Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISLAW): How to determine maximum and minimum penalties (Act no 4103 as amended) The Indeterminate

Sentence Law is mandatory in all cases, EXCEPT if the accused will fall in any of the following exceptions: 1. if sentenced with a penalty of death or life imprisonment 2. if convicted of treason, conspiracy, proposal to commit treason 3. if convicted of misprision of treason, sedition, rebellion or espionage 4. if convicted of piracy 5. if the offender is a habitual delinquent 6. those who escaped from prison or evaded sentence 7. those who violated the terms of conditional pardon of the chief executive 8. where the maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed 1 year (important!) 9. if convicted by final judgement at the time of the effectivity of Act No. 4103 10. if penalized with suspension or distierro If accused fall in any of the foregoing exceptions. DO NOT APPLY ISLAW! ISLAW applies to offenses punished by Special Law and Revised Penal Code. Why is ISLAW mandatory? In the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law the judge will get the maximum penalty and likewise the minimum penalty. If the accused was already able to serve the minimum term of his indeterminate sentence and upon the approval of the Board, the accused now becomes eligible for parole. ISLAW is favorable to the accused. If the accused was granted parole and violated some conditions of the parole, What will happen? A warrant of arrest will be issued by the court and the accused will be made to serve the rest of the remaining or unexpired portion of his sentence. (But in probation you go back to number 1, serving of sentence will be from the beginning)

Application of ISLAW: How to get maximum and minimum penalty in Special Law: 1. The maximum penalty should NOT exceed the maximum provided for by that law. 2. The minimum penalty should NOT fall below the minimum provided by the law. How to get maximum and minimum penalty in Revised Penal Code: Example: In the crime of homicide, under the Revised Penal Code, the offender is sentenced to reclusion temporal. The maximum penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law is reclusion temporal. But reclusion temporal is a divisible penalty consisting of maximum, medium and minimum periods. Which period will we place the maximum term of the Indeterminate Sentence? Guide for determining the maximum penalty: 1. Determine the entire range of the penalty 2. Determine if there is mitigating or aggravating circumstance Which period will the maximum penalty be placed? In pursuant to art 64, when there is no mitigating and no aggravating circumstance, it should be placed at the medium period. Thus, the maximum penalty for the example above is reclusion temporal in the medium period. What is the minimum penalty now? In getting the minimum penalty, the rule is to simply get the penalty one (1) degree lower from the maximum penalty without taking into account the mitigating and aggravating circumstance. Thus, the penalty one degree lower from reclusion temporal, without taking into account any mitigating or aggravating circumstance, is prision mayor. Prision mayor is now the minimum penalty for our example. Important: If your maximum penalty is wrong, it follows that the minimum penalty will also be wrong. Again, prision mayor is a divisible penalty.

Which period can it be placed? Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, it would depend upon the discretion of the court on which period to place it. Thus, the minimum penalty is prision mayor in any of its period. Factors that could affect the imposition of minimum penalty: 1. Age 2. Conduct during trial 3. Mental or physical condition Suppose in the example above, 1 aggravating circumstance was proven. What is now the maximum penalty? It would still be reclusion temporal, but it shall be placed in the maximum period because of the presence of 1 aggravating circumstance. How about the minimum penalty? It would still be 1 degree lower from reclusion temporal, which is prision mayor. In which period? It shall be discretionary upon the court. (More examples) 1 mitigating but NO aggravating maximum penalty: reclusion temporal in the minimum period minimum penalty: prision mayor in any period 2 mitigating, NO aggravating (privileged mitigating) maximum penalty: prision mayor in the medium period minimum penalty: prision correctional any period The preceding example is an exception to the rule. If there is a privileged mitigating circumstance, we take it into account first in order to obtain the proper maximum penalty. Then, from that maximum penalty, we obtain the proper minimum penalty by getting the penalty 1 degree lower. Same rule applies as to the period of the minimum penalty. Remember: It will never become a privileged mitigating circumstance if there is an aggravating circumstance present. 8 mitigating and 1 aggravating will never become privileged mitigating circumstance.

3 mitigating, NO aggravating maximum penalty: prision mayor in the minimum period minimum penalty: prision correctional any period In the preceding example, there are 3 mitigating circumstance present and no aggravating circumstance. The first two mitigating circumstance shall be a privileged mitigating circumstance. Thus, the penalty will be reduced by 1 degree from reclusion temporal to prision mayor. The 3rd mitigating circumstance shall place the penalty in the minimum period. 4 mitigating, NO aggravating maximum penalty: prision correctional in the medium period (2 privileged circumstance. Thus we lower by 2 degrees) minimum penalty: arresto mayor any period 5 mitigating, NO aggravating maximum penalty: prision correctional in the minimum period minimum penalty: arresto mayor any period At most we can only lower by 2 degrees. Thus, if there are 6 mitigating circumstance and NO aggravating: maximum penalty: prision correctional in the minimum period minimum penalty: arresto mayor any period How is Indeterminate Sentence Law applied in complex crimes (Article 48)? A complex crime is punished by the most serious offense and shall be imposed in its maximum period. Example: Estafa through falsification of public documents. Under the Revised Penal Code, falsification of public documents (Article 171) is a more serious offense punished by prision mayor than estafa (Article 315), punished only by prision correctional. Thus, applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the maximum penalty for estafa through falsification of public documents shall be prision mayor in the maximum period. Minimum

penalty shall be prision correctional, any period. Suppose there was 1 mitigating circumstance proven. Maximum penalty would still be prision mayor in the maximum period. In pursuant to Article 48, even if there is a mitigating circumstance present, it should still be imposed at the maximum period. How about if there are 2 mitigating circumstance and no aggravating? The rule is, if it is a privileged mitigating circumstance, we lower by the penalty by one degree but still place it at the maximum period. Thus, the maximum penalty shall be prision correctional in the maximum period. 4 mitigating, NO aggravating maximum penalty: arresto mayor in its maximum period
RA No. 4103, Dec. 5, 1933 - Instead of imposing a straight penalty, the court must determine two penalties (maximum and minimum) I. PURPOSE

Who escaped confinement or evaded sentence or violated the terms of a conditional pardon 8. Persons already sentenced by final judgment at the time this Act was approved (Dec. 5, 1933) III. APPLICATION A. RPC: Min (next lower to prescribed) to Max (imposable) 1. Derive MAXIMUM term imposable by applying rules for aggravating (AC) and ordinary mitigating circumstances (MC) under Art. 64 and for complex crimes under Art. 48

7.

No AC or MC: Penalty PRESCRIBED medium period 1 AC, no MC: Penalty PRESCRIBED maximum period No AC, 1 MC: Penalty PRESCRIBED minimum period Several ACs and MCs: OFFSET then apply rules to remainder No AC, 2 or more MCs: Penalty NEXT LOWER IN DEGREE TO THAT PRESCRIBED

If COMPLEX CRIME (2 or more grave or less grave felonies OR one offense is a necessary means for committing the other): Penalty for the MOST SERIOUS CRIME maximum period 2. Derive MINIMUM term by getting the penalty one degree lower than the penalty prescribed by the RPC, without regard to its three periods. The court has discretion to fix as the minimum term any period of imprisonment within that penaltynext lower to the penalty prescribed EXCEPTION: WHEN THERE IS A PRIVILEGED MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE, do NOT follow the aforementioned rule. Consider the privileged mitigating circumstance FIRST before any AC or MC to get the PENALTY PRESCRIBED and then proceed as required by the rule on deriving the minimum term. Otherwise, the maximum of the ISL will end up being lower than the minimum of the ISL. B. SPL: Min (at least that prescribed) to Max (not exceed prescribed) 1. MAXIMUM TERM: Court may fix any as long as it does not exceed the penalty prescribed by the special law MINIMUM TERM: Court has discretion so long as it does not exceed the minimum prescribed by the special law

To uplift and redeem valuable human material, and prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of liberty and economic usefulness. Penalties shall not be standardized but fitted as far as is possible to the individual, with due regard to the imperative necessity of protecting the social order (People v. Ducosin, 59 Phil 109).

II. COVERAGE A. GENERAL RULE: All persons convicted of certain crimes under Philippine courts B. EXCEPTIONS (Sec. 2): Law will NOT apply to persons

2. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Convicted of offense punishable with death penalty or life imprisonment Whose maximum term of imprisonment (imposed) does not exceed one year Convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason, misprision of treason Convicted of rebellion, sedition, espionage, Convicted of piracy Who are habitual delinquents

Homicide; proper computation of penalty G.R. No. 180219 G.R. No. 180219 "x x x. The penalty for homicide under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code is reclusion temporal. Under Section 1 of theIndeterminate Sentence Law,[15] the court, in imposing a prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code, or its amendments, is mandated to prescribe an indeterminate sentence the maximum term of which shall be that which, in view of the attending circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules of the Revised Penal Code, and the minimum term shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Revised Penal Code for the offense. With the absence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal in its medium period, or 14 years, eight months, and one day to 17 years and four months. This is pursuant to Article 64 of the Revised Penal Code.[16] It is such period that the maximum term of the indeterminate sentence should be reckoned from. Hence, limiting the maximum term of the indeterminate sentence at only 14 years and eight months contravened the express provision of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, for such penalty was within the minimum period ofreclusion temporal. Accordingly, the Court must add one day to the maximum term fixed by the lower courts. The Court finds to be unnecessary the increment of one day as part of the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence. It may be true that the increment did not constitute an error, because the minimum term thus fixed was entirely within the parameters of theIndeterminate Sentence Law. Yet, the addition of one day to the 10 years as the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence of Talampas may occasion a degree of inconvenience when it will be time for the penal administrators concerned to consider and determine whether Talampas is already qualified to enjoy the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Hence, in order to simplify the computation of the

minimum penalty of the indeterminate sentence, the Court deletes the one-day increment from the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence. WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on August 16, 2007 finding VIRGILIO TALAMPAS y MATIC guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide, and IMPOSES the indeterminate sentence of 10 years of prision mayor, as minimum, to 14 years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The petitioner shall pay the costs of suit. SO ORDERED.