REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

SANDIGANBAYAN

QUEZON CITY

FOURTH DIVISION

/

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

- versus -

Criminal Case Nos. 26508 to

26510

For: Violation of Section 3 of

Republic Act No. 3019, as

amended

Present:

QUIROZ, J., Chairperson,

CRUZ, 7., and

JACINT0,7.

FELIX T. RIPALDA, ET AL,

Accused.

Promulgated:

OCT 3 1 im

RESOLUTION

QUIROZ,!.:

Pending before the Court are the following matters:

1) 1^^ Indorsement^ dated July 29, 2019 of the Executive Clerk ofCourt IV, Atty. Ma. Teresa S. Pabulayan (Atty. Pabulayan),regarding the emaiP dated June 7, 2019 with the subject "FidelityBond" of Katherine Guy, daughter of accused Cesar P. Guy; and

2) Ex-Parte Manifestation and Motion^ dated October 17, 2019 ofthe prosecution on the death of accused Felix T. Ripalda.

1 Records Volume 4, pp. 94-97.2 Id. at 96.

5 Id. at 112-116.

RESOLUTION

People V. Ripalda, et al.Criminal Case Nos. 26508 to 26510

Page 2 of 5

Claim of Katherlne Guy over

the bail bond of accused Cesar

P. Guy

On June 1, 2019, Katherlne Guy sent an email through the Court'semail address inquiring about the release of the One Hundred EightyThousand Peso (PhP180,000.00)-bail bond posted by her father who wasconvicted in 2010 but had passed away in May 2019. In her subsequentemail on June 29, 2019, she informed Atty. Pabulayan that her father wasCesar Guy and his case was with the Fourth Division of this Court.''

On July 29, 2019, Atty. Pabulayan issued the 1'^ Indorsement referringthe matter to Atty. Maria Lourdes M. Lobiano-Alviola (Atty. Lobiano-Alviola), Executive Clerk of Court II, Fourth Division, for appropriate action.

On August 1, 2019, Atty. Lobiano informed Atty. Pabulayan that,upon verification of the case records of Criminal Case Nos. 26508 to 26510,entitled People of the Philippines v. Felix T. Ripolda, et al., there is anexisting Bench Warrant of Arrest for execution of judgment issued againstaccused Cesar P. Guy on June 18, 2010, no return has been filed as of date,and the said accused remains at-large.^

In its Resolution dated August 13, 2019,® the Court required theprosecution to file its comment/opposition to the query of Katherlne Guy.

In its Comment dated October 4, 2019,^ the prosecution attached theCertificate of Death® of Cesar Pagatpatan Guy to confirm his demise on May3, 2019. However, it objected to the claim of Katherlne Guy over herfather's posted bond pointing out that despite the issuances of an entry ofjudgment on his conviction on September 23, 2009 and a bench warrant ofarrest on June 18, 2010, the accused never served his sentence up until hisdeath because he failed to surrender himself to the proper authorities to

serve the same. The prosecution argues that the failure of accused Cesar P.

Guy to appear before the proper authorities as required justified the

forfeiture of his bail bond in accordance with Section 21 of Supreme Court

Administrative Circular No. 12-94.

"Id. at 97

5 Id. at 98-99.

®ld. at 100.

'Id. at 359-367.

8 Id. at 111.

A/

RESOLUTION

People V. Ripalda, et al.Criminal Case Nos. 26508 to 26510

Page 3 of 5

The Court agrees with the prosecution and resolves to deny the claimof Katherine Guy over the bail bond posted by accused Cesar P. Guy,

pursuant to Section 21 of Rule 114 of the Revised Rules of Court, viz:

Section 21. Forfeiture of bond. — When the presence of the

accused is required by the court or these Rules, his bondsmen shall be

notified to produce him before the court on a given date and time. If the

accused fails to appear in person as required, his bail shall be declared

forfeited and the bondsmen given thirty (30) days within which to

produce their principal and to show cause why no judgment should be

rendered against them for the amount of their bail. Within the said

period, the bondsmen must:

(a) produce the body of their principal or give the reason

for his non-production; and

(b) explain why the accused did not appear before the

court when first required to do so.

Failing in these two requisites, a judgment shall be rendered

against the bondsmen, jointly and severally, for the amount of the bail.

The court shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the liability of thebondsmen, unless the accused has been surrendered or is acquitted.

The foregoing provision clearly states that the failure of the accused

to appear as required shall result in the forfeiture of his bail. In the presentcase, the Supreme Court issued on September 23, 2009 an Entry ofJudgment^ of its Decision dated March 20, 2009 affirming this Court'sDecision dated September 2, 2004 convicting accused Felix T, Ripalda,Eduardo R. Villamor, Concepcion C. Esperas, Ervin C. Martinez, Cesar P.Guy, and Narcisa A. Grefiel for three (3) counts of violation of Section 3(e)of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended. Thereafter, this Court issued aResolution^® on June 18, 2010 ordering the issuance of a bench warrant^^for the arrest of all the accused and directing them to surrender theirpersons to the Court within five (5) days from notice for execution of

judgment, otherwise their bonds shall be ordered confiscated.Notwithstanding the same, accused Cesar P. Guy failed to surrender himselfto the Court or the proper authorities and, as a consequence, died in 2019without having served his sentence for the crimes he was convicted for. Hisfailure to do so is a violation of the condition of his bond. Having failed tocomply with the said condition, forfeiture of his bail bond must necessarilyfollow.

® Id. at 64-88.

" Id, at 89-90.

"Id. at 91.

/

/■RESOLUTION

People V. Ripalda, et al.Criminal Case Nos. 26508 to 26510

Page 4 of 5

Incidentally, taking into consideration that accused Felix T, Ripalda,Eduardo R. Villamor, Concepcion C. Esperas, Ervin C. Martinez, and NarcisaA. Grefiel have also failed to surrender themselves to the Court or theproper authorities, their respective bail bonds must likewise be confiscated.

Death of accused Felix T.

Ripalda

On October 18, 2019, the prosecution manifested that accused FelixTubis Ripalda had died on January 24, 2012 at his residence in Brgy. 91,Abucay, Tacloban, Leyte, as evidenced by the Certificate of Death^^ issuedby the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), and moved for the resolution ofthe case against him pursuant to Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code.

The Court finds the death of accused Felix T. Ripalda has beensufficiently established by the PSA copy of the Certificate of Death of thesaid accused. Thus, the Court resolves to dismiss the cases against him inaccordance with the above-cited provision.

WHEREFORE, the bail bonds of accused Felix T, Ripalda, Eduardo R.Villamor, Concepcion C. Esperas, Ervin C. Martinez, Cesar P. Guy, andNarcisa A. Grefiel are ORDERED forfeited in favor of the government.Accordingly, let the claim of Katherine Guy regarding the release of the bailbond posted by accused Cesar P. Guy be DENIED.

Let an alias warrant of arrest be issued against accused Eduardo R.Villamor, Concepcion C. Esperas, Ervin C. Martinez, and Narcisa A. Grefiel.

The prosecution's Ex-Porte Manifestation is NOTED and the Motion isGRANTED. Pursuant to Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code, Criminal CaseNos. 26508 to 26510 against accused Felix T. Ripalda are DISMISSED.

The Hold Departure Order issued against accused Felix T. Ripalda byreason of these cases is LIFTED and SET ASIDE.

Let a copy of this Resolution be furnished the Bureau of Immigration.

Id. at 115-116.

RESOLUTION

People V. Ripalda, et al.

Criminal Case Nos. 26508 to 26510

Page 5 of 5

SO ORDERED.

ALEX Z.Xl\J\R

Chairperson

P. CRUZ

Associate Justice

BAYAN/H.mCINTO

Associate Justice