This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-04-07 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| In the present case, petitioner had already availed of a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by respondent Sandiganbayan. His next remedy is set forth under Section 7 of P.D. No. 1606, as amended by R.A. No. 8249, which provides that decisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayan shall be appealable to the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari raising pure questions of law in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. In Neypes v. Court of Appeals,[28] the Court allowed a fresh period of 15 days within which to file a notice of appeal in the Regional Trial Court to be counted from receipt of the order dismissing a motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration. This "fresh period rule" shall also apply to Rule 45 governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court. Without an appeal, the judgment becomes final upon expiration of the period and execution should necessarily follow.[29] Unfortunately, petitioner failed to avail of the said remedy within the 15-day period and, instead, filed a motion for new trial. The petitioner cannot be allowed to resort to another remedy as a substitute for an appeal. | |||||