PENALTIES Flashcards
State the two classes of Penalties under the RPC. Define each.
Under Articles 25 of the RPC, these are:
(1) Principal - defined as that provided for a felony and which is imposed by court expressly upon conviction.
(2) Accessory - defined as that deemed included in the imposition of the principal penalty.
What are the factors to consider to arrive at the correct penalty? (also known as the 5 steps)
- Determine the CRIME committed;
- Stage of EXECUTION and degree of PARTICIPATION;
- Determine the PENALTY;
- Consider the modifying CIRCUMSTANCES;
- Determine if ISLAW is applicable of not.
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act (RA) No. 7959, reclusion perpetua shall be from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.
Does this mean that reclusion perpetua is now a
divisible penalty? Explain.
No, because the Supreme Court has repeatedly called the attention of the Bench and the Bar to the fact that the penalties of reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment are not synonymous and should be applied correctly and as may be specified by the applicable law. Reclusion perpetua has a specific duration of 20 years and 1 day to 40 years (Art. 27) and accessory penalties (Art. 41), while life imprisonment has no definite term or accessory penalties.
Also, life imprisonment is imposable on crimes punished by special laws, and not on felonies in the Code.
Accused was charged with, and was convicted of, five (5) counts of rape, but the Judge did not impose the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. Instead, the Judge sentenced him to 40 years of imprisonment on the bais of the three-fold rule. Was the Judge correct?
No, the Judge was incorrect. The tree-fold rule is applicable only in connection with the service of the sentence, not in the imposition of the proper penalties. The court must impose all penalties for all the crimes for which the accused have been found guilty.
A and B are convicted of a penal law that imposes a penalty of fine or imprisonment or both fine and imprisonment. The Judge sentenced them to pay the fine, jointly and severally, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
(a) is the penalty proper?
(b) May the Judge impose an alternative penalty of fine or imprisonment?
(a) NO. The penalty should be imposed individually on every person accused of the crime. Any of the convicted accused who is insolvent and unable to pay the fine, shall serve the subsidiary imprisonment.
(b) NO. Although the law may prescribe an alternative penalty for a crime, it does not mean that the court may impose the alternative penalties at the same. The sentence must be definite- otherwise, the judgement cannot attain finality.
How is criminal liability TOTALLY EXTINGUISHED?
Under Article 89 of the RPC, the following causes total extinction of criminal liability:
- Death of the convict as to personal penalties (distinguish if before or after final judgement as to pecuniary liabilities - before: extinguish; after: not)
- Service of sentence
- Amnesty
- Absolute pardon
- Prescription of the crime
- Prescription of the penalty
- Marriage of the offended woman to the offender (Art. 344)
How is criminal liability PARTIALLY EXTINGUISHED?
Under Article 94 of the RPC, the following causes partial extinction of the criminal liability:
- Conditional pardon
- Commutation of pardon
- Good conduct allowance during confinement
- Parole
- Probation
If an accused if acquitted, does it necessarily follow that no civil liability arising from the acts complained of may be awarded in the same judgement?
No, it does not necessarily follow that no civil liability arising from the acts complained of may be awarded in the same judgement, except for these two circumstances: (1) if there is an express waiver of the liability, and (2) if there is a reservation to file a separate civil action.
Suppose X, the brother of victim A, witnessed how A was strangled to death by C. However, X only reported the crime to NBI authorities after the lapse of 21 years from the time of the incident. The crime of homicide prescribes in 20 years. Can the State still prosecute C for the death of A despite the lapse of 21 years?
YES. Under Article 91 of the RPC, the period of prescription commences to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents.
In the problem, the commission of the crime was known only to X, who was neither the offended party, the authorities or their agents. The crime was only then discovered when X reported the same to the NBI authorities. Hence, the period of prescription of 20 years commenced to run only from the time it was reported.
Under the RPC, when does the period of prescription of a crime commence to run?
Generally, the period of prescription of a crime commences to run from the date it was committed; but if the crime was committed clandestinely, the period of prescription of the crime under the RPC commence to run from the day on which the crime was discovered (discovery rule) by the offended party, the authorities or their agents.
When is the period of prescription of the crime interrupted?
The running of the prescriptive period of the crime is interrupted when “any kind of investigative proceeding is instituted against the guilty person which may ultimately lead to his prosecution.” (i.e. filing of information, commencement of investigation)
NOTE:
The prescriptive period shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine archipelago.
A was convicted of a violation of the Election Code and was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 year (min) to 3 years (max). The RTC decision was affirmed on appeal and became final and executory. A failed to appear when summoned for execution of judgement, prompting the issuance of an order for his arrest. However, A was able to leave for the USA and returned 15 years later. A filed a motion to quash the warrant of arrest against him on the ground that the penalty imposed against him had already prescribed. Should the motion to quash be granted?
NO. Under Article 93 of the RPC, prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the date the felon evades the service of his sentence. Article 157 of the RPC provides that evasion of sentence can only be committed by those who have been convicted by final judgement by escaping during the term of his sentence.
Here, A never served a minute of his sentence, hence, prescription never started to run in his favor. A person who has not been committed to prison cannot be said to have escaped therefrom.
