EN BANC
[G.R. No. 237723. July 2, 2019.]
IN RE: CORRECTION/ADJUSTMENT OF PENALTY PURSUANT TO R.A. NO. 10951, IN RELATION TO HERNAN vs. SANDIGANBAYAN-MAGDALENA GANDO y TACLUYAN, petitioner.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution datedJULY 2, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 237723 (In re: Correction/Adjustment of penalty pursuant to R.A. No. 10951, in relation to Hernan v. Sandiganbayan-Magdalena Gando y Tacluyan, Petitioner)
RESOLUTION
This Petition for Release seeks the immediate discharge of petitioner Magdalena Gando y Tacluyan pursuant to Republic Act (RA) 10951 1 and this Court's ruling in Hernan v. Sandiganbayan. 2
Antecedents
By Decision dated October 29, 2008 in Crim. Case No. 03-774, the Regional Trial Court-Branch 65, Jordan, Guimaras rendered a verdict of conviction against petitioner, then acting Municipal Treasurer of Nueva Valencia, Guimaras, for malversation of public funds, viz.:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of malversation of public funds defined and penalized under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.
There being no mitigating or aggravating circumstances and applying the indeterminate sentence, accused is sentenced to suffer a penalty of imprisonment of eighteen (18) years of Reclusion Temporal to forty years (40) of Reclusion Perpetua, perpetual special disqualification and to pay a fine equivalent to One Million Five Hundred Eighty-Eight Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Eight Pesos and 83/100 (Php1,588,338.83).
The bail bond posted by the accused is cancelled and the accused is ordered arrested.
No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED. 3
The Court of Appeals, under Resolution dated July 30, 2010, dismissed petitioner's appeal. On September 1, 2010, entry of judgment was issued in the Court of Appeals. 4
Petitioner is currently confined at the Correctional Institution for Women in Mandaluyong City. Based on her prison record, she had already served thirteen (13) years and seventeen (17) days of her sentence, inclusive of good conduct time allowance, as of January 29, 2018. 5
Meanwhile, RA 10951 which was promulgated on August 29, 2017 provides:
SECTION 40. Article 217 of the same Act, as amended by Republic Act No. 1060, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"ART. 217. Malversation of public funds or property. — Presumption of malversation. — Any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or property, shall appropriate the same, or shall take or misappropriate or shall consent, through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public funds or property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property, shall suffer:
xxx xxx xxx
"3. The penalty of prisión mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period, if the amount involved is more than One million two hundred thousand pesos (P1,200,000) but does not exceed Two million four hundred thousand pesos (P2,400,000).
xxx xxx xxx
The entire range of the imposable penalty for malversation of public funds is ten (10) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years. Applying the indeterminate sentence law, the minimum imposable penalty may still be further reduced. 6
Petitioner now vigorously asserts that she is entitled to have her sentence modified in accordance with RA 10951 and immediately released from confinement.
Ruling
The petition is meritorious.
RA 10951 may be invoked to modify prison sentences for select crimes committed under the Revised Penal Code. 7 Whether petitioner is entitled to such modified sentence or immediate release, the trial court is best equipped to make such determination. For one's eligibility to avail of the benefits under RA 10951 necessarily involves ascertaining, among others, the length of time one has actually served and whether good conduct time allowance should be allowed. 8
At any rate, the Court has already issued guidelines in applying the amendatory law for the benefit of qualified convicts, viz.:
I. Scope.
These guidelines shall govern the procedure for actions seeking (1) the modification, based on the amendments introduced by R[.]A[.] No. 10951, of penalties imposed by final judgments; and, (2) the immediate release of the petitioner-convict on account of full service of the penalty/penalties, as modified.
II. Who may file.
The Public Attorney's Office, the concerned inmate, or his/her counsel/representative, may file the petition.
III. Where to file.
The petition shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court exercising territorial jurisdiction over the locality where the petitioner-convict is confined. The case shall be raffled and referred to the branch to which it is assigned within three (3) days from the filing of the petition.
IV. Pleadings.
(A) Pleadings allowed. — The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the petition and the comment from the OSG. No motions for extension of time, or other dilatory motions for postponement shall be allowed. The petition must contain a certified true copy of the Decision sought to be modified and, where applicable, the mittimus and/or a certification from the Bureau of Corrections as to the length of the sentence already served by petitioner-convict.
(B) Verification. — The petition must be in writing and verified by the petitioner-convict himself.
V. Comment by the OSG.
Within ten (10) days from notice, the OSG shall file its comment to the petition.
VI. Effect of failure to file comment.
Should the OSG fail to file the comment within the period provided, the court, motu propio, or upon motion of the petitioner convict, shall render judgment as may be warranted.
VII. Judgment of the court.
To avoid any prolonged imprisonment, the court shall promulgate judgment no later than ten (10) calendar days after the lapse of the period to file comment. The judgment shall set forth the following:
a. The penalty/penalties imposable in accordance with RA No. 10951;
b. Where proper, the length of time the petitioner-convict has been in confinement (and whether time allowance for good conduct should be allowed); and
c. Whether the petitioner-convict is entitled to immediate release due to complete service of his sentence/s, as modified in accordance with RA No. 10951.
The judgment of the court shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to the filing before the Supreme Court of a special civil action under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court where there is a showing of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
VIII. Applicability of the regular rules.
The Rules of Court shall apply to the special cases herein provided in a suppletory capacity insofar as they are not inconsistent therewith. 9 (emphasis added)
Pursuant to these guidelines, the present petition must be referred to the Regional Trial Court of Mandaluyong City which has territorial jurisdiction over the Correctional Institution for Women where petitioner is currently confined.
WHEREFORE, the petition is referred to the Regional Trial Court of Mandaluyong City which shall raffle the case within three (3) days from notice.
The branch to which the case is raffled shall determine: (1) the prescribed penalty under Republic Act 10951 for malversation of public funds where the amount involved is Php1,588,338.83; and (2) whether on the basis thereof, petitioner Magdalena Gando y Tacluyan may already be deemed to have fully served her sentence and accordingly released from confinement.
The Court further Resolved to NOTE the:
a) Consolidated Comment (Re: Correction/Adjustment of Penalty Pursuant to Republic Act No. 10951, in Relation to Hernan v. Sandiganbayan) dated July 2, 2018 filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) re: G.R. Nos. 237142, 237454, 237721, 237722, 237723, 237724, 237725, 237926, 238187, 238219, 238724 and 238929, praying that this Consolidated Comment be considered sufficient compliance with the resolutions involving petitions for correction/adjustment of penalty pursuant to Republic Act No. 10951;
b) Manifestation (Re: OSG's Consolidated Comment dated July 2, 2018), dated July 5, 2018 filed by the OSG, praying that the additional forty (40) copies of the above Consolidated Comment be admitted and the caption of the instant case be accordingly modified; and
c) Very Urgent Motion to Remand the Case to the Regional Trial Court of Mandaluyong City dated June 11, 2019 filed by the Public Attorney's Office for the petitioner." Gesmundo, J., on official leave. (adv83)
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETAClerk of Court
Footnotes
1. "AN ACT ADJUSTING THE AMOUNT OR THE VALUE OF PROPERTY AND DAMAGE ON WHICH A PENALTY IS BASED, AND THE FINES IMPOSED UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS "THE REVISED PENAL CODE," AS AMENDED."
2. G.R. No. 217874, December 5, 2017, 847 SCRA 552.
3.Rollo, p. 26.
4.Id. at 28.
5.Id. at 23.
6. Act No. 4103, as amended.
7.Supra note 2 at 572-574.
8.In Re: Saganib y Lutong, petitioner, G.R. No. 240347, August 14, 2018.
9.In Re: Elbanbuena y Marfil, G.R. No. 237721, July 31, 2018.