JOSE ANTONIO LEVISTE

vs.
THE COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 189122               March 17, 2010

Facts:
Jose Antonio Leviste  was charged with the crime of murder of Rafael
de las Alas but was convicted by the RTC for the lesser crime of homicide.
He appealed the RTC's decision to the CA then he filed an application for
admission to bail pending appeal, due to his advanced age and health
condition, and claiming the absence of any risk or possibility of flight on his
part.
The CA denied his application on the ground that the discretion to extend
bail during appeal should be exercised with grave caution and only for
strong reasons. Levisete questioned the ruling of the CA and averred that the
CA committed grave abuse of discretion in the denial of his application for
bail considering that none of the conditions justifying denial of bail under
the Sec. 5 (3) Rule 114 of the Rules of Court was present. That when the
penalty imposed by the trial court is more than six years but not more than
20 years and the circumstances in the above-mentioned provision are absent,
bail must be granted to an appellant pending appeal.
Issue:
Whether or not the CA committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the
application for bail of Leviste.
Ruling:
No, under Sec 5 of Rule 114 bail is discretionary, upon conviction by the
RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion Perpetua, or life
imprisonment. Furthermore, petitioner failed to establish that the Court of
Appeals indeed acted with grave abuse of discretion. He simply relies on his
claim that the Court of Appeals should have granted bail in view of the
absence of any of the circumstances enumerated in the third paragraph of
Section 5, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court.