VALEROSO VS.

CA

ART. 3 (EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: PENAL IN NATURE, APPLICABLE

TO THE ACCUSED)

THE law looks forward, never backward. Lex prospicit, non respicit. A new law has a
prospective, not retroactive, effect.1 However, penal laws that favor a guilty person, who is not a
habitual criminal, shall be given retroactive effect. These are the rule, the exception and
exception to the exception on effectivity of laws.

Petitioner was charged with the crime of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition under the
first paragraph of Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866, as amended.

P.D. No. 1866, as amended, was the governing law at the time petitioner committed the offense
on July 10, 1996. However, R.A. No. 8294 amended P.D. No. 1866 on July 6, 1997, 81 during the
pendency of the case with the trial court. The present law now states:

SECTION 1. Unlawful Manufacture, Sale, Acquisition, Disposition or Possession of

Firearms or Ammunition or Instruments Used or Intended to be Used in the Manufacture
of Firearms or Ammunition. – The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period
and a fine of not less than Fifteen Thousand Pesos ( P15,000) shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire, dispose, or possess any low-
powered firearm, such as rimfire handgun, .380 or .32 and other firearm of similar
firepower, part of firearm, ammunition, or machinery, tool or instrument used or intended
to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition: Provided, That no other
crime was committed. (Underscoring supplied)

As a general rule, penal laws should not have retroactive application, lest they acquire the
character of an ex post facto law.82 An exception to this rule, however, is when the law is
advantageous to the accused. According to Mr. Chief Justice Araullo, this is "not as a right" of
the offender, "but founded on the very principles on which the right of the State to punish and for
the basis of penalty, and regards it not as an exception based on political considerations, but as a
rule founded on principles of strict justice."83

Although an additional fine of P15,000.00 is imposed by R.A. No. 8294, the same is still
advantageous to the accused, considering that the imprisonment is lowered to prision
correccional in its maximum period84 from reclusion temporal in its maximum period
to reclusion perpetua85 under P.D. No. 1866.

Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, prision correccional maximum which ranges from

four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day to six (6) years, is the prescribed penalty and will
form the maximum term of the indeterminate sentence. The minimum term shall be one degree
lower, which is prision correccional in its medium period (two [2] years, four [4] months and
one [1] day to four [4] years and two [2] months). 86 Hence, the penalty imposed by the CA is
correct. The penalty of four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional medium, as
minimum term, to six (6) years of prision correccional maximum, as maximum term, is in
consonance with the Court’s ruling in Gonzales v. Court of Appeals87 and Barredo v. Vinarao.88

As to the subject firearm and its five (5) live ammunition, their proper disposition should be
made under Article 45 of the Revised Penal Code89 which provides, among others, that the
proceeds and instruments or tools of the crime shall be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the
government.

WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated May 4, 2004 is AFFIRMED in

full.