GR 39913; (December, 1933) (Digest)
G.R. No. 39913, December 19, 1933
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RICARDO MELENDREZ Y NIETO, ET AL., defendants. RICARDO MELENDREZ Y NIETO, appellant.
FACTS
The appellant, Ricardo Melendrez y Nieto, together with an unapprehended co-accused, was charged with the crime of robbery. The information alleged that they forcibly broke into an inhabited store in Pasay, Rizal, and stole various personal properties valued at P76.68. The appellant pleaded guilty to the charge. He was also alleged to be a habitual delinquent, having been previously convicted twice for theft and once for estafa, with his last conviction on September 3, 1932. The trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to eight years and one day of prision mayor as the principal penalty, plus an additional penalty of six years and one day of prision mayor for being a habitual delinquent.
ISSUE
Whether the aggravating circumstance of recidivism should be considered in imposing the principal penalty when the defendant is also sentenced to an additional penalty as a habitual delinquent.
RULING
Yes. The Court, sitting en banc, held that the aggravating circumstance of recidivism should be taken into account in imposing the principal penalty in its corresponding degree, notwithstanding the imposition of an additional penalty for habitual delinquency. The crime committed was robbery without the use of arms in an inhabited house, with the value of the property taken being less than P250, penalized under Article 299 of the Revised Penal Code by prision correccional in its medium degree. The mitigating circumstance of a plea of guilty was appreciated in favor of the appellant. With one mitigating and one aggravating circumstance (recidivism) present, the principal penalty was imposed in its medium degree. The Court modified the principal penalty to two years, eleven months, and eleven days of prision correccional, while affirming the additional penalty for habitual delinquency and the rest of the judgment.
Separate Opinion:
Justice Abad Santos dissented in part, arguing that recidivism should not be considered as an aggravating circumstance for the principal penalty when the accused is being punished as a habitual delinquent, as recidivism is an inherent element of habitual delinquency under the law.
AI Generated by Armztrong.