G.R. No. L-9597; January 6, 1915
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TAN CHIA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
The appellant, Tan Chia, was convicted by the Court of First Instance of Manila for the crime of illegally possessing opium. The information charged that on or about November 18, 1913, in Manila, he willfully and unlawfully had in his possession and control 130 grams of opium and 65 grams of opium ash. He was sentenced to four months of imprisonment and to pay the costs. The evidence of guilt was clear and not seriously contested on appeal.

ISSUE:
The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the penalty of four months imprisonment imposed on the appellant is unjust or erroneous, considering that his co-accused who pleaded guilty was only sentenced to pay a fine of P300.

RULING:
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of conviction and the penalty imposed. The Court held that Act No. 1761 , as amended by Act No. 1910 , grants the trial court discretion in applying the penalty for illegal possession of opium, the only limitation being that the fine shall not exceed P10,000 or be less than P300, and the imprisonment shall not exceed five years or be less than three months. The penalty of four months imprisonment imposed on Tan Chia was within these statutory limits and within the trial court’s discretion. The general rule is that an appellate court will not interfere with a penalty imposed by the trial court when the statute grants such discretion and the penalty is within the designated limits. The difference in penalty between co-accused, by itself, does not constitute a manifest injustice warranting appellate intervention.