G.R. No. 117078 February 22, 1995
In the matter of the petition of ALFREDO O. LAMEN and REYNALDO A. CORTES for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus for WILLY BAGAWE y PAGALLA; ALFREDO O. LAMEN and REYNALDO A. CORTES, vs. THE HON. DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS, MUNTINGLUPA, METRO MANILA.

FACTS

Petitioners Alfredo O. Lamen and Reynaldo A. Cortes filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus to secure the release of Willy Bagawe y Pagalla. Bagawe was convicted for violating Section 4, Article II of R.A. No. 6425 (The Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972), as amended, for selling and delivering marijuana. The prohibited drugs involved were three matchboxes containing marijuana flowering tops (total weight 3.5 grams), one matchbox with a marijuana cigarette butt, and one brown paper bag containing 10 grams of marijuana flowering tops. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of P20,000. The Supreme Court affirmed this judgment in its decision dated April 7, 1992, in G.R. Nos. 88515-16, which became final on May 11, 1992. Bagawe has been incarcerated since his arrest on April 14, 1987, and is serving his sentence at the New Bilibid Prisons. The petitioners contend that, based on the Supreme Court’s ruling in People vs. Simon, the maximum penalty for the quantity of marijuana involved (13.6 grams) should be reduced to two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional. Since Bagawe has already served more than six years, he should be released. The Office of the Solicitor General agrees that Simon applies but recommends a different penalty computation: six months of arresto mayor as minimum to six years of prision correccional as maximum, without fine.

ISSUE

Whether the writ of habeas corpus is the proper remedy to give retroactive effect to a favorable penal provision ( R.A. No. 7659 , as interpreted in People vs. Simon) for an accused whose sentence has become final and executory, and who has served more than the maximum penalty that could have been properly imposed under the favorable law.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition and ordered the release of Willy Bagawe y Pagalla. The Court held that while the final and executory judgment in G.R. Nos. 88515-16 could not be altered or modified, the writ of habeas corpus was the appropriate remedy to give retroactive effect to the favorable provisions of R.A. No. 7659 , as applied in People vs. Simon. Following Simon, the penalty imposable on Bagawe under the amended law would have been prision correccional. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the proper penalty would have been an indeterminate sentence ranging from six months of arresto mayor as minimum to four years and two months of prision correccional as maximum. Since Bagawe had already undergone imprisonment for a period exceeding this maximum term, and considering Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code which provides for the retroactive effect of penal laws favorable to the accused who is not a habitual criminal, his continued detention was no longer lawful. The Court cited the precedent in Directo vs. Director of Prisons, which held that the only means of giving retroactive effect to a favorable penal provision after the trial court has lost jurisdiction is through the writ of habeas corpus.