Short answer. Yes. Rule 124, Section 9 says appeals of accused under detention are given precedence in disposition over other appeals, and the Court of Appeals must hear and decide them at the earliest practicable time. You also do not need to be personally present in court during the appeal hearing.
What the law says
Appeals of accused who are under detention shall be given precedence in their disposition over other appeals. The Court of Appeals shall hear and decide the appeal at the earliest practicable time with due regard to the rights of the parties.
Rule 124, Section 9 — Prompt disposition of appeals. Read the full provision →
Detention itself is what triggers the priority
Rule 124, Section 9 draws the line at custody, not at the seriousness of the offense or the length of the sentence being appealed. An accused who is under detention while the appeal is pending has that appeal given precedence in disposition over other appeals — meaning appeals involving accused who are out on bail, or otherwise not detained, are meant to be taken up after, or at least behind, the detained accused's case in the Court of Appeals' handling of its docket.
What 'earliest practicable time' commits the court to
The rule does not stop at ranking the appeal ahead of others — it directs the Court of Appeals to hear and decide it at the earliest practicable time, with due regard to the rights of the parties. That phrase ties the pace of the proceeding to what is actually achievable given the case's own circumstances and the fair-process rights of both the accused and the prosecution, rather than setting a fixed number of days. The underlying reason is straightforward: a wrongly convicted person who is detained loses liberty for every additional day the appeal takes.
You do not have to be present for the hearing
The same section adds that the accused need not be present in court during the hearing of the appeal. Appellate proceedings typically turn on the existing trial record and the parties' briefs rather than new testimony, so this removes any requirement to physically produce a detained accused for the appellate hearing itself, which would otherwise complicate and potentially delay the very priority disposition the rule is trying to secure.
What this priority does not change
Precedence in disposition is about the order and pace at which the appeal is taken up and decided — it does not decide the appeal in the accused's favor, and it does not shorten the substantive review the appellate court gives to the record. A detained accused benefits from earlier attention to the case, but the appeal is still decided on its merits, the same as any other appeal, just with the docketing priority and urgency the rule requires because liberty is at stake while it is pending.