Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Reparation – amount of the damage, taking into consideration the price of the
thing, whenever possible, and its sentimental value to the injured party (Art.
106).
Costs - shall include fees and indemnities in the course of the judicial
proceedings, whether they be fixed or unalterable amounts previously
determined by law or regulations in force, or amounts not subject to schedule.
Subsidiary penalty - a penalty that takes the place of a fine for insolvent convicts
It is neither a principal or accessory penalty, but a substitute penalty for fine only,
subject to the following rules:
1) If the principal penalty imposed is higher than PC – no subsidiary imprisonment;
2) If the principal penalty imposed is PC or Arresto and Fine - shall remain under
confinement until his fine is satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not
exceed 1/3 of the term of sentence and in no case continue for more than 1 year.
Example:
Offender is sentenced to 6 years of PC and a P4,000 fine.
Divide the number of days such fine of P4,000 at the rate of P8.00 per day =
500 days.
1/3 of 6 years = 2 years (730 days)
500 days is lesser than the 1/3 term-730
In no case will it exceed - 1 year – 365 days.
So, the subsidiary imprisonment – 365 days
3) If the principal penalty is only Fine- the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed 6
mos., if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for grave or less grave felony, and
shall exceed 15 days, if for a light felony.
Example:
Penalty is P4, 000
Divide this by P8.00 = 500 days.
Fine of P4,000 is Less Grave - so the subsidiary imprisonment shall be limited
only to 6 mos. or 180 days.
4) If the penalty is Fine and Destierro (not to be executed by confinement in a penal
institution, but has a fixed duration) – computation is the same as in no. 1.
5) Service of subsidiary imprisonment will not relieve the offender of his pecuniary
liabilities to pay the fine if his financial position improves after his release.
Article 65: Rules in arriving the 3 periods for the divisible penalty
Article 45: Confiscation & Forfeiture of the Proceeds or Instruments of the Crime
This accessory penalty is included in every penalty imposed for the commission of a
crime.
Property of a third person not liable for the offense is not subject to confiscation.
Property not subject of lawful commerce though it belongs to a third person shall be
destroyed.
Articles 50 to 57:
C F A
Principal - 0 - 1 - 2
Accomplice - 1 - 2 - 3
Accessory - 2 - 3 - 4
Article 60:
The provisions contained in the above articles shall not be applicable to cases in which the
law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted felony, or to be
imposed upon accomplices or accessories.
Examples of cases wherein the law punish the Accomplice with a penalty
corresponding to the Principals:
1) Article 346 - Ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and any person who by
abuse of authority or confidential relationship shall cooperate as accomplices in
Rape, Acts of Lasciviousness, Seduction, Corruption of Minors, White Slave Trade or
Abduction;
2) Article 268 - One who furnished the place for the perpetration of the crime of Slight
Illegal Detention.
Cases in which the law punishes an accessory with a penalty corresponding to that
of a Principal or of one degree lower instead of two degrees:
1) Article 162 - Knowingly using counterfeit seal or forged signature of the President;
2) Article 168 - Illegal Possession and Use of False Treasury or Bank Notes;
3) Article 172 (par. 3) - Using Falsified Document;
4) Article 173 (par. 2) - Using Falsified Dispatch
Effectivity of Penalties:
1) From the day the judgment becomes final – temporary penalties like suspension, if
the offender is in prison;
2) From the day the offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty - penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty if the offender
is not in prison;
3) From the day the defendant commences to serve the sentence – other penalties.
4) Since a commitment order in case the offender is in prison does not take effect
until after the judgment of conviction becomes final, or fifteen (15) days after its
promulgation, when no appeal is filed- it is only then that the service of sentence is
legally commenced;
5) If the accused is in prison at the time the judgment is promulgated, he is deemed
to have submitted himself for the execution of the said judgment as of the date of
promulgation.
This also holds true if the penalty is Reclusion Perpetua - because the law does not
make any distinction between temporal or perpetual penalties (Pp. vs. Corpuz- March
l994-49 SCAD). More so since Reclusion Perpetua now has a fixed period although
still indivisible (RA 7659- Pp. vs. Lucas & Pp, vs. Reyes – August 1992).
This does not apply if the sentence does not involve a term of imprisonment like fine,
as the law says “deprivation of liberty.”
What is the remedy when the person has already served the maximum penalty
imposable?
The appropriate remedy of the accused is to file a Petition for Habeas Corpus
considering that the decision in this case is now final (In accordance with the
resolution in Angeles vs. Bilibid - Jan. 4, 1995 and Pp. vs. Agustin - Sept. 5, 1995).
When the culprit has two or more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the
nature of the penalties will so permit, otherwise the following rules shall be observed:
• In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective severity shall be
followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as possible,
should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed,
or should they have been served out.
• For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding par. the
respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance with the
following scale:
1) Death
2) Reclusion Perpetua
3) Reclusion Temporal
4) Prision Mayor
5) Prision Correccional
6) Arresto Mayor
7) Arresto Menor
8) Destierrro
9) Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
10) Temporary Absolute Disqualification
11) Suspension from public office, the right to vote & be voted for, the right to
follow profession or calling
12) Public Censure
• Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum
period of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of
time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties upon him. No other
penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those
imposed equals the same maximum period.
• Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years.
• In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties
(penal perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years.
Example:
Destierro and Fine
Prision Correccional and Perpetual Special Disqualification
Suspension From Office and Fine (Rodriguez vs. Dir. of Prisons - 47 SCRA 353).
The three-fold rule applies although the penalties were imposed for different times
and under separate informations. (Torres vs. Superintendent - 56 Phil. 847)
The three-fold maximum penalty does not preclude subsidiary imprisonment. This
means to say that after the prisoner has served the highest penalty under the three-
fold rule, he still has to serve the payment of all indemnities (fine) with or without
subsidiary imprisonment provided the principal penalty does not exceed 6 years. So,
if the prisoner after serving the three-fold maximum penalty cannot pay the fine, he
still has to serve the subsidiary imprisonment as long as the principal does not
exceed 6 years (Bagtas vs. Dir. of Prisons- 47 O.G. l743).
Should the court refrain from imposing the correct penalties if these would exceed
the limitation of the three-fold rule?
NO. It is the duty of the court to impose the penalty for all crimes of which the
accused was found guilty. This article deals with SERVICE OF SENTENCE and not
imposition, hence this article is for the Director of Prisons to follow and not for the
court.
The rationale for imposing the correct penalty is that when the convict is pardoned,
he will still serve the other sentences meted upon him.
“Granting, however, that the Chief Executive, in the exercise of his constitutional
power to pardon (one of the presidential prerogatives which is almost absolute),
deems it proper to commute the multiple death penalties to multiple life
imprisonments, then the practical effect is that the convict has to serve the maximum
40 years of multiple life sentences. If only one death penalty is imposed, and then is
commuted to life imprisonment, the convict will have to serve a maximum of only
thirty years corresponding to a single life sentence” (Pp. vs. Jaime Jose, et al- Feb. 6,
l971- 37 SCRA 450; Pp. vs. Peralta –ibid).
If the multiple penalties are death, how will the rule under Art. 70 be complied?
When the sentence is executed, all the death sentences are deemed simultaneously
served (Pp. vs. Peralta - ibid).
In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty lower or higher by one or more
degrees than another given penalty, the rules prescribed in Article 61 shall be
observed in graduating such penalty.
The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which is
comprised the given penalty.
The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the following
graduated scales:
Scale No. 1
1) Death
2) Reclusion Perpetua
3) Reclusion Temporal
4) Prision Mayor
5) Prision Correccional
6) Arresto Mayor
7) Destierro
8) Arresto Menor
9) Public Censure
10) Fine
Scale No. 2
1) Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
2) Temporary Absolute Disqualification
3) Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, and the
right to follow a profession or calling
4) Public Censure
5) Fine
In Article 70, the penalty next lower in severity to Arresto Mayor regarding the
successive service of sentence is Arresto Menor; but in Article 71, as to graduated
scales, the penalty next lower in degree to Arresto Mayor is Destierro.
Example: Pp. vs. Cabanban (May 7, 1960) - Accused was convicted of Simple
Seduction which carries a penalty of Arresto Mayor. As he was under l8 at the time
of the commission of the crime, the penalty imposed was Destierro.
For the purpose of graduating the penalties which, according to the provisions of
Articles 50 - 57, inclusive of this Code, are to be imposed upon persons guilty as
principals or any frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories,
the following rules shall be observed:
1) When the penalty prescribed for the felony is SINGLE & INDIVISIBLE, the next
penalty lower in degree shall be that immediately following such scale prescribed
under Art. 71;
Single and Indivisible penalties are Death and Reclusion Perpetua.
If the single penalty is Death – one degree lower to this is Reclusion Perpetua
If the single penalty is Reclusion Perpetua - one degree lower to this is
Reclusion Temporal.
Example: Art. 267 - Kidnapping & Serious Illegal Detention - punishable w/
Death - If the accused is only an Accomplice – penalty is Reclusion Perpetua.
2) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of TWO INDIVISIBLE
penalties, or of ONE or MORE DIVISIBLE penalties to be imposed to their full extent,
the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following the lesser of the
penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale;
a) Two indivisible penalties - Reclusion Perpetua to Death
Example: Parricide (Article 248) - Reclusion Perpetua to Death
One degree lower to this - If the crime is frustrated - Reclusion Temporal
b) Divisible penalty imposed in its full extent- Prision Mayor
Penalty next lower in degree of PM is Prision Correccional
Example: Intentional Abortion - Art.256 (par. 2) – PM - If the crime is only
frustrated - penalty is only Prision Correccional.
3) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or two indivisible
penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty, the penalty next lower
in degree shall be composed of the medium and minimum periods of the proper
divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately following in said
respective scale;
Penalty prescribed consists of ONE or MORE INDIVISIBLE and the
MAXIMUM of a DIVISIBLE PENALTY - next lower in degree consists of
medium and minimum period of proper divisible penalty and the maximum of
the divisible penalty immediately following:
Reclusion Temporal maximum to Death
Example: Pp. vs. Paredes, Jr. (Nov. 1996) - convicted of Murder (prior to RA
7659) - carries a penalty of Reclusion Temporal Maximum to Death-
Period Penalty prescribed
Maximum Death
Medium Reclusion Perpetua
Minimum Reclusion Temporal Maximum
One degree lower:
Maximum Reclusion Temporal Medium
Medium Reclusion Temporal Minimum
Minimum Prision Mayor Maximum
One degree lower – Prision Mayor maximum to Reclusion Temporal medium
4) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several periods,
corresponding to the different divisible penalties, the penalty next lower in degree
shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum prescribed and
of the two next following, which shall be taken from the penalty prescribed, if
possible; otherwise from the penalty immediately following in the above-mentioned
respective graduated scale;
Example:
a) Penalty is Prision Mayor maximum to Reclusion Temporal medium period
Max. - Reclusion Temporal med.
Med. - Reclusion Temporal min.
Min. - Prision Mayor max.
One degree lower:
Max. - Prision Mayor med.
Med. - Prision Mayor min.
Min. - Prision Correccional max.
One degree lower = Prision Correccional in its max. period to Prision Mayor in
its medium period.
b) Article 306- Brigandage- Prision Mayor in its medium period to Reclusion
Temporal in its minimum period.
Max. - Reclusion Temporal min.
Med. - Prision Mayor max.
Min. - Prision Mayor med.
One degree lower:
Max. - Prision Mayor min.
Med. - Prision Correccional max.
Min. - Prision Correccional med.
One degree lower – Prision Correccional in its medium period to Prision
Mayor in its minimum period.
5) Penalty prescribed in a manner not provided in the preceding 4 rules - Court
proceeds by analogy and shall impose the corresponding penalty:
a) if the penalty prescribed by law is composed of three periods, the penalty lower in
degree is the penalty consisting of three periods down the scale;
b) if the penalty prescribed by law consists of two periods, the penalty next lower in
degree is the penalty consisting of two periods down the scale;
Example: Penalty for Abduction – (Article 343)- Prision Correccional in its
min. and med. periods:
Prision Correccional med.
Prision Correccional min.
One degree lower-
Arresto Mayor max.
Arresto Mayor med.
c) if the penalty prescribed by law consists of one period, the penalty next lower in
degree is the next period in the scale:
Example: Art. 166 (par. 5) Forging Treasury Notes - the penalty is Reclusion
Temporal in its minimum period - penalty next lower in degree is Prision
Mayor in its maximum period
Reclusion Temporal min.
Prision Mayor max.
This is so, as in arriving at the imposable penalty, the following circumstances will be
considered by the Court:
1) Stages of the commission of the crime(C, F, A)
2) Degree of participation (P, Acco., Acce.)
3) Presence of Aggravating or mitigating circumstances;
4) Indeterminate Sentence law
5) Probation (if the penalty does not exceed 6 yrs)
Article 62: Rules for Application of Penalties with Regard to Mitigating & Aggravating
Circumstances
Rationale: After serving the minimum term, the prisoner may be released on parole.
Examples:
1) Convicted of Homicide - Reclusion Temporal – 12 years and 1 day to 20 years.
Accused – principal
Crime is consummated
Maximum – 17 years, 4 mos. & 1 day to 20 years;
Medium – 14 years, 8 mos. & 1 day to 17 years and 4 mos.
Minimum – 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 mos.
Prision Mayor - 6 years & 1 day to 12 yrs;
Max. - 10 years & 1 day to 12 years
Med. - 8 years & 1 day to 10 years
Min. - 6 years & 1 day to 8 years
Prision Correccional - 6 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs.
Max. - 4 yrs., 2 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs.
Med. - 2 yrs., 4 mos. & 1 day to 4 yrs. 2 mos.
Min. - 6 mos. & 1 day to 2 yrs. & 4 mos.
During the trial, he pleaded guilty – (Plea of guilt is an ordinary mitigating
circ.)
12 years and 1 day to 14 years & 8 mos.
Applying the ISL - one degree for the minimum
Prision Mayor min. – 6 yrs and 1 day to 8 yrs.
Penalty - 6 yrs. & 1 day of PM in its min. period as its minimum to 14 years &
8 mos. of RT in its min. period as its maximum.
A) If the law prescribes the minimum as well as the maximum - the court cannot
impose a fine next higher.
Example:
Fine of P200 to P1, 000 (each degree will be equal to ¼ of P1,000 or
P250.00. P250.00 added to P1, 000 to determine the next higher in degree
without changing the minimum of P200 = P 200 to P1, 250.
Fine next lower in degree = P200 to P750.00
B) If the law imposing the fine does not fix the minimum, the determination of the fine
is left to the discretion of the court, provided that it shall not exceed the authorized
maximum - P4,000 ( P200 or P2,000)
Circumstances to be considered by the court:
1) Mitigating or agg. circs
2) Wealth or means of the culprit
3) Gravity or seriousness of the charge.
(Nizurtado vs. Sandiganbayan – the SC reduced the P10, 000 fine to P2, 000
because of the presence of mitigating circumstance.)
A) DEATH
The criminal and civil liabilities are extinguished if the offender dies before
final judgment (Pp. vs. Jose, et a l- June 17, l976).
This is so, as when death occurs, nobody will serve the penalty for the crime
(Pp. vs. Bayotas- Sept. l994-55 SCAD & Petralba vs. Sandiganbayan- Aug.
16, l991).
If death however, occurs after final judgment, the pecuniary liabilities devolve
upon the heirs only if some properties are left.
Article 89, par. 1 applies only if the civil liability arises from the criminal liability
as its sole basis (Article 100 - “Every person criminally liable for a felony is
also civilly liable”). However, it cannot apply if the civil liability arises not only
from the crime but from another source like a contract of purchase and sale.
Example:
The accused was convicted of Estafa for selling a parcel of land twice.
Pending appeal, he died. His civil liability was not extinguished as it arose out
of the contract of sale.
Under the Civil Code, the civil liability of the accused remains as this civil
liability is independent of his criminal liability. If the accused dies while his
case is pending appeal, the motion for recovery of money may not be
dismissed; but when he dies before final judgment by the trial court, the
money claim should be presented before the probate or intestate court
(Torrijos vs. CA- L-40336, 67 SCRA 394).
The possible civil liability of the deceased accused can be determined in the
exercise of appellate jurisdiction arising from the alleged criminal acts
complained of as if no criminal case has been instituted against him and Art.
30 of the Civil Code will apply in determining his civil liability (Pp. vs.
Sendaydiego - Jan. 20, l978). This rule was applied in the case of Pp. vs.
Tirol- L-30588- Jan. 31, l981- where one of the accused-appellants died
pending appeal, the case was dismissed as to his criminal liability, but the
appeal was to be resolved concerning him to determine his criminal liability as
the basis of his civil liability for which his estate may be liable (Pp. vs. Naboa-
132 SCRA 410).
Does Art. 30 of the Civil Code authorize the appellate court to continue
exercising appellate jurisdiction over the accused’s civil liability ex-delicto
when his death supervenes during appeal?
No. What Art. 30 recognizes is an alternative and separate civil action which
may be brought to demand civil liability from a criminal offense independently
of any criminal action.
The intendment of Article 100 on civil liability ex-delicto is rooted in the court’s
pronouncement of the guilt or innocence of the accused. Death dissolves all
things (“Mors omnia solvi”).
Article 30 refers to the institution of a separate civil action that does not draw
its life from a criminal proceeding.
B) SERVICE OF SENTENCE
C) AMNESTY
Amnesty extinguishes the criminal liability & not merely the penalty but also
its effects. But the civil liability is not extinguished.
D) ABSOLUTE PARDON
Conditional pardon does not also extinguish civil liability (Monsanto vs.
Factoran, Jr. - 170 SCRA l989 & Pp. vs. Nacional- Sept. l995 - 64
SCAD).
The criminal action in public crimes is not extinguished. Thus, the criminal
liability for Estafa is not affected by the compromise or novation of contract,
for it is a public offense which must be prosecuted and punished by the
government in its own motion even though complete reparation should have
been made of the damages suffered by the offended party (Javier vs. Pp. - 70
Phil. 550).
Regarding private crimes, which are mentioned under Art. 344, like Rape,
Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness, Adultery and Concubinage, the
criminal action is barred if:
a) the pardon is made before the institution of the action;
b) in Adultery & Concubinage, the pardon must refer to both offenders, which
may either be expressed or implied;
c) in Rape, and other private crimes, the pardon must be expressed (Pp. vs.
Infante- 57 Phil. 138);
d) the marriage between the offender and the offended party totally
extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender.
In Rape cases, the pardon given by the parents of the minor victim to be
effective must have the concurrence of the minor victim herself (Art. 266-C
R.A. 8353).
Pp. vs. Lacson, Jr - The pardon given by the parents cannot stand alone. This
is inefficacious. This is not sufficient to remove the criminal responsibility of
the offender. Rather, this must be accompanied by the express pardon of the
victim herself (U.S. vs. Luna -1 Phil. 360 & Pp. vs. Tadulan - April l997- 81
SCAD).
Pardon by the Chief Executive Distinguished from the Pardon by the Offended Party:
1) Pardon by the Chief Executive extinguishes criminal liability, whereas that is not
the case if the pardon is given by the offended party except in case of marriage, as it
only bars the institution of the criminal action;
2) Pardon by the Chief Executive is granted after conviction by final judgment,
whereas pardon given by the offended party is given before the institution of the
action;
3) Pardon by the Chief Executive cannot include the civil liability of the offender,
whereas the civil liability may be expressly waived by the offended party.
1) Application
Amnesty – generally to political crimes & offenders
Pardon – generally to ordinary crimes & offenders
2) Effect
Amnesty – obliterates the effects of conviction as if the act were not criminal
Pardon – relieves the offender of penalty but the effects of conviction stay
3) Congress
Amnesty – concurrence required
Pardon – concurrence not required
4) When given
Amnesty – even before conviction
Pardon – after final conviction
5) To whom given
Amnesty – usually to class of persons
Pardon – specific individual
Prescriptive period is not waivable. Since it is for the benefit of the accused,
this cannot be extended. Once prescription sets in, the court loses its
jurisdiction.
In computing the period of prescription, the first day is excluded and the last
day is included (Pp. vs. Galano - 75 SCRA 193).
When the last day to file an Information falls on Sunday or legal holiday, the
period of prescription cannot be extended to the next working day. So, this
should be filed on the last working day before the legal holiday (Yapdiangco
vs. Buencamino, et al – 122 SCRA 713).
What is the effect of the delay in the reporting of crimes in its prosecution?
None. The law on prescription would be meaningless if we were to yield to the
proposition that delay in the prosecution of crimes would be fatal to the State
and the offended party. In fixing the different prescriptive periods on the basis
of the gravity of the penalty prescribed therefore, the law takes into account or
allows reasonable delays in the prosecution thereof. In the case of Pp. vs.
Gecomo -254 SCRA- the court ruled that 17 days, 35 days or even 6 mos.
delay by a rape victim in reporting the attack on her honor does not detract
from the veracity of her charge.
The prescriptive periods for the crimes punished under SPL - basis is Act no.
3326 - Prescription shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the
violation of the law and if the same be not known at the time, from the
discovery thereof, and the institution of judicial proceedings for its
investigation and punishment (Presl. Ad Hoc Committee on Behest Loans vs.
Ombudsman- August 2001).
Can brief trips abroad qualify as “absence” as contemplated under Art. 91?
No. This is not the absence referred to in said article, as these trips were very
brief.
Example: Slight Physical Injuries-inflicted on July 20, 2009- prescriptive
period is 2 mos.
a) If committed by a public official in relation to office – no need of going to
the Lupong Tagapamayapa
– 31 days for July
- 20 60 – 42= 18 days
-------- September 18, 2009 - last
11 - July day of filing
31- August
---------
42 days
b) If not a public official or a public official and the act is not in relation to
office – undergo a conciliation at the Lupong Tagapamayapa. Filing of the
complaint at the barangay will toll the running of the prescriptive period but
only for 60 days and thereafter, the prescriptive period will again run.
1) Conditional pardon
2) Commutation of the sentence
3) Good conduct allowance which the culprit may earn while he is serving his
sentence.
4) Parole (Under ISL)
5) Probation
6) Partial repeal of penal law
The commutation of the original sentence for another of a different length and nature
shall have the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place of the former.
It is the change in the sentence of the court made by the President which consists in
reducing the penalty imposed upon the offender. Such substitutes the original
penalty.
The good conduct of a prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle him to the
following deductions from the period of his sentence:
1) First two years – 5 days for each month of good behavior
2) Third to fifth year - 8 days for each mo.
3) Following years to the 10th year - 10 days each mo.
4) Eleventh year and successive years – 15 days for each mo.
The allowance is given in consideration of the good conduct of the prisoner while
serving his sentence (Pp. vs. Martin-68 Phil. 122).
These allowances are granted by the Director of Prisons and once given, these
cannot be revoked (ARTICLE 99).
This right can be enjoyed even though the prisoner has been sentenced to several
penalties and the same have been cut down by Article 70 to three times the most
severe of the penalties.
This does not embrace detention prisoners. Detention prisoners are entitled only to
preventive imprisonment, if he agreed in writing to abide by the rules of the jail
(Baking vs. Director of Prisons, et al. L-30603-28 SCRA 851).
Article 98: Special Time Allowance For Loyalty
A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner
who, having evaded the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned
in Art. 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following
the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or
catastrophe referred to in said articles.
Loyalty award - 1/5 deduction of the period of his sentence. If he does not return,
additional 1/5 of the term remaining to be served will be imposed, but not to exceed 6
months.
Compound Crimes:
Single act results to:
a) two or more grave felonies
Example:
Pp. vs. Guillen – 47 O.G. 3433 - single
• Act of throwing a hand grenade resulted to the killing of several
persons (Murder w/ Multiple Frustrated & Attempted Murders);
• One single shot killed two persons- Double Homicide. (Pp. vs. Pama-
44 O.G. 3339);
• When a person planted a bomb in the airplane and it exploded –
several murders and damage to property (Pp. vs. Largo – 99 Phil. 1061);
• Where a paper bag was given by the accused to the occupant of the
house containing some vegetables but when opened it exploded resulting
to the death of several persons and injuring another – complex crime of
Murder with Frustrated Murder (Pp. vs. Villaflores – 115 SCRA 570).