GR 45198; (October, 1936) (Digest)
G.R. No. 45198 ; October 31, 1936
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BASILIO DE JESUS Y JAVIER, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The appellant, Basilio de Jesus y Javier, was convicted by the Court of First Instance of Manila for the theft of an umbrella and a buri hat valued at P2.65. He was sentenced to one month and one day of arresto mayor (the minimum period for the crime under Article 309 of the Revised Penal Code), with accessory penalties, and ordered to indemnify the victim. As a habitual delinquent under Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code, an additional penalty of two years, four months and one day of prision correccional was imposed. The appellant appealed the sentence. The information alleged his prior convictions for theft (January 4, 1933) and qualified theft (November 18, 1935), with his last release on January 10, 1936.
ISSUE
Whether the aggravating circumstance of recidivism should be considered in imposing the principal penalty for the crime when the accused is also adjudged a habitual delinquent, thereby warranting an additional penalty.
RULING
Yes. The Court modified the trial court’s decision. The principal penalty was increased from one month and one day to two months and one day of arresto mayor (the minimum of the medium period). The additional penalty for habitual delinquency was affirmed. The Court held that recidivism is an aggravating circumstance that must be considered in fixing the principal penalty, even in cases of habitual delinquency, as established in People vs. Aguinaldo and People vs. Melendrez. However, the same recidivism cannot be used again as an aggravating circumstance in determining the period of the additional penalty for habitual delinquency; it is considered an inherent or qualifying circumstance for that purpose. Since the mitigating circumstance of voluntary confession compensated for the aggravating circumstance of recidivism, the principal penalty was imposed in the medium period’s minimum. The additional penalty imposed was the minimum prescribed for a third offense under Article 62, Rule 5(a) of the Revised Penal Code, as no other aggravating circumstances justified a higher period.
AI Generated by Armztrong.