Wilfredo Torres Vs Hon. Neptali Gonzales: ISSUE: Whether or Not Conviction of A Crime by Final Judgment of A Court Is

People v Beltran (1985) case digest f r o m t h e C i t y o f M a n i l a f o r a t t e m p t e d robbery, evaded
the service of said sentence by going beyond the limits made against himand
commit vagrancy.
FACTS:
ISSUE:
Accused-appellants Delfino Bel tran and others were indicted for murder Whether the lower court erred in imposing apenalty on the accused
and double attempted murder with direct assault evidence shows that in under article 157
Ballesteros, Cagayan, Ernesto Alvarado was bringing Calixto Urbi home in a of t h e R e v i s e d P e n a l C o d e , w h i c h d o e s n o t cover evasion of
jeep. Passing by the Puzon Compound, Delfino Beltran shouted at them, service of "destierro."
"Oki ni inayo" (Vulva of your mother).
RULING:
They proceeded on their way and ignored Delfino. After Alvarado had It is clear that the word "imprisonment" usedin the English text is a wrong
brought Urbi to his house he went to the house of Mayor. The newly elected or erroneoustranslation of the phrase "sufriendo privaciond e l i b e r t a d "
Mayor told the Chief of Police that something should be done about it. used in the Spanish text. It
i s e q u a l l y c l e a r t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l im p l i e d l
When they came near the compound, they saw appellants and suddenly y a d m i t s d e s t i e r r o a s n o t constituting imprisonment, it is a deprivationof
there was a simultaneous discharge of gunfire, The mayor's son, Vicente, liberty, though partial, in the sense that
and Mayor also suffered injuries. asi n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e , t h e a p p e l l a n t b y h i s s e n t e n c e of d e
s t i e r r o wa s d e p r i v e d of t h e liberty to enter the City of Manila. Under
I: W/N appellants guilty of attempted murder with direct assault. thecase of People vs. Samonte, as quoted in thebrief of the Solicitor
General that "it is clearthat a person under sentence of destierro
H: Yes. considering that Mayor Quirolgico is a person in authority and Pat. iss u f f e r i n g d e p r i v a t i o n o f h i s l i b e r t y a n d escapes from
Rolando Tolentino is a policeman who at the time was in his uniform, and the restrictions of the penaltywhen he enters the prohibited area.
both were performing their official duties to maintain peace and order in the
community, the finding of the trial court that appellants are guilty. For the
double attempted murder with direct assault, applying the Indeterminate
Sentence Law, the penalty imposed on the aforesaid appellants is reduced
to four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional, as minimum, to
Wilfredo Torres vs Hon. Neptali Gonzales
ten (10) years of prision mayor, as maximum.
In 1978, Wilfredo Torres was convicted of estafa. In 1979, he was pardoned

by the president with the condition that he shall not violate any penal laws
again. In 1982, Torres was charged with multiple crimes of estafa. In 1986,
EN BANC[G.R. No. L-1960. November then Chairman of the Board of Paroles Neptali Gonzales petitioned for the
26, 1948.]T H E P E O P L E O F T H E P H I L I P P I N E S , p l a i cancellation of Torres pardon. Hence, the president cancelled the pardon.
n t i f f - a p p e l l e e , v s . F L O R E N T I N O ABILONG, defendant-
Torres appealed the issue before the Supreme Court averring that the
appellant.FACTS:
Executive Department erred in convicting him for violating the conditions of
That on or about the 17th day of his pardon because the estafa charges against him were not yet final and
September,1 9 4 7 , i n t h e C i t y o f M a n i l a , P h i l i p p i n e s , Flore executory as they were still on appeal.
ntino Abilong, the accused, being thena c o n v i c t s e n t e n c e d a n d o r d e r
e d t o s e r v e destierro during which he should not enterany place
ISSUE: Whether or not conviction of a crime by final judgment of a court is
within the radius of 100 kilometers
necessary before Torres can be validly rearrested and recommitted for
violation of the terms of his conditional pardon and accordingly to serve the under Section 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code. That choice is an
balance of his original sentence. exercise of the Presidents executive prerogative and is not subject to
judicial scrutiny.
HELD: The SC affirmed the following:
1. The grant of pardon and the determination of the terms and conditions of
a conditional pardon are purely executive acts which are not subject to
judicial scrutiny.
PEOPLE v. DIOSO (1964) PONENTE: Escolin, J.
2. The determination of the occurrence of a breach of a condition of a
pardon, and the proper consequences of such breach, may be either a
FACTS:
purely executive act, not subject to judicial scrutiny under Section 64 (i) of
the Revised Administrative Code; or it may be a judicial act consisting of trial Teofilo Dioso and Jacinto Abarca were charged with for
for and conviction of violation of a conditional pardon under Article 159 of the the crime of murder which was committed inside the
Revised Penal Code. Where the President opts to proceed under Section 64 New Bilibid Prison in Muntinglupa, Rizal where both
(i) of the Revised Administrative Code, no judicial pronouncement of guilt of accused were serving sentence, Abarca having been
a subsequent crime is necessary, much less conviction therefor by final
judgment of a court, in order that a convict may be recommended for the
previously convicted by final judgment of the crime of
violation of his conditional pardon. homicide, and Dioso, of robbery.
3. Because due process is not semper et ubique judicial process, and ISSUE: Whether the accused are quasi-recidivist.
because the conditionally pardoned convict had already been accorded
judicial due process in his trial and conviction for the offense for which he YES. RATIO: The accused are quasi-recidivist, having
was conditionally pardoned, Section 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative committed the crime charged while serving sentence
Code is not afflicted with a constitutional vice. for a prior offense. As such, the maximum penalty
prescribed by law for the new felony [murder] is death,
In proceeding against a convict who has been conditionally pardoned and
regardless of the presence or absence of mitigating
who is alleged to have breached the conditions of his pardon, the Executive
Department has two options: (i) to proceed against him under Section 64 (i) (voluntary plea of guilt and voluntary surrender) or
of the Revised Administrative Code; or (ii) to proceed against him under aggravating circumstance (aleviosia) or the complete
Article 159 of the RPC which imposes the penalty of prision correccional, absence thereof. But for lack of the requisite votes, the
minimum period, upon a convict who having been granted conditional
Court is constrained to commute the death sentence
pardon by the Chief Executive, shall violate any of the conditions of such
pardon. Here, the President has chosen to proceed against the petitioner imposed on each of the accused to reclusion perpetua.

Wilfredo Torres Vs Hon. Neptali Gonzales: ISSUE: Whether or Not Conviction of A Crime by Final Judgment of A Court Is

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wilfredo Torres Vs Hon. Neptali Gonzales: ISSUE: Whether or Not Conviction of A Crime by Final Judgment of A Court Is

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wilfredo Torres Vs Hon. Neptali Gonzales: ISSUE: Whether or Not Conviction of A Crime by Final Judgment of A Court Is

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

People v Beltran (1985) case digest f r o m t h e C i t y o f M a n i l a f o r a t t e m p t e d robbery, evaded

In 1978, Wilfredo Torres was convicted of estafa. In 1979, he was pardoned

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.