G.R. No. 32070 , November 19, 1929
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs. RAFAEL SALINAS Y AGAS

FACTS

The accused, Rafael Salinas y Agas, was convicted of qualified theft and declared a habitual criminal under Act No. 3397 . He was sentenced to an additional penalty of twenty-one years for habitual delinquency. On appeal, he challenged the constitutionality of Act No. 3397 and argued that the five prior thefts used to establish his habitual delinquency were committed before the Act took effect, and thus should not be considered under it.

ISSUE

1. Whether Act No. 3397 , which imposes an additional penalty for habitual delinquency, can be applied to prior crimes committed before its enactment.
2. Whether Act No. 3397 is constitutional.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the judgment of the lower court.

1. On the application of Act No. 3397 to prior crimes: The Court held that the Act does not punish the prior crimes anew. Instead, it penalizes the habituality or criminal propensity demonstrated by the accused in committing the latest crime (the qualified theft in this case) after the law’s enactment. The prior convictions are merely considered as evidence of the accused’s habitual criminality. This is consistent with the ruling in People vs. Sierra ( G.R. No. 28516 ).

2. On the constitutionality of Act No. 3397 : The Court upheld the law’s constitutionality. It cited the doctrine established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Graham vs. West Virginia and previous Philippine cases (People vs. Nayco, 45 Phil. 167). The increased penalty for habitual criminals is not a second punishment for the old offenses. It is a severer penalty for the new offense because the repetition of criminal conduct aggravates the offender’s guilt and demonstrates a depravity that the State has the power to repress. Such legislation is a valid exercise of police power, considering the offender’s persistence in crime after previous convictions and the State’s interest in public safety.

The Court also clarified that the accused must suffer the accessory penalties under Article 58 of the Revised Penal Code.