Skip to main content

PEOPLE v. SANDIGANBAYAN AND CEFERINO S. PAREDES - CRIMINAL LAW CASE DIGEST

 


PEOPLE v. SANDIGANBAYAN AND CEFERINO S. PAREDES, JR.,

G.R. No. 157171, March 14, 2006

GRINO-AQUINO, J.:


TOPICS: EX POST FACTO LAW

FACTS:

B.P. 195 amended Section 11 of R.A. No. 3019 by increasing from 10 to 15 years the period for the prescription or extinguishment of a violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Private Respondent was issued a free patent title when he was still the provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur before he became a Governor.  A letter of complaint was filed against him, a subpoena was issued but was not served.  Despite the  absence of Notice to the Respondent, a preliminary investigation was conducted and a recommendation for filing an information in the Sandiganbayan was approved.

A warrant of arrest was issued and respondent was arrested.  Respondent then filed "An Urgent Motion to Quash Information and to Recall Warrant of Arrest" on the ground that the charged filed against him already prescribed; that the preliminary investigation, as well as the information filed by the Tanodbayan and the warrant of arrest issued were invalid for lack of notice to him of the preliminary investigation; and that his constitutional right was violated by the long delay in the termination of the preliminary investigation.

Sandiganbayan granted the motion to quash on the ground of prescription of the offense charged.  It held that the period for prescription was 10 years under Section 11 of R.A. 3019, the crime was committed January 21, 1976 and should have prescribed in 1986.

ISSUE:

Whether B.P. 195 should be given retroactive effect.

What is the concept of Ex Post Facto Law?

HELD:

No, B.P. 195 should not be given retroactive effect.

B.P. 195 was approved on March 6, 1982.  The law amended Section 11 of R.A. No. 3019 by increasing from 10 to 15 years the period of the prescription or extinguishment of a violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.  This may not be given retroactive application to the crime which was committed by Paredes in January 1976 for it would be prejudicial to the accused.  It would deprive him of the substantive benefit of the shorter prescriptive period under Section 11, R.A. 3019 which was an essential element of the crime at the time he committed it.

To apply B.P. 195 to Paredes would make it an ex post facto law for it would alter his situation to his advantage by making him criminally liable for a crime that had already been extinguished under the law existing when it was committed.

An ex post facto law is defined as, a law which provides for the infliction of punishment upon a person for an act done which, when it was committed, was innocent; a law which aggravates a crime or makes it greater than when it was committed; a law that changes the punishment or inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when it was committed; a law that changes the rules of evidence and receives less or different testimony that what was required at the time of the commission of the offense in order to convict the offender; a law which, assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes a penalty or the deprivation of a right which, when done, was lawful; a law which deprives persons accused of crime of some lawful protection to which they have become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or of the proclamation of amnesty; every law which, in relation to the offense or its consequences, alters the situation of a person to his disadvantage.

Read Full text: People v. Sandiganbayan and Ceferino Paredes (full text) - ChanRobles

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

LAW SCHOOL ADVICE - HOW TO MAKE A CASE DIGEST : A DETAILED GUIDE ON MAKING A CASE DIGEST

DISCLAIMER:  This entry may look familiar since this is from my other blog, "LAW STUDENT'S COFFEE TABLE" however, I made some minor adjustments and improvements so that you can make an organized, effective, and understandable case digest. Let us start with the basics.  How do you digest a case? Some students and not just law students who have law subjects are often asked by their professors as a requirement for their class to digest cases that are normally assigned by your professors either for your next meeting or for the whole semester.  For someone who does not know how to digest a case, this can be a laborious task as some cases may be as long as reading a whole book.  What are these cases assigned to you by your professors? These are the cases decided by the Supreme Court containing the story of the case and the application of the principles and theories that are discussed under the law.  These cases were assigned to you simply because they are related to t...
Post a Comment
Read more

EVANGELINE LADONGA v. PEOPLE - CRIMINAL LAW CASE DIGEST

EVANGELINE LADONGA v. PEOPLE G.R. No. 141066, February 17, 2005 AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.: TOPICS: CONSPIRACY IN VIOLATION OF B.P 22                       SUPPLETORY APPLICATION OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE                       CONSPIRACY FACTS: Spouses Adronico and Evangeline Ladonga was a regular customers of Alfredo Oculam's pawnshop.  Ladonga spouses obtained several loans from Oculam which were guaranteed by several check.  The said checks bounced for the reason of "Closed Account".  Spouses Ladonga failed to redeem the checks despite repeated demand thus three (3) criminal cases for conspiracy to commit violation of B.P. 22. RTC found spouses Ladonga guilty for violation of B.P. 22.  On appeal, Evangeline argued that conspiracy RTC erred in finding her criminally liable for conspiring with her husband as the principle of conspiracy is inapp...
Post a Comment
Read more

ARNOLD JAMES YSIDORO v. PEOPLE - CRIMINAL LAW CASE DIGEST

  ARNOLD JAMES YSIDORO v. PEOPLE G.R. No. 192330, November 14, 2012 ABAD, J.: TOPICS: MALA PROHIBITA IN REVISED PENAL CODE                     TECHNICAL MALVERSATION FACTS: Mayor Arnold James Ysidoro of Leyte was accused of the crime technical malversation for approving the release and signed the withdrawal slip for four (4) sacks of rice and two (2) boxes of sardines worth P3,396 from the Supplemental Feeding Program (SFP) which is devoted to the ration of food to malnourished children to Core Shelter Assistance Program (CSAP). The goods were to be given to the workers of the construction for the calamity victims as there was a stoppage of work as the workers had to find food for their families. ISSUE: Whether Ysidoro committed the crime of Technical Malversation. Whether the crime of Technical Malversation is considered mala in se or mala prohibita. HELD: Yes Ysidoro committed the crime of Technical Malversation. The ele...
Post a Comment
Read more