GR 164815; (February, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 164815 ; February 22, 2008
SR. INSP. JERRY C. VALEROSO, petitioner, vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Sr. Insp. Jerry C. Valeroso was arrested on July 10, 1996, pursuant to a warrant for kidnapping with ransom. During a bodily search incidental to the arrest, police officers found a .38 caliber revolver with ammunition tucked in his waist. Verification from the Firearms and Explosives Division revealed the firearm was not registered in his name but to another individual. Consequently, he was charged with illegal possession of firearm and ammunition under Presidential Decree No. 1866.
The Regional Trial Court found Valeroso guilty and sentenced him to prision correccional in its maximum period. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua, applying the more severe penalty under the law at the time of commission. Valeroso appealed, arguing for the retroactive application of the more lenient penalty provided under Republic Act No. 8294 , which amended P.D. 1866 and took effect in 1997.
ISSUE
Whether Republic Act No. 8294 , which provides for a lesser penalty for the crime of simple illegal possession of a firearm, should be applied retroactively to benefit the petitioner.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition and applied R.A. No. 8294 retroactively. The general rule is that penal laws have prospective application. However, an exception exists under Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code: when a new law is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual criminal, it shall be given retroactive effect. R.A. No. 8294 , which reduced the penalty for simple illegal possession of a firearm, is such a favorable law.
The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove any aggravating circumstance, such as the use of the firearm in the commission of another crime. The charge was specifically for simple illegal possession, and the kidnapping case for which he was initially arrested remained a separate and distinct offense. Since the petitioner was not a habitual criminal, the exception applied. Therefore, the lesser penalty under R.A. No. 8294 , which is prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine, was imposed. The firearm was ordered confiscated in favor of the government.