Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
DECISION
PUNO, J.:
Accused WILFREDO FELOTEO was charged with and convicted of the crimes of Murder, as
defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and Illegal Possession of Firearm,
a violation of Section 1 of Presidential Decree No. 1866.
The Informations against accused read:
In Criminal Case No. 11109
"That on or about the 6th day of May, 1993, in the evening, at Sitio Nagbaril, Barangay
Bintuan, Municipality of Coron, Province of Palawan, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, with evident premeditation and
treachery, while armed with a firearm and with intent to kill, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously shoot with his firearm, to wit: an armalite rifle, one SONNY
SOTTO, hitting him on the vital part of his body and inflicting upon him a gunshot wound
on the left side of his chest, thru and thru, which injury was the direct and immediate
cause of his instantaneous death. (emphasis ours)
"That on or about the 6th day of May, 1993, and prior thereto, at Sitio Nagbaril, Barangay
Bintuan, Municipality of Coron, Province of Palawan, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession, custody and control, one armalite rifle
with Serial No. 9035914 and ammunitions, without any license or permit to possess the
same and that this firearm was used in shooting to death one SONNY SOTTO in a case of
Murder filed with the RTC of Palawan and Puerto Princesa City, docketed as Criminal
Case No. 11109 and that this crime have no relation or in furtherance of the crime of
rebellion or subversion. (emphasis ours)
"CONTRARY TO LAW."
If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm, the penalty of
death shall be imposed." (emphasis ours)
The penalty for the aggravated form of illegal possession of firearm under P.D. No. 1866 is
death. Since at that time, the death penalty cannot be enforced in view of Article III (19) (1) of the 1987
Constitution, appellant should have been sentenced to serve the penalty of reclusion perpetua,[12] not
twenty (20) years of imprisonment.
Nonetheless, Republic Act No. 8294, amended P.D. No. 1866, by reducing the penalties for simple
and aggravated forms of illegal possession of firearms.[13] The law now provides:
The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine of Thirty thousand pesos
(P30,000.00) shall be imposed if the firearm is classified as high powered firearm which
includes those with bores bigger in diameter than .38 caliber and 9 millimeter such as
caliber .40, .41, .45 and also lesser caliber firearms but considered powerful such as
caliber .357 and caliber .22 center-fire magnum and other firearms with firing capability of
full automatic and by burst of two or three: Provided, however, That no other crime was
committed by the person arrested.
If homicide or murder is committed with the use of unlicensed firearm, such use of an
unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. (emphasis ours)
Sec. 5. Coverage of the Term Unlicensed Firearm. - The term unlicensed firearm shall
include:
Clearly, the penalty for illegal possession of high powered firearm is prision mayor in its
minimum period and a fine of P30,000.00. In case homicide or murder is committed with
the use of unlicensed firearm, such use of unlicensed firearm shall be merely considered
as an aggravating circumstance.
The enactment of R.A. No. 8294 can be given retroactive effect as it favors the appellant. [14] So we
held in People vs. Simon,[15] viz:
"Since obviously, the favorable provisions of Republic Act 7659 could neither have been
involved or invoked in the present case, a corollary question would be whether this court,
at the present stage, can sua sponte apply the provisions of Article 22 to reduce the
penalty to be imposed on appellant. That issue has likewise been resolved in the cited
case of People vs. Moran, et al., ante., thus:
`x x x. The plain precept contained in article 22 of the Penal Code, declaring the
retroactivity of penal laws in so far as they are favorable to persons accused of a felony,
would be useless and nugatory if the courts of justice were not under obligation to fulfill
such duty, irrespective of whether or not the accused has applied for it, just as would also
all provisions relating to the prescription of the crime and the penalty.'
If the judgment which could be affected and modified by the reduced penalties provided in
Republic Act No. 7659 has already become final and executory or the accused is serving
sentence thereunder, then practice, procedure and pragmatic consideration would warrant
and necessitate the matter being brought to the judicial authorities for relief under a writ
of habeas corpus." (footnote omitted)
As mentioned above, the penalty for simple illegal possession of high powered firearm is prision
mayor in its minimum period.[16] This penalty was taken from the Revised Penal Code, hence, although
P.D. No. 1866, as amended by RA 8294, is a special law, the rules in said Code for graduating penalties
by degrees or determining the proper period should be applied.[17]
In the case at bar, an unlicensed firearm was used in committing murder, thus, aggravating the
crime and increasing the imposable penalty to the maximum period of prision mayor minimum, the
duration of which ranges from seven (7) years, four (4) months and one (1) day to eight (8) years. [18]
We determine the minimum and maximum sentence pursuant to the first part of Section 1 of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law[19] which directs that "in imposing a prison sentence for an offense
punished by the Revised Penal Code, or its amendments, the court shall sentence the accused to an
indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which shall be that which, in view of the attending
circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules of said Code, and the minimum of which
shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense."
Accordingly, the minimum range of the indeterminate sentence shall be taken from any of the
periods of prision correccional maximum, the penalty next lower in degree to the penalty of prision
mayor minimum. Prision correccional maximum has a duration of four (4) years, two (2) months and
one (1) day to six (6) years. On the other hand, the maximum penalty to be imposed, taking into
consideration the aggravating circumstance attending the commission of the crime, shall be taken from
the maximum period of prision mayor minimum which ranges from seven (7) years, four (4) months
and one (1) day to eight (8) years.
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the judgment against appellant in Criminal Case Nos. 11109 (for Murder)
and Criminal Case No. 11644 (for Illegal Possession of Firearm) is AFFIRMED, with the
MODIFICATION that, in Criminal Case No. 11644, appellant should be sentenced, as he is hereby
sentenced, to an indeterminate penalty of six (6) years of prision correccional, as the minimum term,
and eight (8) years of prision mayor minimum, as the maximum term. No costs.
SO ORDERED.
Regalado (Chairman), Mendoza and Martinez, JJ., concur.
Melo, J., on leave.
[1] TSN, September 12, 1994, pp. 11-12, 18, 27-28, 33.
[2] TSN, September 12, 1994, pp. 18, 26, 35.
[3] Exhibit "F"; TSN, March 28, 1995, pp. 15-16, 20-22, 24-27.
[4] Bearing serial number 9035914.
[5] TSN, September 13, 1994, pp. 7-8, 11-12, 15-21, 24, 27, 30-37, 59.
[6] Exhibit "C"; TSN, February 27, 1996, p. 7.
[7] TSN, November 13, 1995, pp. 5-6, 9-12.
[8] Ibid., pp. 13-16.
[9] Decision, dated December 6, 1995; Penned by Presiding Judge Eustaquio Z. Gacott, Jr.
[10] People vs. Santos, G.R. No. 94545, April 4, 1997, 270 SCRA 650.
[11] People vs. Apongan, G.R. No. 112369, April 4, 1997, 270 SCRA 713; People vs. Javier, G.R. No. 84449, March 4, 1997,
thereafter.
[14] See Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code.
[15] G.R. No. 93028, July 29, 1994, 234 SCRA 555, 570-571.
[16] It ranges from six (6) years and one day to eight (8) years.
[17] People vs. Simon, supra. See also People vs. Lian, G.R. No. 115988, March 29, 1996, 255 SCRA 532 and
People vs. Padilla, G.R. No. 121917, March 12, 1997, 269 SCRA 402.
[18] The medium period ranges from 6 years, 8 months and 1 day to 7 years and 4 months, while the minimum