Lawyerly

GR No. 174483

2009-03-31

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

Pursuant to our pronouncement in People v. Mateo[9] 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, this case was referred for appropriate action and disposition to the CA where it was docketed as CA-G.R. No. 01556.

GR No. 173471

2009-03-17

PEOPLE v. ERNESTO MALIBIRAN

VELASCO JR., J.

SO ORDERED.[6] The RTC forthwith elevated the records of the case to this Court for automatic review. In accordance, however, with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[7] the Court, per its August 24, 2004 Resolution,[8] transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 181494

2009-03-17

PEOPLE v. MONALYN CERVANTES Y SOLAR

VELASCO JR., J.

Conformably with People v. Mateo,[9] the Court directed the transfer of the case to the CA where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00476. Before the appellate court, accused-appellant urged her acquittal on the ground of "insufficiency of evidence," particularly stating that the "forensic chemist who actually conducted the laboratory examination on the specimens allegedly recovered from the accused was not presented in court x x x [and] hence, there was no clear identification of the contents of the confiscated sachets."[10]

GR No. 178300

2009-03-17

PEOPLE v. DOMINGO REYES Y PAJE

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

WHEREFORE, finding herein three (3) accused DOMINGO REYES y PAJE, ALVIN ARNALDO y AVENA, and JOSELITO FLORES y VICTORIO guilty as principals beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of KIDNAPPING FOR RANSOM WITH (DOUBLE) HOMICIDE as charged, they are hereby sentenced each to suffer the supreme penalty of DEATH as mandated by law, to jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of deceased Chua Ong Ping Sim and Raymond Yao in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,000.00), and all the private offended parties or victims, including the heirs of the deceased, in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) as moral damages, subject to the corresponding filing fee as a first lien, and to pay the costs of the proceedings.[39] By reason of the death penalty imposed on each of the appellants, the instant case was elevated to us for automatic review. However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[40] we remanded the instant case to the Court of Appeals for proper disposition.

GR Nos. 158694-96

2009-03-13

PEOPLE v. TEOFILO G. PANTALEON

BRION, J.

The records of the case were forwarded to this Court after the appellants filed their respective notices of appeal. In our Resolution of September 13, 2004,[45] we transferred the case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition pursuant to People v. Mateo.[46]

GR No. 170360

2009-03-12

PEOPLE v. HENRY GUERRERO Y AGRIPA

BRION, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[13] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[14]

GR No. 180169

2009-02-27

PEOPLE v. AGUSTINO TAMOLON

NACHURA, J.

The RTC decision was elevated directly to the Supreme Court for automatic review. However, conformably with our ruling in People v. Mateo,[12] the case was, by Resolution dated December 13, 2004, referred to the CA. Parenthetically, no appeal was taken by the appellants in the other cases against them.[13] Accordingly, insofar as the other criminal cases are concerned, the Decision of the RTC of Davao del Sur had become final and executory.

GR No. 175238

2009-02-24

PEOPLE v. ELMER BALDO Y SANTAIN

QUISUMBING, J.

Since the penalty imposed on appellant is reclusion perpetua, the case was elevated to this Court for automatic review. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[10] however, we referred the case to the Court of Appeals.

GR No. 174484

2009-02-23

PEOPLE v. FELIX ORTOA Y OBIA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

In its Resolution dated November 8, 2005, the Court referred the cases to the CA for appropriate action and disposition[25] pursuant to the Court's pronouncement in People v. Mateo.[26]

GR No. 175603

2009-02-13

PEOPLE v. RENATO ESPAÑOL

CORONA, J.

Aggrieved, appellant filed an appeal in this Court which we referred to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[23] The CA affirmed the RTC in a decision promulgated on November 30, 2005. It denied reconsideration in a resolution dated June 29, 2006.

GR No. 175978

2009-02-12

PEOPLE v. SAMUEL ALGARME Y BONDA

BRION, J.

On appeal, we endorsed this case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition[31] pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[32] The CA, in its decision of September 7, 2006, affirmed the RTC decision with the modification that the death penalty imposed on Rizaldy be reduced to reclusion perpetua.

GR No. 174372

2009-01-20

PEOPLE v. ELPIDIO ANTONIO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

The records of the cases were thereupon elevated for automatic review to this Court which, following People v. Mateo[14] providing for an intermediate review of criminal cases where the death penalty, life imprisonment and reclusion perpetua are imposed, referred them to the Court of Appeals.[15]

GR No. 182549

2009-01-20

PEOPLE v. SERGIO LAGARDE

VELASCO JR., J.

In view of the imposition of the death penalty, the case was automatically elevated to the Court. In accordance with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[11] however, the case was transferred to the CA for review per this Court's August 24, 2004 Resolution.

GR No. 179190

2009-01-20

PEOPLE v. ALBERTO L. MAHINAY

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The records of the case were transmitted to this Court for automatic review. However, conformably with the ruling of this Court in People v. Mateo,[5] the case was referred to the Court of Appeals.

GR No. 182518

2009-01-20

PEOPLE v. MUHAMMAD ABDULAH

NACHURA, J.

On direct appeal to this Court in G.R. Nos. 145306-08, we referred the cases to the appellate court for intermediate review following the doctrine in People v. Mateo.[18] In its July 17, 2007 Decision,[19] the CA, as aforesaid, affirmed in toto the decision of the trial court. Thus, we now finally review the trial and the appellate courts' uniform findings.

GR No. 183567

2009-01-19

PEOPLE v. AVELINO DELA PEÑA

NACHURA, J.

The appellant timely filed his Notice of Appeal[25] on December 19, 2001. On June 3, 2002, he was received at the New Bilibid Prison for commitment.[26] In the September 20, 2004 Resolution[27] of the Court in G.R. No. 152448, we transferred the case to the appellate court for appropriate action and disposition following our ruling in People v. Mateo.[28]

GR No. 172326

2009-01-19

PEOPLE v. ALFREDO PASCUAL Y ILDEFONSO

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

SO ORDERED.[11] The case was directly elevated to this Court for automatic review. However, in a Resolution[12] dated July 26, 2005 and pursuant to our ruling in People v Mateo[13] the case was transferred to the CA.

GR No. 168173

2008-12-24

PEOPLE v. FO1 FELIPE DELA CRUZ Y REYES

BRION, J.

The case was brought to this Court on automatic appeal in light of the penalty imposed, but we remanded it to the CA for intermediate appellate review pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[65]

GR No. 176263

2008-12-24

PEOPLE v. MICHAEL MURO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

On appellant's appeal to this Court,[23] it referred[24] the case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to People v. Mateo.[25]

GR No. 182924

2008-12-24

PEOPLE v. JOSE PEREZ

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The death penalty having been imposed, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to the Supreme Court for automatic review pursuant to Section 10, Rule 122 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure. However, pursuant to Our ruling in People v. Mateo,[22] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.[23]

GR No . 172973

2008-12-18

PEOPLE v. MARCELINO ABARE

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

The RTC decision was appealed to this Court by the appellant; the decision, was, however, referred to the CA pursuant to People v. Mateo.[14]

GR No. 183456

2008-12-18

PEOPLE v. REGINO TORMIS

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted before this Court on automatic review. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[32] the records were remanded to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.In his brief, the appellant's lone assignment of error was: the court a quo gravely erred in convicting the [appellant] of the crime charged despite the fact that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.[33]

GR No. 172874

2008-12-17

PEOPLE v. MARIO CASTRO

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[9] accused-appellant appealed his conviction to the CA via a notice of appeal on September 30, 2004,[10] whereat it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00126.

GR No. 177742

2008-12-17

PEOPLE v. JOSELITO A. LOPIT

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

Conformably with this Court's decision in People v. Mateo,[15] accused-appellant's appeal by way of automatic review was transferred to the CA where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01896.

GR No. 171654

2008-12-17

PEOPLE v. EDWIN GAYETA Y ROBLO

TINGA, J.

As to the co-accused, Reano, Jr., who did not appeal his conviction by the lower court, its judgment must be deemed final and executory. On the other hand, the cases of appellant (Criminal Cases No. 5420 and 5422) were directly elevated to this Court for automatic review in view of the penalty imposed. However, in a resolution dated 24 August 2004, the Court resolved to transfer the case to the Court of Appeals pursuant to our decision in People v. Mateo.[18]

GR No. 173473

2008-12-17

PEOPLE v. BETH TEMPORADA

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

In accordance with the Court's ruling in People v. Mateo,[5] this case was referred to the CA for intermediate review. On February 24, 2006, the CA affirmed with modification the Decision of the RTC:

GR No. 173052

2008-12-16

PEOPLE v. ROGELIO PELAGIO Y BERMUDO

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

In view of the death penalty imposed, the case was brought to this Court on automatic review. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[6] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals (CA) for appropriate action and disposition.[7]

GR No. 175929

2008-12-16

PEOPLE v. ROMMEL DELA CRUZ

REYES, R.T., J.

By virtue of this Court's decision in People v. Mateo,[50] the Court issued a resolution on September 6, 2004, transferring this case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 174371

2008-12-11

PEOPLE v. WARREN DELA CRUZ Y FRANCISCO

REYES, R.T., J.

Appellant directly appealed to this Court.[20]In accordance with Our decision in People v. Mateo,[21] We referred the case to the CA for proper disposition.

GR No. 180926

2008-12-10

PEOPLE v. LOURDES VALENCIANO Y DACUBA

VELASCO JR., J.

SO ORDERED.[4] Accused-appellant appealed to this Court, but the case was transferred to the CA through a Resolution dated September 6, 2004, following People v. Mateo.[5]

GR No. 183087

2008-12-04

PEOPLE v. IGNACIO ISANG Y LAGAY

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

Since the penalty imposed was death, the case was elevated to this Court on automatic appeal. However, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[4] this case was forwarded to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review and disposition, where the case was docketed as CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 01528.

GR No. 171164

2008-11-28

PEOPLE v. NASARIO CASTEL

REYES, R.T., J.

The records of the case were elevated to this Court for automatic review in view of the death penalty imposed on appellant. However, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[65] the Court resolved, on August 24, 2004, to transfer the case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[66]

GR No. 181899

2008-11-27

PEOPLE v. ROLLY MONTESA Y LUMIRAN

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

In view of the death penalty imposed on appellant, the instant cases were elevated to this Court for automatic review. However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[41] we remanded the cases to the Court of Appeals for disposition.

GR No. 180507

2008-11-20

PEOPLE v. NESTOR BAJADA Y BAUTISTA

VELASCO JR., J.

Accused-appellants filed their brief before this Court on April 3, 2003, docketed as G.R. No. 153218. On September 21, 2004, we transferred the case to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[11]

GR No. 177825

2008-10-24

PEOPLE v. RENE ROSAS

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

On September 22, 2004, conformably with our pronouncement in People v. Mateo[8] 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, this Court resolved to refer the case to the Court of Appeals, whereat it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00301, for appropriate action and disposition.[9]

GR No. 171452

2008-10-17

PEOPLE v. RICARDO SANTOS

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

Conformably with People v. Mateo,[38] the Court, in a Resolution[39] dated October 18, 2004, transferred the appeal to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 171089

2008-10-17

PEOPLE v. ROGELIO PASCUAL

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

Appellant appealed to this Court and in accordance with People v. Mateo,[4] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals (CA) for review.[5]

GR No. 177237

2008-10-17

WILLIAM CHING v. PEOPLE

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

Dissatisfied, Ching directly elevated his conviction to this Court for review. This Court, however, referred the case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review, conformably with the ruling in People v. Mateo.[18]

GR No. 180451

2008-10-17

PEOPLE v. SPO1 ARNULFO A. AURE

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

On 10 February 2002, appellants elevated the instant case to us for review.[50] However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[51] we remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for proper disposition.

GR No. 180512

2008-10-17

PEOPLE v. NOEL CUASAY

VELASCO JR., J.

Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on April 1, 2003 and thereafter filed his brief before this Court on May 4, 2004, docketed as G.R. No. 158055. On December 13, 2004, we remanded the case to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[8]

	GR No. 174483 2009-03-31	PEOPLE v. RAMON REGALARIO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Pursuant to our pronouncement in People v. Mateo[9] 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, this case was referred for appropriate action and disposition to the CA where it was docketed as CA-G.R. No. 01556.
	GR No. 173471 2009-03-17	PEOPLE v. ERNESTO MALIBIRAN VELASCO JR., J.
SO ORDERED.[6] The RTC forthwith elevated the records of the case to this Court for automatic review. In accordance, however, with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[7] the Court, per its August 24, 2004 Resolution,[8] transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 181494 2009-03-17	PEOPLE v. MONALYN CERVANTES Y SOLAR VELASCO JR., J.
Conformably with People v. Mateo,[9] the Court directed the transfer of the case to the CA where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00476. Before the appellate court, accused-appellant urged her acquittal on the ground of "insufficiency of evidence," particularly stating that the "forensic chemist who actually conducted the laboratory examination on the specimens allegedly recovered from the accused was not presented in court x x x [and] hence, there was no clear identification of the contents of the confiscated sachets."[10]
	GR No. 178300 2009-03-17	PEOPLE v. DOMINGO REYES Y PAJE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
WHEREFORE, finding herein three (3) accused DOMINGO REYES y PAJE, ALVIN ARNALDO y AVENA, and JOSELITO FLORES y VICTORIO guilty as principals beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of KIDNAPPING FOR RANSOM WITH (DOUBLE) HOMICIDE as charged, they are hereby sentenced each to suffer the supreme penalty of DEATH as mandated by law, to jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of deceased Chua Ong Ping Sim and Raymond Yao in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,000.00), and all the private offended parties or victims, including the heirs of the deceased, in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) as moral damages, subject to the corresponding filing fee as a first lien, and to pay the costs of the proceedings.[39] By reason of the death penalty imposed on each of the appellants, the instant case was elevated to us for automatic review. However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[40] we remanded the instant case to the Court of Appeals for proper disposition.
	GR Nos. 158694-96 2009-03-13	PEOPLE v. TEOFILO G. PANTALEON BRION, J.
The records of the case were forwarded to this Court after the appellants filed their respective notices of appeal. In our Resolution of September 13, 2004,[45] we transferred the case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition pursuant to People v. Mateo.[46]
	GR No. 170360 2009-03-12	PEOPLE v. HENRY GUERRERO Y AGRIPA BRION, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[13] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[14]
	GR No. 180169 2009-02-27	PEOPLE v. AGUSTINO TAMOLON NACHURA, J.
The RTC decision was elevated directly to the Supreme Court for automatic review. However, conformably with our ruling in People v. Mateo,[12] the case was, by Resolution dated December 13, 2004, referred to the CA. Parenthetically, no appeal was taken by the appellants in the other cases against them.[13] Accordingly, insofar as the other criminal cases are concerned, the Decision of the RTC of Davao del Sur had become final and executory.
	GR No. 175238 2009-02-24	PEOPLE v. ELMER BALDO Y SANTAIN QUISUMBING, J.
Since the penalty imposed on appellant is reclusion perpetua, the case was elevated to this Court for automatic review. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[10] however, we referred the case to the Court of Appeals.
	GR No. 174484 2009-02-23	PEOPLE v. FELIX ORTOA Y OBIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
In its Resolution dated November 8, 2005, the Court referred the cases to the CA for appropriate action and disposition[25] pursuant to the Court's pronouncement in People v. Mateo.[26]
	GR No. 175603 2009-02-13	PEOPLE v. RENATO ESPAÑOL CORONA, J.
Aggrieved, appellant filed an appeal in this Court which we referred to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[23] The CA affirmed the RTC in a decision promulgated on November 30, 2005. It denied reconsideration in a resolution dated June 29, 2006.
	GR No. 175978 2009-02-12	PEOPLE v. SAMUEL ALGARME Y BONDA BRION, J.
On appeal, we endorsed this case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition[31] pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[32] The CA, in its decision of September 7, 2006, affirmed the RTC decision with the modification that the death penalty imposed on Rizaldy be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
	GR No. 174372 2009-01-20	PEOPLE v. ELPIDIO ANTONIO CARPIO MORALES, J.
The records of the cases were thereupon elevated for automatic review to this Court which, following People v. Mateo[14] providing for an intermediate review of criminal cases where the death penalty, life imprisonment and reclusion perpetua are imposed, referred them to the Court of Appeals.[15]
	GR No. 182549 2009-01-20	PEOPLE v. SERGIO LAGARDE VELASCO JR., J.
In view of the imposition of the death penalty, the case was automatically elevated to the Court. In accordance with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[11] however, the case was transferred to the CA for review per this Court's August 24, 2004 Resolution.
	GR No. 179190 2009-01-20	PEOPLE v. ALBERTO L. MAHINAY CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The records of the case were transmitted to this Court for automatic review. However, conformably with the ruling of this Court in People v. Mateo,[5] the case was referred to the Court of Appeals.
	GR No. 182518 2009-01-20	PEOPLE v. MUHAMMAD ABDULAH NACHURA, J.
On direct appeal to this Court in G.R. Nos. 145306-08, we referred the cases to the appellate court for intermediate review following the doctrine in People v. Mateo.[18] In its July 17, 2007 Decision,[19] the CA, as aforesaid, affirmed in toto the decision of the trial court. Thus, we now finally review the trial and the appellate courts' uniform findings.
	GR No. 183567 2009-01-19	PEOPLE v. AVELINO DELA PEÑA NACHURA, J.
The appellant timely filed his Notice of Appeal[25] on December 19, 2001. On June 3, 2002, he was received at the New Bilibid Prison for commitment.[26] In the September 20, 2004 Resolution[27] of the Court in G.R. No. 152448, we transferred the case to the appellate court for appropriate action and disposition following our ruling in People v. Mateo.[28]
	GR No. 172326 2009-01-19	PEOPLE v. ALFREDO PASCUAL Y ILDEFONSO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
SO ORDERED.[11] The case was directly elevated to this Court for automatic review. However, in a Resolution[12] dated July 26, 2005 and pursuant to our ruling in People v Mateo[13] the case was transferred to the CA.
	GR No. 168173 2008-12-24	PEOPLE v. FO1 FELIPE DELA CRUZ Y REYES BRION, J.
The case was brought to this Court on automatic appeal in light of the penalty imposed, but we remanded it to the CA for intermediate appellate review pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[65]
	GR No. 176263 2008-12-24	PEOPLE v. MICHAEL MURO CARPIO MORALES, J.
On appellant's appeal to this Court,[23] it referred[24] the case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to People v. Mateo.[25]
	GR No. 182924 2008-12-24	PEOPLE v. JOSE PEREZ CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The death penalty having been imposed, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to the Supreme Court for automatic review pursuant to Section 10, Rule 122 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure. However, pursuant to Our ruling in People v. Mateo,[22] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.[23]
	GR No . 172973 2008-12-18	PEOPLE v. MARCELINO ABARE AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The RTC decision was appealed to this Court by the appellant; the decision, was, however, referred to the CA pursuant to People v. Mateo.[14]
	GR No. 183456 2008-12-18	PEOPLE v. REGINO TORMIS CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted before this Court on automatic review. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[32] the records were remanded to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.In his brief, the appellant's lone assignment of error was: the court a quo gravely erred in convicting the [appellant] of the crime charged despite the fact that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.[33]
	GR No. 172874 2008-12-17	PEOPLE v. MARIO CASTRO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[9] accused-appellant appealed his conviction to the CA via a notice of appeal on September 30, 2004,[10] whereat it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00126.
	GR No. 177742 2008-12-17	PEOPLE v. JOSELITO A. LOPIT LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Conformably with this Court's decision in People v. Mateo,[15] accused-appellant's appeal by way of automatic review was transferred to the CA where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01896.
	GR No. 171654 2008-12-17	PEOPLE v. EDWIN GAYETA Y ROBLO TINGA, J.
As to the co-accused, Reano, Jr., who did not appeal his conviction by the lower court, its judgment must be deemed final and executory. On the other hand, the cases of appellant (Criminal Cases No. 5420 and 5422) were directly elevated to this Court for automatic review in view of the penalty imposed. However, in a resolution dated 24 August 2004, the Court resolved to transfer the case to the Court of Appeals pursuant to our decision in People v. Mateo.[18]
	GR No. 173473 2008-12-17	PEOPLE v. BETH TEMPORADA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In accordance with the Court's ruling in People v. Mateo,[5] this case was referred to the CA for intermediate review. On February 24, 2006, the CA affirmed with modification the Decision of the RTC:
	GR No. 173052 2008-12-16	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO PELAGIO Y BERMUDO AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
In view of the death penalty imposed, the case was brought to this Court on automatic review. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[6] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals (CA) for appropriate action and disposition.[7]
	GR No. 175929 2008-12-16	PEOPLE v. ROMMEL DELA CRUZ REYES, R.T., J.
By virtue of this Court's decision in People v. Mateo,[50] the Court issued a resolution on September 6, 2004, transferring this case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 174371 2008-12-11	PEOPLE v. WARREN DELA CRUZ Y FRANCISCO REYES, R.T., J.
Appellant directly appealed to this Court.[20]In accordance with Our decision in People v. Mateo,[21] We referred the case to the CA for proper disposition.
	GR No. 180926 2008-12-10	PEOPLE v. LOURDES VALENCIANO Y DACUBA VELASCO JR., J.
SO ORDERED.[4] Accused-appellant appealed to this Court, but the case was transferred to the CA through a Resolution dated September 6, 2004, following People v. Mateo.[5]
	GR No. 183087 2008-12-04	PEOPLE v. IGNACIO ISANG Y LAGAY CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Since the penalty imposed was death, the case was elevated to this Court on automatic appeal. However, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[4] this case was forwarded to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review and disposition, where the case was docketed as CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 01528.
	GR No. 171164 2008-11-28	PEOPLE v. NASARIO CASTEL REYES, R.T., J.
The records of the case were elevated to this Court for automatic review in view of the death penalty imposed on appellant. However, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[65] the Court resolved, on August 24, 2004, to transfer the case to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[66]
	GR No. 181899 2008-11-27	PEOPLE v. ROLLY MONTESA Y LUMIRAN CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In view of the death penalty imposed on appellant, the instant cases were elevated to this Court for automatic review. However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[41] we remanded the cases to the Court of Appeals for disposition.
	GR No. 180507 2008-11-20	PEOPLE v. NESTOR BAJADA Y BAUTISTA VELASCO JR., J.
Accused-appellants filed their brief before this Court on April 3, 2003, docketed as G.R. No. 153218. On September 21, 2004, we transferred the case to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[11]
	GR No. 177825 2008-10-24	PEOPLE v. RENE ROSAS LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
On September 22, 2004, conformably with our pronouncement in People v. Mateo[8] 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, this Court resolved to refer the case to the Court of Appeals, whereat it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00301, for appropriate action and disposition.[9]
	GR No. 171452 2008-10-17	PEOPLE v. RICARDO SANTOS AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Conformably with People v. Mateo,[38] the Court, in a Resolution[39] dated October 18, 2004, transferred the appeal to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 171089 2008-10-17	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO PASCUAL AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Appellant appealed to this Court and in accordance with People v. Mateo,[4] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals (CA) for review.[5]
	GR No. 177237 2008-10-17	WILLIAM CHING v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Dissatisfied, Ching directly elevated his conviction to this Court for review. This Court, however, referred the case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review, conformably with the ruling in People v. Mateo.[18]
	GR No. 180451 2008-10-17	PEOPLE v. SPO1 ARNULFO A. AURE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
On 10 February 2002, appellants elevated the instant case to us for review.[50] However, pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[51] we remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for proper disposition.
	GR No. 180512 2008-10-17	PEOPLE v. NOEL CUASAY VELASCO JR., J.
Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on April 1, 2003 and thereafter filed his brief before this Court on May 4, 2004, docketed as G.R. No. 158055. On December 13, 2004, we remanded the case to the CA in accordance with People v. Mateo.[8]

PEOPLE v. EFREN MATEO Y GARCIA