PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MARIEANDY A. FRICKE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OFTAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY THIRD DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE CTA Criminal Case No. 0-199 Plaintiff, For: Violation of Section 255 of the PHILIPPINES, National Internal Revenue Code of the Philippines (NIRC) - versus- Members: MANAHAN, Chai1person, REYES-FAJARDO, and MARIEANDY A. FRICKE ANGELES, JJ. (No. 111 Guava Drive, Ayala, Alabang Muntinlupa City), Promulgated : 0FC 0 6 2~~ Accused. )( ------------------------------�--c-,.-.-_-_---1---.-o--' I'~-.-,.-,-.---)( RESOLUTION On August 6, 2024, the Court issued a Resolution, dismissing the case on the ground that the Information failed to demonstrate the Court's jurisdiction over this case, to wit: WHEREFORE, CTA Criminal Case No. 0-199 charging accused Marieandy A. Fricke of violation of Section 255 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended is WITHDRAWN from the archives and accordingly DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. On September 6, 2024, the prosecution filed a Formal Entry of Appearance with Motion for Reconsideration. The instant Motion must be denied .

RESOLUTION CTA Criminal Case No. 0-199 Item III (2)(c) of the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases provides: III. Procedure XXX XXX XXX 2. Motions XXX XXX XXX (c) Meritorious Motions. - Motions that allege plausible grounds supported by relevant documents and/ or competent evidence, except those that are already covered by the Revised Guidelines, are meritorious motions, xxx: XXX XXX XXX The motion for reconsideration of the resolution of a meritorious motion shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days from receipt of such resolu tion, xxx. Motions that do not conform to the requirements stated above shall be considered unmeritorious and shall be denied outright. From the foregoing, the party aggrieved by the Resolution of the Court is conferred a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days, reckoned from receipt thereof, w ithin w hich to file a motion for reconsideration, lest the same shall be denied. As admitted,1 the prosecution received the Resolution dated August 6, 2024, withdrawing the case from the archives and accordingly dismissing the present case, on August 22, 2024. Consistent w ith the above rule, the prosecution had a non-extendible period of five (5) calendar days from August 22, 2024 or until August 27, 2024 to seek reconsideration of the adverse ruling. The prosecution's Motion for Reconsideration havin g been belatedly filed only on September 6, 2024, the Court is left with no other recourse but to deny the same. 1 Page 2, Paragraph No.5, Prosecution's Motion for Reconsideration.

RESOLUTION CfA Criminal Case No. 0 -199 WHEREFORE, the prosecution1s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED for being filed out of time. SO ORDERED. ~'"7� CATHERINE T. MANAHAN Associate Justice ~ ~ F ~. R.Eq~ES-..Ff7XtJfAMRDO MARIAN Iik Associate Justice HENRY~ANGELES Associate Justice