expiration of probation period alone does not automatically terminate probation, a final order of discharge from the court is required. An order revoking probation or modifying the terms thereof is unappealable. Probationer’s change of residence did not divest the RTC of Manila of jurisdiction over the probation case.

FACTS

Bala has been indicted for removing and substituting the picture of Maria Diazen which had been attached to her USA passport, with that of Florencia Notarte, in effect falsifying a genuine public or official document. The RTC adjudged Bala guilty of the crime of falsification of a public document. Bala appealed the said conviction but the CA affirmed in toto the judgment of the trial court.

Bala then applied for and was granted probation by Judge Martinez. He was placed in probation under a period of 1 year, subject to the terms and conditions enumerated therein. By its terms, it should have expired on August 10, 1983. However, on December 8, 1983, People of the Philippines through Assistant City Fiscal Cajucom filed a motion to revoke the probation as Bala had violated its terms and conditions. Bala now contends that the motion to revoke probation was filed after the lapse of 1 year, which means that he should have been discharged from the same.

ISSUE

Does the expiration of the probation period terminate Probation?

RULING

No.

The court held that expiration of probation period alone does not automatically terminate probation, a final order of discharge from the court is required. An order revoking probation or modifying the terms thereof is unappealable.

Here, the court held that there must first be issued by the court of an order of final discharge based on the report and recommendation of the probation officer. Only from such issuance can the case of the probationer be deemed terminated. Precisely he was granted probation in order to give him a chance to return to the main stream, to give him hope___hope for self-respect and a better life. n the instant case, a review of the records compels a revocation of the probation without the need of further proceedings in the trial court which, after all, would only be an exercise in futility. If we render justice now, why should we allow the petitioner to further delay it. Probationer Manuel Bala failed to reunite with responsible society. Precisely he was granted probation in order to give him a chance to return to the main stream, to give him hope___hope for self-respect and a better life. Unfortunately, he has continued to shun the straight and narrow path. He thus wrecked his chance. He has not reformed.

Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993