Photo from Pexels | Sóc Năng Động
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:
Under Republic Act No. 11362 also known as the Community Service Act, the court may, in its discretion, and lieu of service in jail, require that the penalties of arresto menor and arresto mayor be served by the defendant by rendering community service in the place where the crime was committed, and under such terms as the court shall determine, taking into consideration the gravity of the offense and the circumstances of the case.
By Resolution dated February 8, 2023, the Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the verdict of conviction against petitioner Teddy Peña for slight physical injuries and unjust vexation for which he was meted a straight penalty of 15 days of arresto menor with PHP 5,000.00 moral damages for slight physical injuries; and a straight penalty of 15 days of arresto menor with PHP 200.00 fine for unjust vexation.
Under Peña’s subsequent Motion for Reconsideration, he implores the Court to modify his penalty from imprisonment to community service.
Issue: Whether the penalty should be modified from imprisonment to community service.
The Supreme Court’s Decision: Under Republic Act No. 11362 also known as the Community Service Act, the court may, in its discretion, and lieu of service in jail, require that the penalties of arresto menor and arresto mayor be served by the defendant by rendering community service in the place where the crime was committed, and under such terms as the court shall determine, taking into consideration the gravity of the offense and the circumstances of the case.
In this case, the trial court’s decision was promulgated on June 29, 2016 while Republic Act No. 11362 took effect on August 8, 2019 after due publication. On the other hand, the Guidelines for the Community Service Act under A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC took effect on November 2, 2020.
The Supreme Court held that while generally, laws are prospective in application, penal laws which are favorable to the person guilty of the felony who is not a habitual criminal, as in this case, are given retroactive effect following Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code. It goes without saying, therefore, that the benefits granted under Republic Act No. 11362, being more favorable to Peña, and despite having been enacted three years after the promulgation of judgment in his case, can still be availed by him.
In this regard, A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC or the Guidelines in the Imposition of Community Service as a Penalty in Lieu of Imprisonment, decrees:
“Thus, all judges concerned shall observe these guidelines in allowing rendition of community service in lieu of imprisonment in the service of penalty for arresto menor or arresto mayor:
- After promulgation of judgment or order where the imposable penalty for the crime or offense committed by the accused is arresto menor or arresto mayor, it shall be the court’s duty to inform the accused of and announce in open court his/her options within 15 calendar days from date of promulgation, to wit: (a) file an appeal; (2) apply for probation provided by law; or (3) apply that the penalty be served by rendering community service in the place where the crime was committed. It shall further be explained to the accused that if he/she chooses to appeal the conviction, such resort thereto bars any application for community service or probation.”
Due to the unavailability of the foregoing options to Peña before the trial court, the Regional Trial Court, and the Court of Appeals, he may, at the first instance before this Court, validly apply for the conversion of his sentence from imprisonment to community service.
The Supreme Court emphasized that the imposition of the penalty of community service is still within the discretion of the court and should not be taken as an unbridled license to commit minor offenses. It is merely a privilege since the offender cannot choose it over imprisonment as a matter of right. Further, in requiring community service, the court shall consider the welfare of the society and the reasonable probability that the persón sentenced shall not violate the law while rendering the service.
Source:
Teddy Peña vs. People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 261807 | August 14, 2024
SC Imposes Community Service Over Jail Time
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.
