Eduardo and Edwin Valdez were convicted of three counts of murder and were made to suffer reclusion perpetua in each of the cases. They appealed to the CA but their conviction was sustained. They appealed to the SC but before the SC decided on their appeal, Edwin withdrew his appeal. In 2012, the SC modified the findings of the RTC and sentenced Eduardo to prision mayor as minimum to reclusion temporal as maximum.
Edwin then sent a letter to the SC asking for the court to impose the same penalty to him. The private complainant in the murder cases opposed Edwin’s letter.
ISSUE: Whether or not the lighter penalty may be imposed on Edwin Valdez.
HELD: Yes. This is in accordance with Section 11, Rule 122 which provides: An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did not appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to the latter.
But Edwin in fact appealed but he only withdrew it, is the rule still applicable to him?
Yes. A literal interpretation of the phrase “did not appeal,” as espoused by private complainant, will not give justice to the purpose of the provision. It should be read in its entirety and should not be myopically construed so as to defeat its reason, i.e., to benefit an accused who did not join in the appeal of his co-accused in case where the appellate judgment is favorable. In fact, several cases rendered by the Court applied the foregoing provision without regard as to the filing or non-filing of an appeal by a co-accused, so long as the judgment was favorable to him.
