PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. RAYMUNDO MALIGRO, JR. Y CABRERA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
TIJAM, J.:
On May 22, 2014, We received the 1st Endorsement[2] of the Director of Corrections pertaining to the letter of Accused-Appellant praying for the withdrawal of his appeal.
On August 18, 2014, We issued a Resolution[3] directing the counsels for the Accused-Appellant, namely, Atty. Marvin R. Osias, Atty. Jessica Guia E. Escubio-Arce, and Atty. Jonathan G. Paragua of the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) to confer with and inform Accused-Appellant of the legal consequences of the withdrawal of his appeal, and to inform this Court, within ten (10) days, whether or not Accused-Appellant will pursue such withdrawal after being apprised of the legal consequences thereof.
On September 11, 2014, a Manifestation with Motion[4] was filed by Atty. Joy Rivera stating that due to Atty. Jonathan G. Paragua’s resignation early this year, said counsel was designated as the new handling lawyer of this case under the supervision of Atty. Mariel D. Baja; and that considering the volume of cases counsel simultaneously handles, she is constrained to ask for an additional five (5) days or until September 17, 2014 to comply with the August 18, 2014 Resolution.
On September 17, 2014, Atty. Joy Rivera filed a Compliance With Motion[5] stating that after conferring with and explaining to the Accused-Appellant the merits of his case and the legal consequences of the withdrawal of his appeal, he freely and voluntarily reiterated that his appeal be withdrawn; and that counsel moves for the withdrawal of the Accused-Appellant’s appeal.
The Manifestation with Motion filed by Atty. Joy Rivera is hereby GRANTED.
Considering that Accused-Appellant, fully cognizant of the merits of his case and the legal consequences of the withdrawal of his appeal, had freely and voluntarily opted to withdraw his appeal, and further, the Motion to Withdraw Appeal is not meant to trifle with our judicial system, this Court, in the exercise of its sound discretion, has no substantial reason to disallow the withdrawal of Accused-Appellant’s appeal.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Motion to Withdraw Appeal of Accused-Appellant RAYMUND MALIGRO y CABRERA is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Appeal is hereby considered WITHDRAWN and the case is deemed CLOSED and TERMINATED.
SO ORDERED.
Baltazar-Padilla, and Reyes-Carpio, JJ., concur.
[1] Rollo, p. 137.
[2] Id., p. 138- 142.
[3] Id., pp. 144-146.
[4] Id., pp. 147-150.
[5] Id., pp. 151-153.