Title
Buiser vs. People
Case
G.R. No. L-32377
Decision Date
Oct 23, 1982
Petitioner convicted of reckless imprudence sought retroactive application of RA 5465 abolishing subsidiary imprisonment for insolvency; SC granted, citing Article 22 of RPC favoring accused.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-32377)

Conviction and Sentencing

Lucas Buiser was sentenced to serve two months of arresto mayor, to pay indemnity to the victim Damian Bautista in the amount of PHP 500.00, and to cover the costs of the case. Additionally, the sentence included a provision for subsidiary imprisonment should Buiser be unable to pay the indemnity. The Court of Appeals affirmed this sentence in its decision.

Grounds for Appeal

Buiser pursued a certiorari appeal before the Supreme Court on two main grounds: firstly, he argued that the lower court's decision contradicted the evidence presented in the case; secondly, he contested the imposition of subsidiary imprisonment in the event of his insolvency. The Supreme Court ultimately decided to grant due course to his appeal concerning the issue of subsidiary imprisonment only.

Applicability of Republic Act No. 5465

Buiser contended that he should be granted the benefits of Republic Act No. 5465, which abolished subsidiary imprisonment for insolvency in cases where the accused fails to pay indemnities. The act became effective on April 21, 1969, and as Buiser's appeal was pending when this law took effect, he argued that he was entitled to the benefits enshrined within it.

Legal Framework

The petitioner invoked Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code, which states that penal laws shall have retroactive effect when they favor the offender. Buiser asserted that since he was not deemed a habitual criminal, he should receive the benefits of the amendment provided by Republic Act No. 5465, as it abolished the liability for subsidiary imprisonment stemming from failure to pay civil indemnities.

Position of the Solicitor General

The Solicitor General's comment supported the petitioner’s contention, acknowledging that the imposition of subsidiary imprisonment in Buiser's case was not consistent with the amended law. The Solicitor General agreed that the law’s retroactive application in favor of Buiser was justified.

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioner concerning the issue of subsidiary imprisonment. Although the original decision by the Court of First Instance and the affirmation by the Court of Appeals were correct under

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.