ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES

contact

MON-SAT 8:30AM-5:30PM

The Supreme Court decides: The power of the courts to commit prisoners carries with it the duty to immediately release them in case of detention for a period equivalent or longer than the maximum imposable penalty.

Photo from Pexels | ahmet öktem

The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.

Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.

 


AT A GLANCE:

In this case, the records show that Jovelyn had served her sentence from November 24, 2011 up to the time this case was decided by the Supreme Court in 2023. In total, Jovelyn had been in prison for almost twelve (12) years – which is more than her maximum imposable penalty of ten (10) years and eight (8) months.

 

At this point, the Supreme Court reminds of the policy that detainees who have been imprisoned for a period equal to or longer than the maximum impassable penalty must be released. Otherwise, there would be a violation of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, popularly known as the “Nelson Mandela Rules.”


 

In this case, Susie Qui (Susie), owner of GQ Pawnshop, hired Ruby Agustin (Ruby) and Jovelyn Antonio (Jovelyn), as the shop’s appraiser and secretary respectively. 

 

Some time in 2000, Susie and the shop’s manager, Alfonso Gervacio, Sr. (Alfonso), filed a criminal complaint against Ruby and Jovelyn for qualified theft, as allegedly, the two accused had used people to pawn fake items to GQ Pawnshop, leading to the release of a total of PhP585,250.00 in appraised value to the pawners.

 

Ultimately, the Regional Trial Court found that the prosecution had proven the guilt of Ruby and Jovelyn beyond reasonable doubt, and they were imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua or at least thirty (30) years in prison, and were ordered to pay Susie the amount defrauded, which totaled PhP585,250.00. 

 

The Court of Appeals and later the Supreme Court had affirmed the conviction of the two accused. However, the Supreme Court had resolved another issue in the case at bench: the proper penalty over the crime charged, and whether Jovelyn may be released from her imprisonment.

 

The Supreme Court’s Decision

On this point, the Court reconsidered the penalty that should be imposed. The amount proven to have been stolen was PHP585,250.00. Based on this – and under Republic Act No. 10951, which amended the penalties and fines under the Revised Penal Code, as well as the Indeterminate Sentence Law –  the proper penalty for Jovelyn’s crime of qualified theft of PhP585,250.00 is prision mayor, which carries a maximum imprisonment term of up to ten (10) years and eight (8) months.

 

After resolving the above issue on imposable penalty, the Supreme Court stressed that criminal liability is totally extinguished by service of the sentence.

 

In this case, the records show that Jovelyn had served her sentence from November 24, 2011 up to the time this case was decided by the Supreme Court in 2023. In total, Jovelyn had been in prison for almost twelve (12) years – which is more than her maximum imposable penalty of ten (10) years and eight (8) months.

 

At this point, the Supreme Court reminds of the policy that detainees who have been imprisoned for a period equal to or longer than the maximum impassable penalty must be released. Otherwise, there would be a violation of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, popularly known as the “Nelson Mandela Rules.” 

 

As a result, Jovelyn must now be set free, and any further delay is deemed unjust. It must be noted, however, that her release is not without prejudice to her civil liability arising from her commission of the crime. Her civil liability subsists even with the service of her sentence.

 

Source:

People of the Philippines vs. Ruby Agustin and Jovelyn Antonio
G.R. No. 223107 | March 15, 2023

 

Click here to subscribe to our newsletter

 

Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 0917-5772207/ 09778050020.

All rights reserved.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share