Alex, Bobbie, and Gabbie were charged with the crime of Murder. Finding them to have acted in conspiracy, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted them of Homicide. Only Bobbie appealed the conviction with the Court of Appeals (CA). Consequently, an entry of judgment was issued as against Alex and Gabbie. Subsequently, the CA modified Bobbie’s conviction from Homicide to Murder. In the same judgment, the CA likewise modified Alex and Gabbie’s conviction from Homicide to Murder. Upon learning of the CA’s decision, Alex and Gabbie confronted Bobbie, saying: “Bakit ka pa ba nag-appeal? Tumaas tuloy ang sentensya namin. Nadamay pa kami!” Bobbie snapped back: “Bakit parang galit kayo? Pero bakit kasalanan ko? Parang kasalanan ko?” Was the CA correct in modifying the judgment as to Alex and Gabbie? Explain briefly. (5 points)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
No, the Court of Appeals was not correct in modifying the judgment as to Alex and Gabbie. Under Section 11(a), Rule 122 of the Rules of Court and jurisprudence, an appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect
Unlock the full Remedial Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What is the general rule regarding the effect of an appeal taken by one of several co-accused in a criminal case?
Under Rule 122, Section 11(a), an appeal taken by one co-accused does not affect non-appealing co-accused unless the judgment is favorable and applicable to them.
When may a judgment of the appellate court benefit a co-accused who did not file an appeal?
Non-appealing co-accused benefit from an appeal only when the appellate judgment is favorable and applicable to them.
What happens if the Court of Appeals upgrades the conviction of an appealing accused from Homicide to Murder?
An adverse modification upgrading a conviction cannot be extended to non-appealing co-accused whose judgments have attained finality.
What is the legal status of a trial court's judgment of conviction as to a co-accused who chose not to appeal?
Choices available with full access.
Which constitutional principle is violated if an appellate court increases the penalty of a non-appealing co-accused whose conviction has become final?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Effect of Appeal
Under Section 11(a), Rule 122 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, an appeal taken by one or more of several co-accused shall not affect those who did not join the appeal. The appellate court acquires jurisdiction only over the appealing accused and cannot modify the judgment to the prejudice of non-appealing co-accused. A non-appealing co-accused's conviction becomes final and executory upon the expiration of the period to appeal, rendering the original decision immutable as to them.
2. Favorable Judgment Exception
The sole exception to the rule that an appeal does not affect non-appealing co-accused is when the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to them. If the appellate court acquits the appealing accused or reduces the penalty based on grounds applicable to all co-accused, such favorable judgment benefits the non-appealing co-accused. However, this exception operates strictly in one direction: it applies exclusively to favorable modifications and never extends adverse or harsher modifications to non-appealing co-accused.
3. Finality of Judgments
Under the doctrine of immutability of judgments, once a criminal conviction becomes final due to failure to file a timely appeal, it can no longer be modified, altered, or set aside by any court. When non-appealing co-accused allow their conviction to attain finality, an appellate court reviewing the appeal of a co-accused lacks jurisdiction to increase their penalty or upgrade their crime. Modifying a final judgment adversely against non-appealing parties violates fundamental constitutional principles of due process and finality of judicial determinations.