Lawyerly

GR No. 186233

2009-10-02

VELASCO JR., J.

Pursuant to a notice of appeal accused-appellant filed, the RTC forwarded the records of the case to this Court. In line with People v. Mateo,[17] however, the Court transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 181744

2009-10-02

PEOPLE v. ROY BACUS

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The Court of Appeals, to which this Court referred the case pursuant to People v. Mateo,[5] affirmed appellant's conviction in this wise: [T]he victim never faltered in her assertions that she was ravished by accused-appellant on February 3, 1999. Her testimony, as observed by the lower court, is clear and positive. She remained steadfast in her claim that accused-appellant sexually abused her. Rape victims, especially those who are of tender age, would not normally concoct a story of defloration allow an examination of their private parts and undergo a public trial if they were not motivated solely by the desire to have their ravishers apprehended and punished. Likewise, the crying of AAA during her testimony is eloquent evidence of the credibility of the rape charge with verity born out of human nature and experience.[6] (Citations omitted; underscoring supplied)

GR No. 175317

2009-10-02

PEOPLE v. CRISTINO CAÑADA

BRION, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[51] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 179748

2009-10-02

PEOPLE v. FEBLONELYBIRTH T. RUBIO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

On appellants' appeal before this Court, it referred the same to the Court of Appeals for disposition[31] pursuant to People v. Mateo.[32]

GR No. 167955

2009-09-30

PEOPLE v. ARMANDO PADILLA Y NICOLAS

PERALTA, J.

Pursuant to the Court's pronouncement in People v. Mateo,[35] which modified the provisions of the Rules of Court insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases where the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, the case was referred to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[36]

GR No. 181629

2009-09-18

PEOPLE v. ELIZARDO CABILES

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The records of the case were forwarded to this Court for automatic review. By Resolution of January 25, 2005,[25] this Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals pursuant to People v. Mateo.[26]

GR No. 170342

2009-09-18

ALLAN DIZON Y AQUI v. PEOPLE

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, to which the RTC gave due course in its Order dated 4 April 2002. In the said Order, the trial court directed the transmittal of the records of the instant case to this Court.[18] Subsequently, petitioner submitted his "Appellant's Brief."[19] Pursuant, however, to this Court's ruling in People v. Mateo,[20] we remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition.

GR No. 184958

2009-09-17

PEOPLE v. ANTHONY C. DOMINGO

VELASCO JR., J.

In view of the imposition of the death penalty, the case was forwarded to the CA for review.[13]

GR No. 187503

2009-09-11

PEOPLE v. TECSON LIM Y CHUA

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[37] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 178485

2009-09-04

PEOPLE v. MARIANO SAPIGAO

QUISUMBING, J.

Appellant appealed before this Court. Pursuant to the decision in People v. Mateo,[22] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review.

GR No. 178543

2009-09-04

PEOPLE v. ARISTO VILLANUEVA

CARPIO MORALES, J.

On appellant's appeal before this Court, the case was, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[14] referred to the Court of Appeals for disposition.[15]

GR No. 170137

2009-08-27

PEOPLE v. RANDY MAGBANUA

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

Upon filing of a Notice of Appeal, the RTC elevated the records of the case directly to this Court. In the Resolution dated February 11, 2004, the Court accepted the appeal and required the parties to file their respective briefs. However, pursuant to the ruling in People v. Mateo,[5] promulgated on July 7, 2004, the case was transferred to the CA.

GR No. 177741

2009-08-27

PEOPLE v. VS.WILLIE RIVERA

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The case was forwarded to the Court after appellant filed a notice of appeal. Per People v. Mateo,[5] however, this Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of August 3, 2005.[6]

GR No. 180921

2009-08-27

PEOPLE v. BERNARDO RIMANDO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

Per People v. Mateo,[11] the records of the case were forwarded to the Court of Appeals for review by Order dated February 21, 2006 issued by the trial court.[12]

GR No. 185711

2009-08-24

PEOPLE v. REYNALDO SANZ LABOA

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[15] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 171313

2009-08-16

PEOPLE v. EDGAR TRAYCO Y MASOLA

BRION, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[22] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[23]

GR No. 177134

2009-08-14

PEOPLE v. RACHEL ANGELES Y NAVAL

CARPIO MORALES, J.

This Court, following People v. Mateo,[7] referred the case, by Resolution of September 15, 2004,[8] to the Court of Appeals where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01612.

GR No. 169870

2009-08-04

PEOPLE v. ELEGIO AN

PERALTA, J.

Due to the penalty imposed, which is Reclusion Perpetua, the case was elevated to this Court on appeal. However, per Resolution[10] of this Court dated September 6, 2004, the case was transferred to the CA in conformity with the Decision of this Court, dated July 7, 2004, in People v. Mateo,[11] modifying the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, particularly Sections 3 and 10 of Rule 122, Section 13 of Rule 124, Section 3 of Rule 125, and any other rule insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, as well as the resolution of this Court en banc, dated September 19, 1995, in Internal Rules of the Supreme Court, in cases similarly involving death penalty, pursuant to this Court's power to promulgate rules of procedure in all courts under Section 5, Article VIII of the Constitution, and allowing an intermediate review by the CA before such cases are elevated to this Court.

GR No. 185841

2009-08-04

PEOPLE v. ISMAEL DIAZ

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

In its Order dated 3 May 2001, the trial court, finding the notice of appeal to have been filed in time, directed the records of the cases to be forwarded to the Supreme Court.[42] However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[43] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.[44]

GR No. 185712

2009-08-04

PEOPLE v. LILIO U. ACHAS

VELASCO JR., J.

The RTC forthwith elevated the records of the case to this Court for automatic review in light of the penalty imposed. In accordance, however, with the People v. Mateo[8] ruling, the Court, per Resolution of June 6, 2006, ordered the transfer of the case records to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 178058

2009-07-31

PEOPLE v. JESSIE MALIAO Y MASAKIT

Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[16] this case was first referred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 178205

2009-07-27

PEOPLE v. LEO QUEMEGGEN

NACHURA, J.

The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review, but on February 9, 2005, pursuant to the decision of this Court in People v. Mateo,[19] we transferred the case to the CA. [20]

GR No. 174370

2009-07-23

PEOPLE v. WILLY MARDO GANOY Y MAMAYABAY

CARPIO MORALES, J.

This Court to which appellant appealed[18] referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of June 8, 2005[19] following People v. Mateo.[20]

GR No. 182454

2009-07-23

PEOPLE v. FELIX WASIT

VELASCO JR., J.

Wasit appealed the RTC Decision to this Court. On September 15, 2004, the Court, in line with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[9] transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 171655

2009-07-22

PEOPLE v. PABLO L. ESTACIO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The case was forwarded to this Court for automatic review.[18] However, the Court referred it to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review following People v. Mateo.[19]

GR No. 177766

2009-07-17

PEOPLE v. CLARO JAMPAS Y LUAÑA

CARPIO MORALES, J.

Appellant appealed before this Court which, pursuant to the ruling in People v. Mateo,[20] referred the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition.[21]

GR No. 179187

2009-07-14

PEOPLE v. RENATO TALUSAN Y PANGANIBAN

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The case was forwarded to this Court on automatic review due to the death penalty imposed. Per People v. Mateo,[7] however, the Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of November 22, 2005 for intermediate disposition.

GR No. 170472

2009-07-03

PEOPLE v. JOJO MUSA Y SANTOS

BRION, J.

SO ORDERED.[22] On appeal, we endorsed this case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition[23] pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[24] The CA, in its decision of October 11, 2005, affirmed the RTC decision with the modification that the awarded moral damages be increased to P50,000.00.

GR No. 177148

2009-06-30

PEOPLE v. RAUL NUÑEZ Y REVILLEZA

QUISUMBING, J.

Appellant elevated the case to this Court on appeal, but the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals on May 2, 2006, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[9] On January 19, 2007, the Court of Appeals rendered its decision affirming appellant's conviction. The appellate court dismissed appellant's defense of frame-up and upheld the credibility of SPO1 Ilagan and PO2 Ortega. It observed that the inconsistencies in their testimony were minor at best, and did not relate to the elements of the crime.

GR No. 176157

2009-06-18

PEOPLE v. ELPIDIO IMPAS Y POLBERA

QUISUMBING, J.

In view of the RTC's imposition of the penalty of reclusion perpetua on appellant, the case was elevated to us for automatic review. However, we transferred and referred this case to the Court of Appeals, in line with People v. Mateo.[12]

GR No. 176744

2009-06-05

PEOPLE v. ADELADO ANGUAC Y RAGADAO

VELASCO JR., J.

Per Resolution[5] dated August 31, 2005, the Court, in line with its ruling in People v. Mateo,[6] transferred the case to the CA for its disposition, whereat it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 02012.

GR No. 183566

2009-05-08

PEOPLE v. BONIFACIO BADRIAGO

VELASCO JR., J.

SO ORDERED.[9] On September 14, 2004, the records of the case were transferred to this Court on automatic review as the death penalty was involved. But conformably with People v. Mateo,[10] the case was transferred to the CA via a Resolution dated February 15, 2005.

GR No. 184050

2009-05-08

PEOPLE

VELASCO JR., J.

SO ORDERED.[4] Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal dated August 2, 2002, from the aforementioned decision to this Court. The case was transferred to the CA in a resolution dated September 20, 2004, following the ruling in People v. Mateo.[5]

GR NO. 180923

2009-04-30

PEOPLE v. SALOMON DIONEDA Y DELA CRUZ

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The records of the case were forwarded to this Court on appeal of appellant.[18] Per People v. Mateo,[19] however, the Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of September 28, 2005.[20]

GR No. 178301

2009-04-24

PEOPLE v. ROLANDO 'BOTONG' MALIBIRAN ACCUSED

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

Appellant then appealed to this Court; the appeal was, however, referred to the CA pursuant to People v. Mateo.[9]

GR No. 176531

2009-04-24

PEOPLE v. ROMEO BANDIN

CORONA, J.

The case was forwarded to this Court on automatic review but we referred it to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[12] The CA affirmed the RTC decision with modifications. It held that since the complaint contained no allegations pertaining to the aggravating circumstances of dwelling and use of deadly weapon, the same cannot be appreciated in the imposition of the penalty. The dispositive portion of the CA decision thus read:

GR No. 170235

2009-04-24

PEOPLE v. JAIME CADAG JIMENEZ

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

This case was directly appealed to this Court. The accused-appellant filed his Brief[15] dated February 12, 2002 and Reply Brief[16] dated November 7, 2002 while the plaintiff-appellee filed its Brief[17] dated June 18, 2002. In a Minute Resolution[18] dated August 25, 2004, we referred this case to the CA for appropriate action conformably with our ruling in People v. Mateo.[19]

GR No. 181318

2009-04-16

PEOPLE v. GERMAN AGOJO Y LUNA

TINGA, J.

In a resolution dated August 31, 2004, this Court transferred the case to the appellate court for intermediate review, following the ruling in People v. Mateo.[18] An exchange of pleadings before the appellate court followed, wherein the parties reiterated their earlier stances.

GR No. 179933

2009-04-16

PEOPLE v. JOSEPH FABITO

BRION, J.

The appellant directly appealed his conviction to this Court in view of the penalty of reclusion perpetua that the RTC imposed. We referred the case to the CA for intermediate review[43] pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[44]

	GR No. 186233 2009-10-02	PEOPLE v. ROMEO SATONERO VELASCO JR., J.
Pursuant to a notice of appeal accused-appellant filed, the RTC forwarded the records of the case to this Court. In line with People v. Mateo,[17] however, the Court transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 181744 2009-10-02	PEOPLE v. ROY BACUS CARPIO MORALES, J.
The Court of Appeals, to which this Court referred the case pursuant to People v. Mateo,[5] affirmed appellant's conviction in this wise: [T]he victim never faltered in her assertions that she was ravished by accused-appellant on February 3, 1999. Her testimony, as observed by the lower court, is clear and positive. She remained steadfast in her claim that accused-appellant sexually abused her. Rape victims, especially those who are of tender age, would not normally concoct a story of defloration allow an examination of their private parts and undergo a public trial if they were not motivated solely by the desire to have their ravishers apprehended and punished. Likewise, the crying of AAA during her testimony is eloquent evidence of the credibility of the rape charge with verity born out of human nature and experience.[6] (Citations omitted; underscoring supplied)
	GR No. 175317 2009-10-02	PEOPLE v. CRISTINO CAÑADA BRION, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[51] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 179748 2009-10-02	PEOPLE v. FEBLONELYBIRTH T. RUBIO CARPIO MORALES, J.
On appellants' appeal before this Court, it referred the same to the Court of Appeals for disposition[31] pursuant to People v. Mateo.[32]
	GR No. 167955 2009-09-30	PEOPLE v. ARMANDO PADILLA Y NICOLAS PERALTA, J.
Pursuant to the Court's pronouncement in People v. Mateo,[35] which modified the provisions of the Rules of Court insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases where the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, the case was referred to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[36]
	GR No. 181629 2009-09-18	PEOPLE v. ELIZARDO CABILES CARPIO MORALES, J.
The records of the case were forwarded to this Court for automatic review. By Resolution of January 25, 2005,[25] this Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals pursuant to People v. Mateo.[26]
	GR No. 170342 2009-09-18	ALLAN DIZON Y AQUI v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, to which the RTC gave due course in its Order dated 4 April 2002. In the said Order, the trial court directed the transmittal of the records of the instant case to this Court.[18] Subsequently, petitioner submitted his "Appellant's Brief."[19] Pursuant, however, to this Court's ruling in People v. Mateo,[20] we remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition.
	GR No. 184958 2009-09-17	PEOPLE v. ANTHONY C. DOMINGO VELASCO JR., J.
In view of the imposition of the death penalty, the case was forwarded to the CA for review.[13]
	GR No. 187503 2009-09-11	PEOPLE v. TECSON LIM Y CHUA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[37] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 178485 2009-09-04	PEOPLE v. MARIANO SAPIGAO QUISUMBING, J.
Appellant appealed before this Court. Pursuant to the decision in People v. Mateo,[22] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review.
	GR No. 178543 2009-09-04	PEOPLE v. ARISTO VILLANUEVA CARPIO MORALES, J.
On appellant's appeal before this Court, the case was, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[14] referred to the Court of Appeals for disposition.[15]
	GR No. 170137 2009-08-27	PEOPLE v. RANDY MAGBANUA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Upon filing of a Notice of Appeal, the RTC elevated the records of the case directly to this Court. In the Resolution dated February 11, 2004, the Court accepted the appeal and required the parties to file their respective briefs. However, pursuant to the ruling in People v. Mateo,[5] promulgated on July 7, 2004, the case was transferred to the CA.
	GR No. 177741 2009-08-27	PEOPLE v. VS.WILLIE RIVERA CARPIO MORALES, J.
The case was forwarded to the Court after appellant filed a notice of appeal. Per People v. Mateo,[5] however, this Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of August 3, 2005.[6]
	GR No. 180921 2009-08-27	PEOPLE v. BERNARDO RIMANDO CARPIO MORALES, J.
Per People v. Mateo,[11] the records of the case were forwarded to the Court of Appeals for review by Order dated February 21, 2006 issued by the trial court.[12]
	GR No. 185711 2009-08-24	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO SANZ LABOA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[15] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 171313 2009-08-16	PEOPLE v. EDGAR TRAYCO Y MASOLA BRION, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[22] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[23]
	GR No. 177134 2009-08-14	PEOPLE v. RACHEL ANGELES Y NAVAL CARPIO MORALES, J.
This Court, following People v. Mateo,[7] referred the case, by Resolution of September 15, 2004,[8] to the Court of Appeals where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01612.
	GR No. 169870 2009-08-04	PEOPLE v. ELEGIO AN PERALTA, J.
Due to the penalty imposed, which is Reclusion Perpetua, the case was elevated to this Court on appeal. However, per Resolution[10] of this Court dated September 6, 2004, the case was transferred to the CA in conformity with the Decision of this Court, dated July 7, 2004, in People v. Mateo,[11] modifying the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, particularly Sections 3 and 10 of Rule 122, Section 13 of Rule 124, Section 3 of Rule 125, and any other rule insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, as well as the resolution of this Court en banc, dated September 19, 1995, in Internal Rules of the Supreme Court, in cases similarly involving death penalty, pursuant to this Court's power to promulgate rules of procedure in all courts under Section 5, Article VIII of the Constitution, and allowing an intermediate review by the CA before such cases are elevated to this Court.
	GR No. 185841 2009-08-04	PEOPLE v. ISMAEL DIAZ CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In its Order dated 3 May 2001, the trial court, finding the notice of appeal to have been filed in time, directed the records of the cases to be forwarded to the Supreme Court.[42] However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[43] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.[44]
	GR No. 185712 2009-08-04	PEOPLE v. LILIO U. ACHAS VELASCO JR., J.
The RTC forthwith elevated the records of the case to this Court for automatic review in light of the penalty imposed. In accordance, however, with the People v. Mateo[8] ruling, the Court, per Resolution of June 6, 2006, ordered the transfer of the case records to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 178058 2009-07-31	PEOPLE v. JESSIE MALIAO Y MASAKIT
Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[16] this case was first referred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 178205 2009-07-27	PEOPLE v. LEO QUEMEGGEN NACHURA, J.
The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review, but on February 9, 2005, pursuant to the decision of this Court in People v. Mateo,[19] we transferred the case to the CA. [20]
	GR No. 174370 2009-07-23	PEOPLE v. WILLY MARDO GANOY Y MAMAYABAY CARPIO MORALES, J.
This Court to which appellant appealed[18] referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of June 8, 2005[19] following People v. Mateo.[20]
	GR No. 182454 2009-07-23	PEOPLE v. FELIX WASIT VELASCO JR., J.
Wasit appealed the RTC Decision to this Court. On September 15, 2004, the Court, in line with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[9] transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 171655 2009-07-22	PEOPLE v. PABLO L. ESTACIO CARPIO MORALES, J.
The case was forwarded to this Court for automatic review.[18] However, the Court referred it to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review following People v. Mateo.[19]
	GR No. 177766 2009-07-17	PEOPLE v. CLARO JAMPAS Y LUAÑA CARPIO MORALES, J.
Appellant appealed before this Court which, pursuant to the ruling in People v. Mateo,[20] referred the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition.[21]
	GR No. 179187 2009-07-14	PEOPLE v. RENATO TALUSAN Y PANGANIBAN CARPIO MORALES, J.
The case was forwarded to this Court on automatic review due to the death penalty imposed. Per People v. Mateo,[7] however, the Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of November 22, 2005 for intermediate disposition.
	GR No. 170472 2009-07-03	PEOPLE v. JOJO MUSA Y SANTOS BRION, J.
SO ORDERED.[22] On appeal, we endorsed this case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition[23] pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[24] The CA, in its decision of October 11, 2005, affirmed the RTC decision with the modification that the awarded moral damages be increased to P50,000.00.
	GR No. 177148 2009-06-30	PEOPLE v. RAUL NUÑEZ Y REVILLEZA QUISUMBING, J.
Appellant elevated the case to this Court on appeal, but the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals on May 2, 2006, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[9] On January 19, 2007, the Court of Appeals rendered its decision affirming appellant's conviction. The appellate court dismissed appellant's defense of frame-up and upheld the credibility of SPO1 Ilagan and PO2 Ortega. It observed that the inconsistencies in their testimony were minor at best, and did not relate to the elements of the crime.
	GR No. 176157 2009-06-18	PEOPLE v. ELPIDIO IMPAS Y POLBERA QUISUMBING, J.
In view of the RTC's imposition of the penalty of reclusion perpetua on appellant, the case was elevated to us for automatic review. However, we transferred and referred this case to the Court of Appeals, in line with People v. Mateo.[12]
	GR No. 176744 2009-06-05	PEOPLE v. ADELADO ANGUAC Y RAGADAO VELASCO JR., J.
Per Resolution[5] dated August 31, 2005, the Court, in line with its ruling in People v. Mateo,[6] transferred the case to the CA for its disposition, whereat it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 02012.
	GR No. 183566 2009-05-08	PEOPLE v. BONIFACIO BADRIAGO VELASCO JR., J.
SO ORDERED.[9] On September 14, 2004, the records of the case were transferred to this Court on automatic review as the death penalty was involved. But conformably with People v. Mateo,[10] the case was transferred to the CA via a Resolution dated February 15, 2005.
	GR No. 184050 2009-05-08	PEOPLE VELASCO JR., J.
SO ORDERED.[4] Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal dated August 2, 2002, from the aforementioned decision to this Court. The case was transferred to the CA in a resolution dated September 20, 2004, following the ruling in People v. Mateo.[5]
	GR NO. 180923 2009-04-30	PEOPLE v. SALOMON DIONEDA Y DELA CRUZ CARPIO MORALES, J.
The records of the case were forwarded to this Court on appeal of appellant.[18] Per People v. Mateo,[19] however, the Court referred the case to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of September 28, 2005.[20]
	GR No. 178301 2009-04-24	PEOPLE v. ROLANDO 'BOTONG' MALIBIRAN ACCUSED AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Appellant then appealed to this Court; the appeal was, however, referred to the CA pursuant to People v. Mateo.[9]
	GR No. 176531 2009-04-24	PEOPLE v. ROMEO BANDIN CORONA, J.
The case was forwarded to this Court on automatic review but we referred it to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[12] The CA affirmed the RTC decision with modifications. It held that since the complaint contained no allegations pertaining to the aggravating circumstances of dwelling and use of deadly weapon, the same cannot be appreciated in the imposition of the penalty. The dispositive portion of the CA decision thus read:
	GR No. 170235 2009-04-24	PEOPLE v. JAIME CADAG JIMENEZ LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
This case was directly appealed to this Court. The accused-appellant filed his Brief[15] dated February 12, 2002 and Reply Brief[16] dated November 7, 2002 while the plaintiff-appellee filed its Brief[17] dated June 18, 2002. In a Minute Resolution[18] dated August 25, 2004, we referred this case to the CA for appropriate action conformably with our ruling in People v. Mateo.[19]
	GR No. 181318 2009-04-16	PEOPLE v. GERMAN AGOJO Y LUNA TINGA, J.
In a resolution dated August 31, 2004, this Court transferred the case to the appellate court for intermediate review, following the ruling in People v. Mateo.[18] An exchange of pleadings before the appellate court followed, wherein the parties reiterated their earlier stances.
	GR No. 179933 2009-04-16	PEOPLE v. JOSEPH FABITO BRION, J.
The appellant directly appealed his conviction to this Court in view of the penalty of reclusion perpetua that the RTC imposed. We referred the case to the CA for intermediate review[43] pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[44]

PEOPLE v. EFREN MATEO Y GARCIA