CASE 7: PATERNO DE LOS SANTOS VS.

COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 181306, March 21,2011
(Norberte, Paculla, Pagadut, Pasuquin, Rute)

FACTS OF THE CASE:

On November 20, 1996, the Regional Trial courts Cebu carried out a decision finding petitioner
Paterno De Los Santos guilty of the crime intentional abortion. He is sentenced the penalty of 6
years and 1 day to 28 years of Prision Mayor as maximum. Paterno De Los Santos (petitioner)
appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeals. The later affirmed his conviction with
modification as to the penalty imposed by reducing his penalty to 6 months of Arresto Mayor as
minimum to 3 years 6 months and 21 days as maximum.

Petitioner then filed an application for probation but the court denied his application in a
resolution dated December 10, 2007. He then filed a motion for reconsideration but was again
denied. The Court of Appeals asserts that the petitioner is ineligible to apply for probation,
considering the fact that he has waived his right to avail the benefits of the probation law when
he appealed the judgement of conviction by the RTC.

Petitioner argues that his case is an exception provided by law, an accused who has appealed his
conviction from the benefits of probation, he only became eligible for probation after the Court
of Appeals modified the judgement and reduced the maximum term of the penalty imposed to
3 years, 6 months and 21 days. The Office of the Solicitor General asserts that when the
petitioner filed an appeal from the trial court’s decision, he was in effect ruled out from the
benefits of probation. Petitioner is disqualified from availing the benefit of probation, because
the RTC sentenced him to suffer more than 6 years which is not probational.

The pertinent provision of the Probation Law, as amended,

Sec. 4. Grant of Probation. — Subject to the provisions of this Decree, the trial court may, after
it shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant and upon application by said defendant
within the period for perfecting an appeal, suspend the execution of the sentence and place the
defendant on probation for such period and upon such terms and conditions as it may deem
best; Provided, That no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the
defendant has perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction.

ISSUE: Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of probation, considering that he had
appealed his conviction, contrary to the provision of Section 4, P.D. 968, as amended by P.D.
1990.
COURT RULED:

The Supreme Court Ruled that, pursuant to Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. (P.D) 968 as
amended by P.D. 1990, Petitioner is ineligible to apply for probation, considering the fact that he
has waived his right to avail the benefits of probation law when he appealed the judgement of
conviction by the Regional Trial Court.