364364605-special-penal-laws-pdf.docx

principle of conspiracy was again applied suppletorily. However, when the penalties under BAR 2017 LAST MINUTE FORESIGHT IN SPECIAL PENAL LAWS By DEAN GEMY LITO L. FESTIN PUP COLLEGE OF LAW ___________________________________________ __________

the special law are different from and are without reference or relation to those under the Revised Penal Code, there can be no suppletory effect of the rules, for the application of penalties under the Code or by other relevant statutory provisions are based on or applicable only to said rules for felonies under the Code. People vs. Simon, 234

1.00 WHAT IS A SPECIAL PENAL LAW?

SCRA 576

It is a penal law which punishes acts not defined and penalized by the Penal Code. U.S. vs. Serapio, 23 Phil. 584 1.02 DIFFERENTIATE CRIMES PUNISHED 1.01 IS THE REVISED PENAL CODE UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE APPLICABLE IN SPECIAL LAWS? FROM CRIMES PUNISHED UNDER THE SPECIAL PENAL LAW. Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code provides: a. In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, they are “Offenses which are or in the future generally regarded as mala in se, may be punishable under special laws are the act committed in inherently not subject to the provisions of this Code.

wrong or immoral; under a special penal law, crimes are

This Code shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide the contrary.”

The first sentence provides for the

regarded as mala prohibita or the act is merely prohibited by law; circumstances in the proper imposition of

general rule. Special laws are not subject to

penalties are not applicable, as a rule, to

the provisions of the Revised Penal Code.

special penal laws. Consequently, in Noble vs.

Hence, the provisions on stages of execution

People, 77 Phil. 1086, plea of guilt as a

under Article 6, degree of participation of

mitigating circumstance is not available to

persons who are criminally liable under Title

offenses punishable under special laws.

Two and the appreciation of the modifying

The second sentence refers to the

*Exception:

suppletory effect of the Revised Penal Code Plunder is malum in se.

to special laws, unless the latter should specially provide the contrary. In People vs.

Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560. November 19, 2001.

Ladonga, G.R. No. 141066, February 17, 2005, the Supreme Court applied the principle of

In the decision, the Supreme Court

conspiracy provided under Article 6 of the

ruled: “The legislative declaration in R.A. No.

Revised Penal Code in suppletory character

7659 that plunder is a heinous offense implies

to violation of B.P. 22 case. In Tan vs. Spouses Tan, G.R. No. G.R. No. 168852, September 30, 2008, in a case involving Violence Against Women and Children or R.A. 9262, the

that it is a malum in se. For when the acts punished are inherently immoral or inherently wrong, they are mala in se and it does not matter that such acts are punished in a special law, especially since in the case of plunder the predicate crimes are mainly mala in se. Indeed, it would be absurd to treat prosecutions for plunder as though they are mere prosecutions for violations of the Bouncing Check Law (B.P. Blg. 22) or of an ordinance against jaywalking, without regard to the inherent wrongness of the acts.” b. In crimes under the Revised Penal Code, good faith is a proper defense; in a special penal law, good faith is not a defense; *Exception: 1

penalty imposable; in a special penal law, they are not;

Plunder being malum in se, criminal intent is required. The elements of mens rea must be proven in a prosecution for plunder. Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560. November 19, 2001. c. Under the Revised Penal Code, the stages of execution under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code is considered in arriving at the proper penalty to be imposed; in a special penal laws, they are not; d. Under the Revised Penal Code , the degree of participation of the offenders under Title Two of the Revised Penal Code is taken into consideration on the penalty imposable; in a special penal law, it is not; *Exceptions: 1. Under Sections 4 and 5 of the Human Security Act of 2007, there may be accomplices and accessories. 2. Likewise, under Section 13 of or R.A. 7610 or the Anti-Torture Act, there may be principals and accessories. 3. Under Section 2 of R.A. 7080, or otherwise known as the Anti-Plunder Law, as amended by Section 12 of R.A. 7659, it provides that in the imposition of penalties, the

degree of participation as provided

under the Revised Penal Code, shall be considered by the Court. e. Under the Revised Penal Code, the modifying circumstances are appreciated in determining the

f. The Revised Penal Code uses the

law, the rules in the Revised Penal Code for

nomenclature of penalties provided

graduating penalties by degrees or

under the Revised Penal Code, it a

determining the proper period should be

special penal law, it does not;

applied. Sanchez vs. People 588 SCRA 747, June 5, 2009.

*Exceptions: 1. Article 6 of the Anti-Child Abuse Law provides for the application of the nomenclature of penalties under the Revised Penal Code. Ex. Under Section 10 thereof, it states that “any person who shall

2. Likewise, under Section 14 of R.A. 7610 or the Anti-Torture Act, it uses again the nomenclature of penalties under the Revised Penal Code. 1.03 DIFFERENTIATE “INTENT TO

commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty

COMMIT A CRIME” FROM “INTENT

or exploitation or to be responsible for other

TO PERPETRATE THE ACT”.

conditions prejudicial to the child’s development including hose covered by Article 59 of the Presidential Decree No. 603,

When the crime is punished by a special law, as a rule, intent to commit the crime is not necessary. It is sufficient that the

as amended, but not covered by the Revised

offender has the intent to perpetrate the act

Penal Code, as amended, shall suffer the

prohibited by the special law. Intent to

penalty of prision mayor in its minimum

commit the crime and intent to perpetrate

period. “

the act must be distinguished. Although R.A. No. 7610 is a special *Exception: A person may not have consciously intended to commit a crime; but he did Under Section 2 of R.A. 7080, or intend to commit an act, and that act is, by the otherwise known as the Anti-Plunder Law, very nature of things, the crime itself. In the as amended by Section 12 of R.A. 7659, it

first (intent to commit the crime), there must

provides that in the imposition of penalties,

be criminal intent; in the second (intent to

the attendance of mitigating and

perpetrate the act) it is enough that the

extenuating circumstances as provided by the Revised Penal Code, shall be considered by the Court.

prohibited act is done freely and consciously. Elenita C. Fajardo vs. People, G.R. No. 190889, January 10, 2011 2

STILL BE GRANTED?(SEC.4)

1.04 ARE SPECIAL LAWS AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE No, Probation Law expressly CONSIDERED MALA PROHIBITA? provides: No, special laws which are intended

“x x x no application for probation

merely as amendments to certain provisions

shall be entertained or granted if the

of the Revised Penal Code are mala in se and

defendant has perfected an appeal from

still subject to its provision.

the judgment of conviction.” The Probation Law prohibits a judge from entertaining or granting an application for probation if the defendant has perfected

-oooOOOoooan appeal from the judgment of conviction. Salvan vs People, 410 SCRA 638 CHAPTER I. PROBATION LAW

In Sable vs. People, 584 SCRA 619, April 7, 2009, the application for probation

Presidential Decree No. 968

was denied. In this case, petitioner already

[BAR Q. 2012, 2010, 2009, 2005, 2004,

filed a Notice of Appeal before the RTC before

2003, 2002, 2001, 1997, 1995, 1994,

the application was instituted. The law is

1993, 1992, 1990, 1986]

patently clear: "no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction." Illustrative cases

1.00 WHAT ARE THE PURPOSES OF PROBATION? (SEC.2)

[BAR Q.1986, 1989]

reformation of a penitent offender which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and

The purposes of probation are as follows:

(c) to prevent the commission of offenses.

(a) to promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing

1.01 WHEN MUST THE APPLICATION FOR PROBATION BE FILED?

him with individualized treatment; An application for probation must b) to provide an opportunity for the

be made within the period for perfecting an

appeal. Sable vs. People 584 SCRA 619, April 7,

1. BAR Q.[2010] Matt was found guilty

2009

of drug trafficking while his younger brother Jeff was found guilty of

1.02 IF THE CONVICT HAD ALREADY PERFECTED AN APPEAL, CAN AN APPLICATION FOR PROBATION

possession of equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs under Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9165. Matt filed a petition for probation. Jeff appealed his conviction during the pendency of which he also filed a petition for probation. The brothers’ counsel argued that they being first time offenders, their petitions for probation should be granted. How would you resolve the brothers’ petitions for probation? Suggested Answer: Both petitions should be denied. Any person found guilty of drug trafficking is disqualified to avail of the benefits of probation. Hence, Matt petition should be dismissed. Insofar as Jeff is concerned, his act of appealing his conviction disqualifies him to avail of probation. Probation law expressly states that no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has

3

IMPLICATION ON THE RIGHT TO APPEAL IF THE APPLICATION FOR PROBATION WAS PREVIOUSLY perfected an appeal from the judgment of conviction.

FILED ? Section 4 of P.D. 968 as amended expressly states:

2. BAR Q.[2001] A, a subdivision developer, was convicted by the RTC of Makati for failure to issue the subdivision title to a lot buyer despite full payment of the lot, and sentenced to suffer one year imprisonment. A appealed the decision of the RTC to the Court of Appeals but his appeal was dismissed. May A still apply for probation? Explain. Suggested Answer: No, A may no apply for probation. The appeal that he filed from the judgment of conviction disqualifies him to avail of probation. Probation law provides that no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the accused has perfected an appeal from the judgment of conviction. 1.03 WHAT IS THEREFORE THE IMPLICATION ON THE APPLICATION FOR PROBATION IF AN APPEAL IS ALREADY PERFECTED? By perfecting their appeal, petitioners ipso facto relinquished the alternative remedy of availing of the Probation Law, the purpose of which is simply to prevent speculation or opportunism on the part of an accused who, although already eligible, does not at once apply for probation, but did so only after failing in his appeal. Lagrosa vs People, 405 SCRA 357 1.04 ON THE OTHER HAND, WHAT IS THE

“The filing of the application for probation shall be deemed a waiver of the right to appeal.”

imposed the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of 3 years, 2 months and 1 day as minimum and six years as maximum, both a prision correctional and was ordered to indemnify the offended party in the amount of

DELICTO? No. In an appeal from a judgment of conviction, the criminal liability and the civil liability ex delicto should be considered independently, each with its own corresponding effects.

P3,000.00. He filed an application for probation upon the promulgation of the

In People vs. Efren Salvan Y Presenes,

judgment. What is the legal effect of his

G.R. No. 153845 September 11, 2003, the

application for probation on the

Court reiterated that the law that bars an

judgment of conviction? Does said application interrupt the running of the period of appeal? Suggested Answer: The legal effect of Johnny’s application for probation effectively waives his right to appeal. Judgment of

appeal of the judgment of conviction, as well as its corresponding criminal liability, should not bar an appeal of the civil aspect of the same judgment. 1.06 MAY PROBATION BE GRANTED EVEN IF THE SENTENCE IMPOSES A FINE ONLY?

conviction had become final and executory upon filing of the said application. The remedy of appeal is unavailing.

Yes, Section 4 of the same law states: “Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposes a term of imprisonment

1.05 IS A WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO

or a fine only.”

APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION LIKEWISE A WAIVER ON THE CIVIL LIABILITY EX

1.07 IS AN ORDER GRANTING OR DENYING PROBATION

Illustrative case APPEALABLE? BAR Q.[2002] BAR Q.[1992] Johnny Gitara was convicted of the crime of estafa by the Regional Trial Court of Manila. He was 4

(5) Who Are Already Serving Sentence At The Time The Substantive Provisions Of This Decree Became Applicable.” 1.08 HOW DOES THE PREVAILING JURISPRUDENCE TREAT APPEAL AND PROBATION AS REMEDIES? Prevailing jurisprudence treats appeal and probation as mutually exclusive remedies because the law is unmistakable about it and, therefore petitioner cannot avail herself of both. 1.09 WHAT IS THE LEGAL EFFECT OF PROBATION? A conviction becomes final when the accused applies for probation. 1.10 WHO ARE DISQUALIFIED TO AVAIL OF THE BENEFITS OF PROBATION? (SEC.9) Probation Law enumerates who are disqualified to avail of the benefits of probation. They are the following: “SECTION 9. Disqualified Offenders.THE BENEFITS OF THE PROBATION DECREE SHALL NOT BE EXTENDED TO THOSE: (1) Sentenced To Serve A Maximum Term Of Imprisonment Of More Than Six Years. (2) Convicted Of Any Crime Against National Security or the Public Order. (3) Who Have Previously Been Convicted By Final Judgment Of An Offense Punished By Imprisonment Of more than 6 months and 1 day and/or a fine of more than P1,000.00( as amended by R.A.10707); (4) Who Have Been Once On Probation Under The Provisions Of This Decree.

In addition: (6) Who Has Perfected An Appeal From The Judgment Of Conviction. (Sec.4) (7) Any Person Convicted Of Drug Trafficking or Pushing Regardless of the Penalty Imposed By The Court. (Sec. 24 of R.A. 9165, The Comprehensive Dangerous

Drugs Act Of 2002) 1.11 ILLUSTRATION OF THE

convictionin this case has nothing to do with his ineligibility to avail of probation.

DISQUALIFICATIONS OF

a. Are there exceptions where even

PROBATION LAW.

if the convict had filed an appeal still he is allowed to file a petition

(1) Sentenced To Serve A Maximum

for probation?

Term Of Imprisonment Of More Than

Yes, there are exceptions and they

Six Years.

are the following: Illustrative case 1. BAR Q.[2002] A was charged with homicide. After trial, he was found

One exception is provided under Section 11 of RA 9265. It provides that the accused first-time offender may avail of

guilty and sentenced to six (6) years and

suspended sentence subject to certain

one (1) day prision mayor, as

conditions. If there is violation of any of

minimum, to twelve (12) and one (1)

the conditions, the court shall pronounce

day of reclusion temporal, as maximum.

judgment of conviction and he/she shall

Prior to his conviction, he had been

serve sentence as any other convicted

found guilty of vagrancy and imprisoned for ten (10) days of arresto menor and fined fifty pesos (P50.00). Is he eligible for probation? Why? Suggested Answer: A is not eligible because his conviction exceeds six years.

person. The court, however, may place the accused under probation or community service in lieu of imprisonment. Upon promulgation of the sentence, the court may, in its discretion, place the accused under probation, even if the

Probation does not extend to those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years. His previous

5

sentence provided under this Act is higher than that provided under existing law on

sound ruling in Francisco. It remains that

probation, or impose community service in

those who will appeal from judgments of

lieu of imprisonment.

conviction, when they have the option to try for probation, forfeit their right to apply for

1.20 The principle enunciated in the

that privilege.

case People vs. Arnel Colinares and now embodied under R.A.10707 amending the probation law.

In a real sense, the Court's finding that Arnel was guilty, not of frustrated homicide, but only of attempted homicide, is an original

ARNEL COLINARES vs. PEOPLE G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011 FACTS: Arnel Colinares was found guilty of frustrated homicide by the RTC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment from two years and four months of prision correccional, as minimum, to six years and one day of prision mayor, as maximum. Since the maximum probationable imprisonment under the law was only up to six years, Arnel did not qualify for probation. ISSUE: Whether or not accused may still apply for probation. RULING: Ordinarily, Arnel would no longer be entitled to apply for probation, he having appealed from the judgment of the RTC convicting him for frustrated homicide. Here, however, Arnel did not appeal from a judgment that would have allowed him to apply for probation. He did not have a choice between appeal and probation. He was not in a position to say, "By taking this appeal, I choose not to apply for probation." The stiff penalty that the trial court imposed on him denied him that choice. Thus, a ruling that would allow Arnel to now seek probation under this Court's greatly diminished penalty will not dilute the

conviction that for the first time imposes on him a probationable penalty. Had the RTC done him right from the start, it would have found him guilty of the correct offense and imposed on him the right penalty of two years and four months maximum. This would have afforded Arnel the right to apply for probation.

The Probation Law never intended to

an application for probation is filed

deny an accused his right to probation

but the defendant has earlier

through no fault of his. The underlying

perfected an appeal?

philosophy of probation is one of liberality towards the accused. Such philosophy is not

Section 4 of P.D. 968, as amended by R.A.

served by a harsh and stringent interpretation

No. 10707 provides that NO application

of the statutory provisions.

for probation shall be entertained or

This may be true if the trial court meted out to Arnel a correct judgment of conviction. Here, however, it convicted Arnel of the wrong crime, frustrated homicide that

granted if the defendant has perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction: Provided, That when a judgment of conviction imposing a non-

carried a penalty in excess of 6 years. How can

probationable penalty is appealed or

the Court expect him to feel penitent over a

reviewed, and such judgment is modified

crime, which as the Court now finds, he did not

through the imposition of a

commit? He only committed attempted

probationable penalty, the defendant

homicide with its maximum penalty of 2 years

shall be allowed to apply for probation

and 4 months. At any rate, what is clear is that, had the RTC done what was right and imposed on Arnel the correct penalty of two years and four months maximum, he would have had the right to apply for probation. No one could say with certainty that he would have availed himself of the right had the RTC done right by

based on the modified decision before such decision shall becomes final. d. Would the “total prison term” or the “maximum prison term” of the sentence be taken into account in determining one’s eligibility for probation?

him. The idea may not even have crossed his mind precisely since the penalty he got was not probationable. c. What does R.A. 10707 provide where

6

b. Probation is not applicable when the accused has been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by The law uses the word “maximum term” and not total term. It is enough that

imprisonment of less than one (1) month and/or fine of less than P200.00.

each of the prison term does not exceed 6 years. The number of offenses is immaterial for as long as the penalties imposed, when taken individually and separately, are

c. Probation is not applicable when accused

within the probationable period. Francisco

is convicted of indirect assault. (*Indirect

vs. CA, 243 SCRA 384

assault is a crime against public order)

(2) Convicted Of Any Crime Against National Security or the Public Order. The Crimes against National Security are as follows: a. Treason

d. Probation is not applicable when accused is convicted of indirect bribery. (3) Who Have Previously Been Convicted By Final Judgment Of An Offense Punished By Imprisonment Of Not Less Than One Month And One Day And/Or A Fine Of Not Less Than Two Hundred Pesos.

b. Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Treason Illustrative case c. Misprision of Treason BAR Q.[2004] PX was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment of thirty days d. Espionage and a fine of one hundred pesos. e. Terrorism and Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism under R.A. 9372 The following are classified as Crimes against Public Order: a. Rebellion, Coup d’ etat, Sedition and Disloyalty

Previously, PX was convicted of another crime for which the penalty imposed on him was thirty days only. Is PX entitled to probation? Suggested Answer: Yes, the penalty imposed upon him does not exceed 6 years. His previous conviction for another crime with a penalty of thirty days

b. Crimes against Legislative Bodies imprisonment or not exceeding one (1) month and Similar Bodies, Violation Of Pariliamentary Immunity d. Assault Upon, and Resistance and c. Illegal Assemblies and Associations

Disobedience to Persons In Authority and Their Agents

does not disqualify him from applying for

Under The Provisions Of This Decree.

probation. (5) Who Are Already Serving Sentence At (4) Who Have Been Once On Probation

The Time The Substantive Provisions Of This Decree Became Applicable Pursuant

e. Public Disorders To Section 33 Hereof. f. Commission of Another Crime (6) Who Has Perfected An Appeal From During Service of Penalty Imposed The Judgment Of Conviction (Sec.4, for Another Previous Offense Probation Law. (*See previous discussion) BAR Q. [2012] Under which of the Probation essentially rejects appeals following circumstances is probation not and encourages an otherwise eligible convict applicable? to immediately admit his liability and save a. Probation is not applicable when the

the state the time, effort and expenses to

accused is sentenced to serve a maximum of

jettison an appeal. Sable vs. People 584 SCRA

six (6) years.

619, April 7, 2009

7

not exceed six years. 1.13 WHAT IS THE CONSEQUENCE IF THE PROBATIONER VIOLATES ANY OF (7) Any Person Convicted Of Drug

THE CONDITIONS OF PROBATION?

Trafficking or Pushing Regardless of the

(SEC. 15)

Penalty Imposed By The Court. (Sec. 24 of R.A. 9165, The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Of 2002).

The court may arrest the probationer, hold an informal summary hearing and may revoke his probation in

The Supreme Court had the occasion to explain this disqualification in Padua vs. People, 559 SCRA 519, July 23, 2008, where it states that under Section 24 of Rep. Act No. 9165, any person convicted of drug trafficking cannot avail of the privilege of probation. In this case, the convict was charged and convicted for violation of Section 5, Article II of Rep. Act No. 9165 for selling dangerous drugs. It is clear under Section 24 of Rep. Act No. 9165 that any person convicted of drug trafficking cannot avail of the privilege of probation. 1.12 WHAT IS THE PERIOD OF PROBATION IF- (SEC.14) a. the convict is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than one year? The period of probation shall not exceed two years. BAR Q. [2012]The period of probation of the offender sentenced to a term of one (1) year shall not exceed a. two (2) years; b. six (6) years; c. one (1) year; d.three (3) years; b. the convict is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than one year? In all other cases, said period shall

which case, he has to serve the sentence originally imposed. 1.14 WHEN IS PROBATION DEEMED TERMINATED? (Sec.16).

After the period of probation and upon consideration of the report and recommendation of the probation officer, the court may order the final discharge of the probationer upon finding that he has fulfilled the terms and conditions of his probation and thereupon the case is deemed terminated. 1.15 WHAT IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF A FINAL DISCHARGE OF THE PROBATIONER? (Sec.16).

1.17 IS A PROBATIONER DISQUALIFIED FROM RUNNING FOR A PUBLIC OFFICE DURING THE PERIOD OF HIS PROBATION? No. In the case of Moren vs. COMELEC and MEJES, G.R. 168550, August 10, 2006, the Supreme Court emphasized that during the period of probation, the probationer is not disqualified from running for a public office because the accessory penalty of suspension from public office is put on hold for the

The final discharge of the

duration of the probation.

probationer shall operate to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspend as a result of his conviction and to fully discharge his liability for any fine imposed as to the offense for which probation was granted.

The Court went on to state the case of Baclayo vs. Mutia, 129 SCRA 148, where it ruled that an order placing defendant on probation is not a sentence but is rather in effect a suspension of imposition of sentence.

1.16 HOW IS PROBATION LAW CONSTRUED?

The grant of probation to petitioner suspended the imposition of the principal

It is well-settled that the probation

penalty of imprisonment, as well as the

law is not a penal statute; and therefore, the

accessory penalties of suspension from

principle of liberal interpretation is

public office and from the right to follow the

inapplicable. And when the meaning is

profession or calling and that of perpetual

clearly discernible from the language of the statute, there is no room for construction or interpretation. People vs. Alejandra Pablo, G.R. No. 12510: August 3, 2000

8

and excessive jurisdiction of personal liberty and economic usefulness;

special disqualification from the right of suffrage. 1.18 DOES THE GRANT OF PROBATION

2) It is intended to favor the accused

AFFECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE

particularly to shorten his term of

ASPECT OF A CASE?

imprisonment, depending upon his behavior and his physical, mental and moral record as

No. Probation affects only the criminal aspect of the case, not its

a prisoner to be determined by the Board of Sentence.

administrative dimension. Samalio vs Court 1.01 IF A SPECIAL LAW ADOPTS of Appeals, 454 SCRA 462 PENALTIES UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE, WILL THE 1.19 CAN THE PERIOD WITHIN WHICH A INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW PERSON IS UNDER PROBATION BE APPLY JUST AS IT WOULD IN EQUATED WITH SERVICE OF SENTENCE ADJUDGED?

FELONIES? Yes, where the special law adopted

No. The period within which a person is under probation cannot be equated with

penalties from the Revised Penal Code, the

service of sentence adjudged.

Indeterminate Sentence Law will apply just

Section 4 of the Probation Law

as it would in felonies.

specifically provides that in the grant of

The Supreme Court in Sanchez vs.

probation, the probationer does not serve

People 588 SCRA 747, June 5, 2009, stressed

the penalty imposed upon him by the court

that although Republic Act No. 7610 is a

but is merely required to comply with all the conditions prescribed by the probation order. Moren vs. Comelec and Mejes, G.R. 168550, August 10, 2006

special law, the rules in the Revised Penal Code for graduating penalties by degrees or determining the proper period should be applied. The penalty for Other Acts of Child

-ooo000oooAbuse is prision mayor in its minimum period. This penalty is derived from, and CHAPTER II. INDETERMINATE SENTENCE

Republic Act No. 4203

LAW ACT NO. 4103 as amended by Act No. 4225 and

[BAR Q. 2014, 2010, 2009, 2007, 2005, 2003, 2002, 1999, 1994, 1991, 1990, 1989, 1988]

____________________________________________ _______ A. IN GENERAL

defined in, the Revised Penal Code. Although R.A. No. 7610 is a special law, the rules in the Revised Penal Code for graduating penalties by degrees or determining the proper period should be applied. 1.02 UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES IS THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW NOT APPLICABLE (SEC. 2)? [*BAR Q: State the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law/ BAR Q: Under what circumstances is the Indeterminate Sentence Law not

1.00 CITE THE PURPOSES OF THE applicable?] INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW. PURSUANT TO SECTION 2 OF THE The purposes of Indeterminate INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW, IT Sentence Law are as follow: SHALL NOT BE APPLICABLE IN THE 1) To uplift and redeem valuable

FOLLOWING CASES:

human material and prevent unnecessary 9

No, it is deemed included in the disqualification. The Indeterminate Sentence Law does not apply to persons 1. Offenses punishable by death or life imprisonment.

convicted of offenses punishable with Reclusion Perpetua. People vs. Lab-eo, 373 SCRA 461

2. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason.

The Court has equated the penalty of reclusion perpetua as synonymous to life imprisonment for purposes of the

3. Those convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage. 4. Those convicted of piracy. 5. Habitual delinquents. 6. Those who escaped from confinement or those who evaded sentence. 7. Those granted with conditional pardon and who violated the terms of the same. 8. Those whose maximum period of imprisonment does not exceed one year. 9. Those already serving final judgment upon the approval of this act. 1.03 EXPLAIN AND ILUSTRATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW IS NOT APPLICABLE. 1. Offenses Punishable By Death Or Life Imprisonment. a. May a person punished with reclusion perpetua be entitled to the benefits of ISLAW?

Indeterminate Sentence Law. People vs. Enriquez G.R. No. 158797 July 29, 2005

b. Query: May the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority be appreciated in fixing the penalty that should be imposed even if the penalty imposed is originally an

punished by prision correccional and a fine not exceeding P5,000.00. Is the Indeterminate Sentence Law applicable to AA?

indivisible penalty? a. Yes. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is Yes. The ISLAW is applicable because the penalty which has been originally an indivisible penalty (reclusion perpetua to death), where ISLAW is inapplicable, became a divisible penalty (reclusion temporal) by virtue of the presence of the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority. People

applicable to AA because the maximum of prision correccional exceeds one (1) year. b. Yes. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is applicable to AA because there is no showing that he is a habitual delinquent.

vs. Allen Udtojan Mantalaba, G.R. No. 186227: c. No. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is

July 20, 2011

not applicable to AA considering the 2. Those Convicted of Treason, Conspiracy or Proposal to Commit

penalty imposable for the offense of which he was convicted.

Treason. d. No. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is a. TREASON b. CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TREASON. Illustrative Case BAR Q.[2012] AA was convicted of proposal to commit treason. Under Article 115 of the Revised Penal Code, proposal to commit treason shall be

not applicable considering the offense

of

which he was convicted (*The crime for which AA was convicted is proposal to commit treason). 3. Habitual Delinquents. 10

imprisonment is less than 1 year? The Indeterminate Sentence Law does not apply if the maximum term of Who is a Habitual Delinquent? He is a person who within a period

imprisonment does not exceed one year if the trial court opts to impose penalty of imprisonment less than one year, it should

of ten (10) years from the date of his release

not impose indeterminate penalty but

or last conviction of the crimes of serious,

straight penalty of one year or less instead.

less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener (Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code as amended). Illustrative case 4. Those Who Escaped From Confinement or Those Who Evaded Sentence. [BAR Q.] A convict serving sentence for robbery escaped from the penitentiary and killed a rival gang member. Found guilty of homicide, he was given a straight prison term. He moved for reconsideration, contending that not being a habitual delinquent, he was entitled to an indeterminate sentence. Decide with reasons. Suggested Answer: Motion for reconsideration is denied. While it may true that A is not be a habitual delinquent, he however, escaped from prison while serving sentence. The Indeterminate Sentence Law provides that it shall not apply to persons who escaped from confinement or evaded his sentence. 5. Those Whose Maximum Period of Imprisonment Does Not Exceed One Year. a. Can an indeterminate sentence be imposed if the maximum term of

An indeterminate sentence may be imposed if the minimum of the penalty is one year or less, and the

maximum exceeds one year. People vs. Lapis,

imprisonment until the end of the maximum.

391 SCRA 131 4) The need for specifying the 1.04 WHAT ARE THE REASONS WHY THE

minimum and maximum periods of the

MAXIMUM AND THE MINIMUM

indeterminate sentence is to prevent the

TERM OF THE INDETERMINATE

unnecessary and excessive deprivation of

SENTENCE HAVE TO BE FIXED BY

liberty and to enhance the economic

THE COURT?

usefulness of the accused, since he may be

The maximum and minimum term of the sentence have to be fixed because of the following reasons: 1) Whenever any prisoner shall have served the minimum penalty imposed on him, and it shall appear to the Board of Indeterminate Sentence that such prisoner is fitted by his training for release that there is a reasonable probability that such prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating the law, and that such release will not be incompatible with the welfare of society, said Board may authorize the release of such prisoner on parole, upon such terms and conditions as may be presented by the Board; 2) Whenever any prisoner released on parole shall, during the period of surveillance, violate any of the conditions of his parole, the Board of Indeterminate Sentence may issue an order for his rearrest. In such case the prisoner so rearrested shall serve the remaining unexpired portion of the maximum portion of the maximum sentence for which he was originally committed to prison, unless the Board of indeterminate Sentence shall, in its discretion, grant a new parole to the said prisoner. 3) Even if a prisoner has already served the minimum, but he is not fitted for release on parole, he shall continue to serve

exempted from serving the entire sentence, depending upon his behavior and his 11