Case Digest (G.R. No. 228704)
Facts:
Petitioner Adelaida Tanega was convicted of slander by the City Court of Quezon City; the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch V, affirmed and sentenced her to 20 days of arresto menor, indemnity of P100.00 with subsidiary imprisonment, and costs, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Court of First Instance set execution for January 1965, deferred it to February 12, 1965; petitioner failed to appear, whereupon the judge issued a warrant of arrest on February 15, 1965 and an alias warrant on March 23, 1965; petitioner was never arrested and, on December 10, 1966, moved to quash the warrants as prescribed, which the judge denied on December 19, 1966, prompting this petition for certiorari and prohibition.Issues:
- When did prescription of penalty under Article 92 and Article 93 of the Revised Penal Code commence to run?
- Did prescription run in favor of Petitioner who was never placed in confinement and against whom warrants issued more
Case Digest (G.R. No. 228704)
Facts:
- Conviction and sentences
- Adelaida Tanega, petitioner, was convicted of slander by the City Court of Quezon City.
- The Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch V, Quezon City (Criminal Case Q-3955) found petitioner guilty on appeal and sentenced her to 20 days of arresto menor, to indemnify the offended party, Pilar B. Julio, in the sum of P100.00 with corresponding subsidiary imprisonment, and to pay costs.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction (C.A.-G.R. No. 0147-CR, May 20, 1964).
- The Supreme Court denied certiorari (docketed G.R. No. L-23429; certiorari denied October 22, 1964).
- Proceedings on execution and warrants
- On January 11, 1965, the Court of First Instance directed that execution of sentence be set for January 27, 1965.
- On petitioner’s motion, execution was deferred to February 12, 1965 at 8:30 a.m.; petitioner failed to appear at the appointed date and hour.
- The respondent judge, Hon. Honorato B. Masakayan, issued a warrant of arrest on February 15, 1965, and an alias warrant on March 23, 1965.
- Petitioner was never arrested.
- On December 10, 1966, petitioner moved to quash the warrants ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Primary legal question
- Whether the penalty of arresto menor and fine prescribed under Article 92 of the Revised Penal Code had prescribed in favor of Adelaida Tanega when she had not been placed in confinement and warrants of arrest were issued.
- Subsidiary interpretive questions
- When does the period of prescription of penalties commence to run under Article 93 of the Revised Penal Code?
- What is the legal concept of “evasion of service of sentence” under Article 157 of the Revised Penal Code, and when does such evasion occur for purposes of...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)