Teen convicted of DUI will spend Christmas in jail

Raymond Blas, the teenager who is now serving time for driving under the influence of alcohol and reckless driving, will have to spend Christmas in jail, after the Supreme Court denied his request for temporary release during the pendency of his appeal.

The High Court ruled that Blas failed to show that he should be released based on factors pursuant to appellate procedures.

The factors the defendant should prove include establishing that he is not a flight risk nor does he pose a danger to any other person or to the community, that the appeal is not taken for the purpose of delay, and that the appeal raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in reversal or in an order for a new trial.

The High Court also explained that appellate procedures require an initial application for a stay of sentence before the trial court, which Blas’ lawyer, Brien Sers Nicholas, did not pursue.

“It is hard to imagine how establishing a clear record in the trial court which preserves for appeal the trial court’s specific legal and factual analysis for determining whether or not to grant a stay is a futile pursuit. Without an adequate record, proper analysis of the three…factors is not possible,” the Supreme Court said.

“Specifically, we are unable to determine if Blas is a flight risk, a danger to the community or any other person, or whether the appeal is taken for the sake of delay,” it added.

Chief Justice Miguel S. Demapan and Associate Justices John A. Manglona and Alexandro C. Castro said a stay of sentence is not proper, noting Blas’ failure to meet the factors for his temporary release pending appeal.

They said Blas also failed to prove that his appeal raises a substantial question of law or fact, which would likely result in reversal or in an order for a new trial.

Sers Nicholas asserted that Blas’ appeal on his conviction and sentence is meritorious and is not being resorted to delay the criminal justice process. He said the appeal has merits that could eventually turn in Blas’ favor by negating the possibility of further imprisonment.

He explained that the appeal presents questions on inconsistent verdicts, referring to Blas’ acquittal by the jury on a charge of vehicular homicide and Superior Court judge Juan T. Lizama’s conviction of Blas on DUI and reckless driving.

He also cited a pertinent statutory provision on vehicular homicide: “Whoever shall unlawfully and unintentionally cause the death of another person while engaged in the violation of any law applying to the operation or use of a vehicle or to the regulation of traffic shall be guilty of homicide when the violation is the proximate cause of the death,” he said.

Sers Nicholas contended that, since the jury acquitted Blas on a charge of vehicular homicide, the same jury unanimously found the defendant to be in no violation of any traffic law. Sers Nicholas said DUI and reckless driving were two traffic offenses that the jury was instructed to consider before handing down its verdict.

The Supreme Court said, however, that Blas’ lawyer failed to support his legal conclusions.

“First he relies on language contained in the jury instructions, but fails to provide any such record. Without this information in the record, we cannot determine the potential legal impact of the jury instructions,” the High Court said.

“Second, he presents no legal authority to support his conclusion that an alleged inconsistent verdict must be reversed on appeal,” the High Court added.

The vehicular mishap Blas was involved in during the wee hours of Dec. 26, 2003 killed a 13-year-old boy, who was among the defendant’s passengers on a pickup truck that slammed into a light post. Prosecutors said the impact of the crash threw the victim from the vehicle and fatally injured him.

Lizama imposed a partially suspended five-year prison term on Blas for his conviction on DUI, leaving out one year of the prison term from suspension. The judge also sentenced Blas to six months imprisonment for reckless driving, which would be served concurrent with the DUI sentence.

Lizama’s ruling meant that Blas would serve at least 12 months in jail before he could be released on supervised probation to complete the entire five-year term.