SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 107623 June 30, 1995

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ANGELITA MANALO y DELA PAZ, Accused-Appellant.chanrobles virtual law library

PUNO, J.:

Angelita Manalo y Dela Pat was charged in two (2) separate informations before the Regional Trial Court of Pasig, Metro Manila (Branch CLVIII) with two (2) OFFENSES, viz: sale of 0.02 grams of "shabu," a prohibited drug, without license or authority and for possession of prohibited drugs, but found her guilty beyond reasonable doubt for illegal sale of 0.02 grams of "shabu". She was thus sentenced ¹ to suffer the penalty for life imprisonment, to pay a fine of thirty thousand pesos and to pay the costs. This decision was affirmed by this Court in G.R. No. 107623, entitled People v. Angelita Manalo, on February 23, 1994. ²

In due time, of said Decision accused moved for a reconsideration. On April 29, 1994, she filed an addendum to her motion for reconsideration, praying for a retroactive application of the provisions of Republic Act 7659 which would reduce the penalty of imprisonment imposed upon her.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

After finding that no substantial argument had, been raised by accused to warrant the reversal of the Decision, the Court denied accused's motion for reconsideration. ³ Accused's addendum to her motion for reconsideration was noted by this Court without action, the decision denying the motion for reconsideration having attained finality. ⁴

On July 29, 1994, the Court came out with its interpretation and reconciliation of the conflicting provisions of R.A. 7659 in the case of People v. Martin Simon Y Sunga. ⁵

Pursuant to our ruling in the case of Simon, that even if the judgment which could be modified by the reduced penalties under R.A. 7659 has become final and executory, "practice, procedure and pragmatic considerations would warrant and necessitate the matter being brought to the judicial authorities for relief under a writ of habeas corpus we hereby treat the addendum to accused-appellant's motion for reconsideration as a petition for writ of habeas corpus.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

In the case at bench, the proper penalty to be, imposed for the illegal sale of 0.02 grams of "shabu" would be prision correccional, pursuant to the second paragraph of Section 20 of R.A. 6425, as amended by Section 17 of R.A. 7659 and in consonance with the doctrine laid down in People v. Simon, supra. Further, applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the impossable penalty should be the indeterminate sentence of SIX (6) MONTHS OF ARRESTO MAYOR, as the minimum, to FOUR (4) YEARS AND TWO (2) MONTHS OF PRISION CORRECTIONAL, as the maximum.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

IN VIEW WHEREOF, the decision of the trial court convicting accused-appellant ANGELITA MANALO Y DELA PAZ for the sale of 0.02 grams of "shabu" is hereby AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that the penalty of imprisonment imposable on accused-appellant should be the indeterminate sentence of SIX (6) MONTHS OF ARRESTO MAYOR as minimum, to FOUR (4) YEARS AND TWO (2) MONTHS OF PRISION CORRECTIONAL as maximum.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, C.J., Regalado and Mendoza, JJ., concur.

1 Decision, dated September 28, 1992, Rollo, at p. 54.chanrobles virtual law library

2 Rollo, pp. 101-116.chanrobles virtual law library

3 Resolution, dated May 11, 1994, Rollo, p. 128.chanrobles virtual law library

4 Resolution, dated June 22, 1994, Rollo, p. 133.chanrobles virtual law library

5 G.R. No. 93028, dated July 29, 1994, 234 SCRA 555, at 571; citing the case of Harden v. Director of Prisons, No. L-2349, October 22, 1948, 81 Phil 741.