Case Digest (G.R. No. 247463)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Hon. Amelia A. Fabros‑Corpuz, in her capacity as Acting Presiding Judge of RTC Muntinlupa City, Branch 256, and Anthony Archangel y Sy, G.R. No. 247463, April 17, 2024, First Division, Hernando, J., writing for the Court.The petitioner is the People of the Philippines (through the Office of the Solicitor General); the public respondent is Hon. Amelia A. Fabros‑Corpuz (Acting Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 256, Muntinlupa City); the private respondent is Anthony Archangel y Sy (convict), who was represented by the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO).
In 2001 nine separate informations charged Sy with estafa by issuing worthless checks under Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code; five cases were dismissed and four remained as Criminal Cases Nos. U‑11223, U‑11226, U‑11227, and U‑11228. On September 3, 2007, Branch 48, RTC, Urdaneta City convicted Sy of three counts of estafa (U‑11223, U‑11226, U‑11227) and imposed indeterminate sentences (decretal terms reproduced in the decision), and acquitted him in U‑11228.
On December 22, 2018 Sy (through PAO) filed a Petition to Adjust and Fix Penalty before the RTC in Muntinlupa, invoking the amendment of penalties by Republic Act No. 10951 and citing Hernan v. Sandiganbayan; he alleged he had already served sufficient time and sought immediate release. The public respondent (Branch 256, RTC, Muntinlupa) directed the OSG to comment; after receiving the OSG’s comment she issued a Resolution dated March 14, 2019 modifying the penalties under RA 10951 and directing the Bureau of Corrections to release Sy immediately.
The OSG filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 before the Court, asserting the public respondent misapplied the provisions of RA 10951 (applying the wrong paragraph of Section 85 and thereby effectively reducing the penalty in a way not permitted, or at minimum applying a provision that would be disadvantageous under Section 100). The Supreme Court, without giving due course initially, issued a TRO on January 8, 2020 restraining enforcement of the RTC Resolution. The Court subsequently required the elevation of records, received comments and memoranda, and ultimately, after procedural steps and extensions, resolved the case on April 17, 2024.
The OSG argued (inter alia) that: (1) the RTC misapplied the first 4th paragraph of Article 315 as amended by Section 85 of RA 10951 when the penalties for estafa by worthless check fall under the separate “penalty for estafa committed through issuance of a worthless check” group in Section 85; (2) applying the correct provisions would in fact increase the penalty for two counts (U‑11223 and U‑11226) and thus RA 10951 is not retroactively favorable under Section 100; and (3) the immediate release was premature because Sy had not demonstrated full service of sentence and there was no showing of compliance with RA 10592’s rules o...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the public respondent commit grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction in adjusting Anthony Archangel y Sy’s prison sentence and ordering his immediate...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)