People v. Almencion
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The accused, Monico Almencion, was charged with falsifying the personal cedula of Fortunato Cañete for the year 1909. The purpose was to simulate that Fortunato Cañete had paid for his 1909 cedula, thereby enabling him to obtain a 1910 cedula without penalty. The accused intended to misappropriate P2 out of the P4 given to him by Fortunato Cañete for the purchase of the 1910 cedula. The municipal treasurer of Mandaue, Cebu, discovered the falsification when demanding the 1909 cedula. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Cebu sentenced the accused to one year of imprisonment, a fine of P2,000, and costs, under section 55 of Act No. 1189. The Petition: The accused appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.
Issue(s)
Whether the more lenient penalty provided by Act No. 2126 should be applied retroactively to a crime committed under Act No. 1189, notwithstanding the prohibition in Article 7 of the Penal Code regarding special laws.
Ruling
The judgment of the Court of First Instance of Cebu is affirmed, with the modification that the penalty imposed is two months imprisonment and a fine of P200, with costs of the instance.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Supreme Court ruled that Act No. 2126 must be applied retroactively because it is the law most favorable to the accused. Under Article 22 of the Penal Code, penal laws are granted retroactive effect insofar as they favor the guilty person, regardless of whether a final sentence has been pronounced. The Court acknowledged the doubt arising from Article 7 of the Penal Code, which states that offenses under special laws are not subject to the Code's general provisions. However, the Court reiterated its earlier ruling in United States v. Parrone, which established that the principle of retroactivity for favorable laws is an exception to the strictures of Article 7. The Court reasoned that once a more lenient penalty is established by the legislature, the prior harsher penalty is effectively repealed for the benefit of the accused. Thus, while the conviction was affirmed, the penalty was modified to two months of imprisonment and a fine of P200 to align with the new statute.
Main Doctrine
Penal laws that are favorable to the accused have retroactive effect, even if the crime was committed before their promulgation and even if a final sentence has been rendered, provided that the principle that offenses punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions of the Penal Code does not preclude the application of Article 22 of the Penal Code to crimes penalized by special laws.