G.R. No. L-2822; October 13, 1949
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TEOFILO MARI Y DURAN, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Teofilo Mari y Duran and Joven Guevarra y Castro were charged with qualified theft for stealing a Ford civilian jeep valued at P1,500. During their joint trial, after two prosecution witnesses had testified, Mari withdrew his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty. The trial court, based on his plea, sentenced him to suffer an indeterminate penalty of 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day of prision correccional to 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor. Mari appealed, raising a pure question of law regarding the correctness of the penalty imposed.

ISSUE

Whether the penalty imposed on the appellant accords with the provisions of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 120, for the crime of qualified theft of a motor vehicle.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court modified the penalty. The theft of a motor vehicle is qualified theft under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. For ordinary theft of property worth P1,500, the penalty is prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. For qualified theft, the penalty is two degrees higher, which is prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods. With no mitigating or aggravating circumstances (Mari’s plea of guilty after prosecution evidence had begun is not a mitigating circumstance), the penalty should be imposed in its medium period. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the proper penalty is an indeterminate sentence of not less than 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day of prision correccional to not more than 9 years, 4 months, and 1 day of prision mayor. The appealed decision was affirmed with this modification to the penalty. No indemnity was ordered as the vehicle was recovered without damage.

AI Generated by Armztrong.