Dismissal of Appeal: Fugitive Status Bars Access to Judicial Relief

The Supreme Court has long held that an accused who flees from the jurisdiction of the courts forfeits the right to seek judicial relief. In People of the Philippines v. Val de los Reyes and Donel Go (G.R. Nos. 130714 & 139634, October 16, 2012), the Court En Banc dismissed the appeal of a convicted rapist who had jumped bail during trial, reaffirming the principle that a fugitive from justice cannot invoke the courts' aid while evading their authority.

The Facts

The case arose from the rape of Imelda B. Brutas on December 22, 1994, in Tabaco, Albay. Imelda went to the house of Donel Go to deliver pictures to his sister. There, she met Val de los Reyes, who was introduced by Go. When it rained, the three took shelter inside Go's house, where the two men forced Imelda to drink two bottles of beer, causing her to feel dizzy.

Under this condition, both men took turns sexually assaulting her. Val de los Reyes first had carnal knowledge of Imelda against her will. Go then took his turn, with Val's assistance in covering her mouth and holding her hands. Val then assaulted her a second time, with Go similarly aiding him.

Two criminal informations were filed: one against Go for rape with the indispensable cooperation of Val, and another against Val for rape with the indispensable cooperation of Go. Only Go was arrested. He was arraigned and pleaded not guilty, but before the prosecution could finish presenting its evidence, he jumped bail. He was tried in absentia.

The Regional Trial Court convicted Go of two counts of rape and sentenced him to death for each count. Because of the death penalty, the case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review. Val, who remained at large, was later arrested, tried, and convicted of three counts of rape.

The Issue

The central question was whether Go, who had jumped bail and remained a fugitive from justice, could pursue his appeal before the Court.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court dismissed Go's appeal. The Court noted that Go jumped bail during the trial before the RTC and was tried and convicted in absentia. There was no evidence that he had since surrendered to the court's jurisdiction.

The Court reiterated the established rule: once an accused escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail, or flees to a foreign country, he loses his standing in court. Unless he surrenders or submits to the jurisdiction of the court, he is deemed to have waived any right to seek relief from the courts.

The Court cited Section 8, Rule 124 of the Rules of Court, which expressly allows the Court of Appeals to dismiss an appeal if the appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail, or flees to a foreign country during the pendency of the appeal.

Even if the case were remanded to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review, the appellate court would be constrained to dismiss Go's appeal because he was a fugitive from justice.

The Court also emphasized that the right to appeal is merely a statutory privilege, not a constitutional right. It may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of the law. A party who seeks to avail of the right must comply with the requirements of the Rules; failing to do so results in the loss of that right.

The Principle of Fugitive Disentitlement

This case illustrates the doctrine of "fugitive disentitlement," which allows courts to dismiss appeals of parties who are evading the court's jurisdiction. The doctrine serves several purposes: it discourages escapes and flight from justice, promotes the efficient operation of the courts, and avoids prejudice to the appellee caused by the appellant's delay and evasion.

The rule applies regardless of the merits of the appeal. Even an accused with a potentially valid defense loses the right to present it while remaining a fugitive. The courts will not entertain the appeals of those who refuse to submit to their authority.

Practical Takeaways

• An accused who jumps bail or escapes from confinement loses standing in court and may have his appeal dismissed, regardless of the merits of his case.
• The right to appeal is a statutory privilege, not a constitutional right; it must be exercised in accordance with the Rules of Court.
• To pursue an appeal, an accused must first surrender and submit to the jurisdiction of the court.
• The doctrine applies even in cases involving the death penalty, which are normally entitled to automatic review.
• The same principle applies before the Court of Appeals under Section 8, Rule 124 of the Rules of Court.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.