Lawyerly

GR No. 172468

2008-10-15

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

This case was directly elevated to this Court for mandatory review. In a Minute Resolution[7] dated January 11, 2005, we referred this case to the CA for proper disposition conformably with the decision rendered in People v. Mateo.[8] On review, the CA rejected the assignments of error raised by the accused-appellant and affirmed her conviction of the crime charged.

GR No. 177563

2008-10-10

PEOPLE v. DIOSDADO BALOBALO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

Appellant appealed to this Court which, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[18] referred the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition.[19]

GR No. 168166

2008-10-10

PEOPLE v. SALVADOR C. DACO

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

Pursuant to our pronouncement in People v. Mateo,[9] modifying the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases in which the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, and also modifying the Resolution dated September 19, 1995, the cases were transferred, for appropriate action and disposition, to the CA where they were docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00621.

GR No. 168299

2008-10-06

PEOPLE v. LUIS AYCARDO

AZCUNA, J.

These consolidated cases were elevated to this Court for automatic review. The Court referred the cases to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review following People v. Mateo.[18]

GR No. 172370

2008-10-06

PEOPLE v. FLORENDA CASTRO

REYES, R.T., J.

Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[21] which modified Rules 122, 124 and 125 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases in which the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, this case was referred to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 170569

2008-09-30

PEOPLE v. NORBERTO MATEO Y DIZON

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

Appellant initially appealed to this Court. Conformably with People v. Mateo,[8] the Court transferred the case to the CA.

GR No. 181631

2008-09-30

PEOPLE v. JOSE BALINAS

TINGA, J.

In a Resolution dated 6 September 2004 and pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[14] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals. The appellate court affirmed in toto the trial court's ruling. Undaunted, appellant filed a notice of appeal.[15]

GR No. 182548

2008-09-30

PEOPLE v. CESARIO OSIANAS

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The accused-appellants appealed to this Court. On 13 September 2004, however, we transferred[6] the appeal to the Court of Appeals in conformity with our decision in People v. Mateo.[7] The appeal was docketed as CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00511.

GR No. 177571

2008-09-29

PEOPLE v. DEAN MARTIN Y SARVIDA

VELASCO JR., J.

Accused-appellants filed a Notice of Appeal and the records of the case were forwarded to this Court for review. The case was originally docketed as G.R. No. 143079. In accordance with People v. Mateo,[7] this Court, however, in its December 8, 2004 Resolution, transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 181632

2008-09-25

PEOPLE v. JESSIE BALLESTA

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[20] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 173483

2008-09-23

PEOPLE v. MERLIE* DUMANGAY Y SALE

QUISUMBING, J.

Merlie appealed. In view of our ruling in People v. Mateo, [11] this case was referred to the Court of Appeals. [12]

GR No. 175995

2008-09-23

PEOPLE v. EDWIN FUENTES Y CARSON

CORONA, J.

After appellant filed his notice of appeal, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to this Court. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[8] however, the case was referred to the Court of Appeals[9] which affirmed the decision of the trial court in toto.[10]

GR No. 167383

2008-09-22

PEOPLE v. AMADEO TINSAY

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review in view of the penalty of death imposed on appellant. However, in accordance with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[15] and the amendments made to Sections 3 and 10 of Rule 122, Section 13 of Rule 124, and Section 3 of Rule 125 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, the Court transferred this case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 168050

2008-09-19

PEOPLE v. BERNARDINO GAFFUD

PUNO, CJ.

The case was transferred to the CA for appropriate action and disposition per Resolution[6] of this Court dated August 24, 2004, in accordance with the ruling in People v. Mateo.[7] In disposing of the assigned errors, the CA held that the lack of discussion of conspiracy among accused-appellant and his anonymous co-accused in the decision of the RTC was not antithetic to his conviction for the crime of murder, since the charge that he was a principal performer in the killing of the victims was spelled out in the Information[8] filed against him.[9] Moreover, in the absence of conspiracy, each of the malefactors is liable only for the act committed by him.[10] As to the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the prosecution, the CA held that the circumstantial evidence in this case established accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.[11] Accordingly, the CA affirmed the Decision of the RTC, finding accused-appellant guilty of the complex crime of double murder, with the following modifications:

GR No. 173242

2008-09-17

PEOPLE v. ESPERIDION BALAIS

QUISUMBING, J.

The case was automatically elevated to this Court because the penalty imposed was death. However, pursuant to our ruling in the case of People v. Mateo,[16] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals.

GR No. 172871

2008-09-16

PEOPLE v. CLEMENTE CASTA Y CAROLINO

BRION, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[31] we endorsed the case and its records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[32]

GR No. 174098

2008-09-12

PEOPLE v. REYNALDO TECZON Y PASCUAL

VELASCO JR., J.

Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal and the records of the case were forwarded to this Court for review. The case was originally docketed as G.R. No. 151201. In accordance with People v. Mateo,[12] however, this Court, in its February 7, 2005 Resolution, transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 181633

2008-09-12

PEOPLE v. ROGER UGOS

VELASCO JR., J.

On December 13, 2004, this Court, in accordance with People v. Mateo,[15] ordered the transfer of the case to the CA for intermediate review.

GR No. 180500

2008-09-11

PEOPLE v. MEDARDO CRESPO Y CRUZ

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[52] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 181546

2008-09-03

PEOPLE v. RICARDO ALUNDAY

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

Since the penalty imposed by the trial court was reclusion perpetua, the case was remanded to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[19]

GR No. 170834

2008-08-29

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO NOGRA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

Conformably to the ruling in People v. Mateo,[10] the case was referred to the CA for intermediate review.[11]

GR No. 181594

2008-08-28

PEOPLE v. ROLLY FLORA Y CANDELARIA

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

In view of the penalty imposed by the RTC, and conformably with People v. Mateo,[24] in a Resolution dated 27 March 2006,[25] we directed the transfer of this case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review.

GR No. 168102

2008-08-22

PEOPLE v. JAYSON TUAZON Y OLIA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

Pursuant to the Court's pronouncement in People v. Mateo,[11] which modified the provisions of the Rules of Court insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases in which 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.[12]

GR No. 176640

2008-08-22

PEOPLE v. LUSTRISIMO ARELLANO

CARPIO MORALES, J.

By Decision[16] of July 31, 2006, the Court of Appeals, to which this Court forwarded the appeal following People v. Mateo,[17] resolving in the negative the sole issue raised by appellant - whether delay in reporting the incidents of rape affected the credibility of AAA, affirmed the trial court's decision. It, however, modified the penalty by imposing reclusion perpetua instead of death, and additionally awarding P75,000 and P25,000 in each case representing civil indemnity and exemplary damages, respectively. Thus it disposed:

GR No. 177151

2008-08-22

PEOPLE v. ARIEL JACOB Y ZUÑEGA

BRION, J.

The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[27] however, we transferred the records to the CA for intermediate review and disposition.[28]

GR No. 167503

2008-08-20

PEOPLE v. LUISITO BAUN Y MERCADO

AZCUNA, J.

The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review. The Court transferred the case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review following People v. Mateo.[8]

GR No. 172696

2008-08-11

PEOPLE v. BENITO BALLESTEROS Y GRAGASIN

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 Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to our ruling in People v. Efren Mateo y Garcia.[36]

GR No. 175589

2008-07-28

PEOPLE v. CERILLO TAMBIS

CARPIO MORALES, J.

Appellant lodged before this Court an appeal which it forwarded to the Court of Appeals following People v. Mateo[8] which directs the intermediate review of decisions imposing the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.[9]

GR No. 171729

2008-07-28

PEOPLE v. RICARDO BOHOL Y CABRINO

QUISUMBING, J.

SO ORDERED.[9] Since one of the penalties imposed by the trial court is life imprisonment, the cases were forwarded to this Court for automatic review. On June 15, 2005, this Court transferred the cases to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to this Court's decision in People v. Mateo.[10]

GR No. 172974

2008-07-28

PEOPLE v. CESAR ARENAS

CORONA, J.

SO ORDERED.[6] After appellant filed his notice of appeal, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to this Court. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[7] however, the case was referred to the Court of Appeals for review.[8]

GR No. 180448

2008-07-28

PEOPLE v. BUDOY GONZALES Y LACDANG

TINGA, J,

In view of the penalty imposed, the case was elevated to this Court for review. However, conformably with our decision in People v. Mateo,[13] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.[14]

GR No. 175479

2008-07-23

PEOPLE v. BIENVENIDO PAYOT

TINGA, J,

The judgment was elevated to the Court for automatic review. In a Resolution[17] dated 16 March 2005 of the Court in G.R. No. 161770,[18] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to the Court's ruling in People v. Efren Mateo.[19]

GR No. 176062

2008-07-04

PEOPLE v. EFREN CUSTODIO Y ESTEBAN

CARPIO MORALES, J.

With costs against the accused.[23] (Underscoring in the original; italics supplied) The records of the cases were forwarded to this Court in view of the Notice of Appeal[24] filed by appellant. Per People v. Mateo,[25] this Court referred the cases to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of September 29, 2004.[26]

GR No. 173308

2008-06-25

PEOPLE v. ELMER DE LA CRUZ

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.[5] The CA affirmed the RTC decision:

GR No. 172752

2008-06-18

PEOPLE v. RODOLFO SISON

REYES, R.T., J.

The case was then elevated to Us but conformably with Our decision in People v. Mateo,[39] this Court transferred the case to the CA for proper disposition.

GR No. 176742

2008-06-17

PEOPLE v. WENCESLAO ESPINO

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

With costs against the [appellant].[34] The records of this case were originally transmitted before this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[35] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.

GR No. 177822

2008-06-17

PEOPLE v. HILARIO OPONG Y TAÑESA

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

On 9 March 2005, we issued a Resolution[24] remanding the present case to the Court of Appeals for proper disposition pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[25] On 25 October 2006, the Court of Appeals promulgated its Decision affirming in toto the Decision of the RTC. Thus: Appellant has not shown that departure from the findings of facts of the trial court is proper.

GR No. 174479

2008-06-17

PEOPLE v. ZALDY GARCIA Y ANCHETA

BRION, J.

The case was elevated to this Court on automatic appeal but was remanded to the Court of Appeals (CA) in accordance with People v. Mateo.[54]

GR No. 178546

2008-04-30

PEOPLE v. MUKIM ELING Y MAÑALAC

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

With the imposition of the death penalty on appellant, the case was elevated to the Supreme Court on automatic review. Pursuant to the Court's ruling in People v. Mateo,[27] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals.[28]

	GR No. 172468 2008-10-15	PEOPLE v. JULIE VILLACORTA GIL LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
This case was directly elevated to this Court for mandatory review. In a Minute Resolution[7] dated January 11, 2005, we referred this case to the CA for proper disposition conformably with the decision rendered in People v. Mateo.[8] On review, the CA rejected the assignments of error raised by the accused-appellant and affirmed her conviction of the crime charged.
	GR No. 177563 2008-10-10	PEOPLE v. DIOSDADO BALOBALO CARPIO MORALES, J.
Appellant appealed to this Court which, pursuant to People v. Mateo,[18] referred the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition.[19]
	GR No. 168166 2008-10-10	PEOPLE v. SALVADOR C. DACO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Pursuant to our pronouncement in People v. Mateo,[9] modifying the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases in which the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, and also modifying the Resolution dated September 19, 1995, the cases were transferred, for appropriate action and disposition, to the CA where they were docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00621.
	GR No. 168299 2008-10-06	PEOPLE v. LUIS AYCARDO AZCUNA, J.
These consolidated cases were elevated to this Court for automatic review. The Court referred the cases to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review following People v. Mateo.[18]
	GR No. 172370 2008-10-06	PEOPLE v. FLORENDA CASTRO REYES, R.T., J.
Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[21] which modified Rules 122, 124 and 125 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases in which the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, this case was referred to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 170569 2008-09-30	PEOPLE v. NORBERTO MATEO Y DIZON AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Appellant initially appealed to this Court. Conformably with People v. Mateo,[8] the Court transferred the case to the CA.
	GR No. 181631 2008-09-30	PEOPLE v. JOSE BALINAS TINGA, J.
In a Resolution dated 6 September 2004 and pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[14] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals. The appellate court affirmed in toto the trial court's ruling. Undaunted, appellant filed a notice of appeal.[15]
	GR No. 182548 2008-09-30	PEOPLE v. CESARIO OSIANAS CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The accused-appellants appealed to this Court. On 13 September 2004, however, we transferred[6] the appeal to the Court of Appeals in conformity with our decision in People v. Mateo.[7] The appeal was docketed as CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00511.
	GR No. 177571 2008-09-29	PEOPLE v. DEAN MARTIN Y SARVIDA VELASCO JR., J.
Accused-appellants filed a Notice of Appeal and the records of the case were forwarded to this Court for review. The case was originally docketed as G.R. No. 143079. In accordance with People v. Mateo,[7] this Court, however, in its December 8, 2004 Resolution, transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 181632 2008-09-25	PEOPLE v. JESSIE BALLESTA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[20] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 173483 2008-09-23	PEOPLE v. MERLIE* DUMANGAY Y SALE QUISUMBING, J.
Merlie appealed. In view of our ruling in People v. Mateo, [11] this case was referred to the Court of Appeals. [12]
	GR No. 175995 2008-09-23	PEOPLE v. EDWIN FUENTES Y CARSON CORONA, J.
After appellant filed his notice of appeal, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to this Court. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[8] however, the case was referred to the Court of Appeals[9] which affirmed the decision of the trial court in toto.[10]
	GR No. 167383 2008-09-22	PEOPLE v. AMADEO TINSAY AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review in view of the penalty of death imposed on appellant. However, in accordance with the ruling in People v. Mateo,[15] and the amendments made to Sections 3 and 10 of Rule 122, Section 13 of Rule 124, and Section 3 of Rule 125 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, the Court transferred this case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 168050 2008-09-19	PEOPLE v. BERNARDINO GAFFUD PUNO, CJ.
The case was transferred to the CA for appropriate action and disposition per Resolution[6] of this Court dated August 24, 2004, in accordance with the ruling in People v. Mateo.[7] In disposing of the assigned errors, the CA held that the lack of discussion of conspiracy among accused-appellant and his anonymous co-accused in the decision of the RTC was not antithetic to his conviction for the crime of murder, since the charge that he was a principal performer in the killing of the victims was spelled out in the Information[8] filed against him.[9] Moreover, in the absence of conspiracy, each of the malefactors is liable only for the act committed by him.[10] As to the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the prosecution, the CA held that the circumstantial evidence in this case established accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.[11] Accordingly, the CA affirmed the Decision of the RTC, finding accused-appellant guilty of the complex crime of double murder, with the following modifications:
	GR No. 173242 2008-09-17	PEOPLE v. ESPERIDION BALAIS QUISUMBING, J.
The case was automatically elevated to this Court because the penalty imposed was death. However, pursuant to our ruling in the case of People v. Mateo,[16] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals.
	GR No. 172871 2008-09-16	PEOPLE v. CLEMENTE CASTA Y CAROLINO BRION, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[31] we endorsed the case and its records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[32]
	GR No. 174098 2008-09-12	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO TECZON Y PASCUAL VELASCO JR., J.
Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal and the records of the case were forwarded to this Court for review. The case was originally docketed as G.R. No. 151201. In accordance with People v. Mateo,[12] however, this Court, in its February 7, 2005 Resolution, transferred the case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 181633 2008-09-12	PEOPLE v. ROGER UGOS VELASCO JR., J.
On December 13, 2004, this Court, in accordance with People v. Mateo,[15] ordered the transfer of the case to the CA for intermediate review.
	GR No. 180500 2008-09-11	PEOPLE v. MEDARDO CRESPO Y CRUZ CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[52] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 181546 2008-09-03	PEOPLE v. RICARDO ALUNDAY CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Since the penalty imposed by the trial court was reclusion perpetua, the case was remanded to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[19]
	GR No. 170834 2008-08-29	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO NOGRA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Conformably to the ruling in People v. Mateo,[10] the case was referred to the CA for intermediate review.[11]
	GR No. 181594 2008-08-28	PEOPLE v. ROLLY FLORA Y CANDELARIA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In view of the penalty imposed by the RTC, and conformably with People v. Mateo,[24] in a Resolution dated 27 March 2006,[25] we directed the transfer of this case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review.
	GR No. 168102 2008-08-22	PEOPLE v. JAYSON TUAZON Y OLIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Pursuant to the Court's pronouncement in People v. Mateo,[11] which modified the provisions of the Rules of Court insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in cases in which 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.[12]
	GR No. 176640 2008-08-22	PEOPLE v. LUSTRISIMO ARELLANO CARPIO MORALES, J.
By Decision[16] of July 31, 2006, the Court of Appeals, to which this Court forwarded the appeal following People v. Mateo,[17] resolving in the negative the sole issue raised by appellant - whether delay in reporting the incidents of rape affected the credibility of AAA, affirmed the trial court's decision. It, however, modified the penalty by imposing reclusion perpetua instead of death, and additionally awarding P75,000 and P25,000 in each case representing civil indemnity and exemplary damages, respectively. Thus it disposed:
	GR No. 177151 2008-08-22	PEOPLE v. ARIEL JACOB Y ZUÑEGA BRION, J.
The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[27] however, we transferred the records to the CA for intermediate review and disposition.[28]
	GR No. 167503 2008-08-20	PEOPLE v. LUISITO BAUN Y MERCADO AZCUNA, J.
The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review. The Court transferred the case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review following People v. Mateo.[8]
	GR No. 172696 2008-08-11	PEOPLE v. BENITO BALLESTEROS Y GRAGASIN 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 Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to our ruling in People v. Efren Mateo y Garcia.[36]
	GR No. 175589 2008-07-28	PEOPLE v. CERILLO TAMBIS CARPIO MORALES, J.
Appellant lodged before this Court an appeal which it forwarded to the Court of Appeals following People v. Mateo[8] which directs the intermediate review of decisions imposing the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.[9]
	GR No. 171729 2008-07-28	PEOPLE v. RICARDO BOHOL Y CABRINO QUISUMBING, J.
SO ORDERED.[9] Since one of the penalties imposed by the trial court is life imprisonment, the cases were forwarded to this Court for automatic review. On June 15, 2005, this Court transferred the cases to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to this Court's decision in People v. Mateo.[10]
	GR No. 172974 2008-07-28	PEOPLE v. CESAR ARENAS CORONA, J.
SO ORDERED.[6] After appellant filed his notice of appeal, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to this Court. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[7] however, the case was referred to the Court of Appeals for review.[8]
	GR No. 180448 2008-07-28	PEOPLE v. BUDOY GONZALES Y LACDANG TINGA, J,
In view of the penalty imposed, the case was elevated to this Court for review. However, conformably with our decision in People v. Mateo,[13] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.[14]
	GR No. 175479 2008-07-23	PEOPLE v. BIENVENIDO PAYOT TINGA, J,
The judgment was elevated to the Court for automatic review. In a Resolution[17] dated 16 March 2005 of the Court in G.R. No. 161770,[18] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review pursuant to the Court's ruling in People v. Efren Mateo.[19]
	GR No. 176062 2008-07-04	PEOPLE v. EFREN CUSTODIO Y ESTEBAN CARPIO MORALES, J.
With costs against the accused.[23] (Underscoring in the original; italics supplied) The records of the cases were forwarded to this Court in view of the Notice of Appeal[24] filed by appellant. Per People v. Mateo,[25] this Court referred the cases to the Court of Appeals by Resolution of September 29, 2004.[26]
	GR No. 173308 2008-06-25	PEOPLE v. ELMER DE LA CRUZ 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.[5] The CA affirmed the RTC decision:
	GR No. 172752 2008-06-18	PEOPLE v. RODOLFO SISON REYES, R.T., J.
The case was then elevated to Us but conformably with Our decision in People v. Mateo,[39] this Court transferred the case to the CA for proper disposition.
	GR No. 176742 2008-06-17	PEOPLE v. WENCESLAO ESPINO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
With costs against the [appellant].[34] The records of this case were originally transmitted before this Court on appeal. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,[35] the records were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition.
	GR No. 177822 2008-06-17	PEOPLE v. HILARIO OPONG Y TAÑESA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
On 9 March 2005, we issued a Resolution[24] remanding the present case to the Court of Appeals for proper disposition pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo.[25] On 25 October 2006, the Court of Appeals promulgated its Decision affirming in toto the Decision of the RTC. Thus: Appellant has not shown that departure from the findings of facts of the trial court is proper.
	GR No. 174479 2008-06-17	PEOPLE v. ZALDY GARCIA Y ANCHETA BRION, J.
The case was elevated to this Court on automatic appeal but was remanded to the Court of Appeals (CA) in accordance with People v. Mateo.[54]
	GR No. 178546 2008-04-30	PEOPLE v. MUKIM ELING Y MAÑALAC CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
With the imposition of the death penalty on appellant, the case was elevated to the Supreme Court on automatic review. Pursuant to the Court's ruling in People v. Mateo,[27] the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals.[28]

PEOPLE v. EFREN MATEO Y GARCIA