This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-07-31 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| With the withdrawal of the appeal in G.R. No. 190282 and the belated filing of the Petition in G.R. No. 191025, the Decision dated August 28, 2009 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 91714, reversing the grant by the RTC of Prieto's Demurrer to Evidence and reinstating Criminal Case No. 97-157752, had become final and executory, thus, immutable. As the Court declared in Lalican v. Insular Life Assurance Co. Ltd.[21]:A judgment becomes "final and executory" by operation of law. Finality becomes a fact when the reglementary period to appeal lapses and no appeal is perfected within such period. As a consequence, no court (not even this Court) can exercise appellate jurisdiction to review a case or modify a decision that has become final. When a final judgment is executory, it becomes immutable and unalterable. It may no longer be modified in any respect either by the court, which rendered it or even by this Court. The doctrine is founded on considerations of public policy and sound practice that, at the risk of occasional errors, judgments must become final at some definite point in time. (Citations omitted.) | |||||
|
2011-03-23 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Clearly, then, this Court may not pass upon the same issues which had been finally adjudicated since a final and executory judgment can no longer be attacked by any of the parties or be modified, directly or indirectly, even by the Supreme Court.[34] This principle of immutability of final judgment renders it unalterable as nothing further can be done except to execute it.[35] A judgment must be final at some definite time as it is only proper to allow the case to take its rest on grounds of public policy and sound practice.[36] Although there are recognized exceptions to this fundamental principle, such as nunc pro tunc entries, void judgments and cases which would not cause any prejudice to any party,[37] none of these exceptions obtain in the case at bench. | |||||