Title
Franco y Mangaoang vs. Director of Prisons
Case
G.R. No. 235483
Decision Date
Jun 8, 2020
Petitioner, convicted of kidnapping with ransom, seeks release citing colonist status privileges and retroactive application of R.A. No. 10592. Court denies immediate release, requires executive approval for sentence reduction, and refers case to trial court for recomputation of GCTA.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-36142)

Factual Background

Petitioner Boy Franco was initially sentenced to reclusion perpetua by the Regional Trial Court of Makati City on July 17, 1993, and was committed to the National Bilibid Prison on October 12, 1995. He was granted colonist status on April 21, 2009, allowing him certain privileges, among them the potential for an automatic reduction of his life sentence to thirty years and eligibility for Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA).

Legal Arguments of the Petitioner

Franco asserts that his nearly 35 years of time served, including credit for preventive imprisonment, qualifies him for immediate release based on his colonist status and the provisions of R.A. No. 10592. He challenges the need for executive approval for the privileges granted to colonists, highlighting that such approval can be delegated by the President to his officials.

The Respondent's Position

The Director of Prisons contends that the privileges of a colonist require executive approval, as stipulated by Section 5 of Act No. 2489 and Article VII, Section 19 of the 1987 Constitution. This approval is necessary for the modification of a life sentence to a thirty-year sentence, and the Director argues that the petitioner lacks such approval.

Legal Framework and Statutory Interpretation

The interpretation of the law emphasizes that being classified as a colonist does not inherently grant a prisoner automatic sentence reduction. The requirement for executive approval exists as a necessary measure, distinguishing between the classification act and the subsequent approval by the Executive. The Court has previously ruled that such a reduction functions as a partial pardon and must be exercised personally by the President.

Court’s interpretation of Precedential Value

The Court dismisses Franco's reliance on the precedent set in Cruz III v. Go, clarifying that Go’s release was not a result of colonist status but based on the computation of GCTA. This distinction undermines Franco's claim to entitlements under the same rationale.

R.A. No. 10592 and Its Effects

The Court acknowledges Franco's potential entitlements under R.A. No. 10592, which amends the computation for GCTA. This law allows for a more extensive application of GCTA, including for preventive imprisonment, and introduces additional credits for educational acti

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.