General Principles - Cases Flashcards
What is the main issue in Corpuz v. People?
Whether or not the Court should modify the penalties for crimes against property
The penalties were established in RPC in 1930 and are based on the value of money at that time.
Why is there a perceived injustice in applying penalties based on 1930 values?
Because it applies outdated monetary values to present-day crimes
This discrepancy raises concerns about fairness in sentencing.
What does the Court say about its ability to modify penalties for crimes?
The Court cannot modify the range of penalties as it would constitute judicial legislation
This is considered an encroachment upon the powers of the legislative branch.
What does Article 5 of the RPC provide as a remedy?
It allows the Court to report to the Chief Executive through the DOJ when it finds a penalty excessive
This is a mechanism for recommending changes to the law.
What criteria must be met for a penalty to be considered cruel and unusual punishment?
It must be flagrantly and plainly oppressive or wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense as to shock the moral sense of the community
Additionally, it should shock the moral sense of the community.
What is the legislative branch’s role regarding the severity of punishment?
Issues of the severity of a punishment are best addressed by the legislative branch
This indicates the separation of powers in addressing punishment.
What is the Court’s remedy when it perceives a punishment to be cruel and unusual?
To apply the existing law, impose the prescribed sentence, and report the issue to the Chief Executive
This includes recommending legislative changes through the Department of Justice.
Fill in the blank: The penalties for crimes against property were established in _______.
RPC in 1930
What is the central issue regarding Section 4, Rule 1 of the IRR of Republic Act No. 10592?
The legality of the provision mandating prospective application for Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) and related allowances, which is challenged as contradictory to Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)
Article 22 of the RPC states that penal laws favorable to the accused should be applied retroactively unless the accused is a habitual criminal.
What case talks about the retroactive application of penal laws which reduce penalties?
Inmates of New Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa City v. Sec. De Lima,
What changes does Republic Act No. 10592 introduce to the Revised Penal Code?
Amends Articles 29, 94, 97, 98, and 99, introduces new credits for preventive imprisonment, increases deductions for good behavior, and adds allowances for study, teaching, and loyalty
These changes effectively reduce potential sentences for inmates.
What does ‘prospective application’ mean in the context of R.A. No. 10592?
Benefits of R.A. No. 10592 apply only to inmates from the date the law was implemented, not retroactively to those already incarcerated
This prospectivity was contested as unfair to inmates already serving time.
What argument did petitioners use regarding Article 22 of the RPC?
Petitioners claimed that R.A. No. 10592, being beneficial to inmates, should be applied retroactively
Article 22 states penal laws favorable to the accused should apply retroactively.
How did the court characterize R.A. No. 10592 despite it not defining a crime?
The court considered it to have a penal character because it reduces punishment by diminishing imprisonment length
This characterization is significant as Article 22 applies only to penal laws.
What does ‘actual case or controversy’ require?
A concrete dispute of legal rights, not a hypothetical one
Ripeness refers to whether the act being challenged has directly and adversely affected the individual challenging it.
What is meant by ‘legal standing’ in a court case?
A party has a direct and substantial personal interest in the outcome and has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining an injury
The court determined that the petitioners had legal standing due to their ongoing incarceration being directly affected.
