SPL NOTES

MALA IN SE VS. MALA PROHIBITA Mala in se Mala prohibita

Mitigating and Mitigating and

Mala in se Mala prohibita aggravating aggravating
circumstances are circumstances are
Wrong from its very Wrong because it is taken into account in generally not taken
nature, such as theft, prohibited by imposing the penalty into account
rape, homicide, etc statute, such as
illegal possession of When there is more Degree of
firearms than one offender, the participation is
degree of participation generally not taken
So serious in their Violations of mere of each in the into account. All
effects on society as rules of commission of the who participated in
to call for almost convenience crime is taken into the act are
unanimous designed to secure account punished to the
condemnation of its a more orderly same extent
members regulation of the Penalty is computed The penalty
affairs of society on the basis of imposed on the
Good faith is a valid Good faith is not a whether he is a offenders are the
defense; unless the defense principal offender, or same whether they
crime is the result of merely an accomplice are merely
culpa or accessory accomplices or
accessories
Intent is an element Criminal intent is
immaterial; the only
inquiry is: “has the
law been violated?”;
criminal intent not
necessary where WHEN THE ACTS ARE INHERENTLY
the acts are IMMORAL, THEY ARE MALA IN SE, EVEN IF
prohibited for PUNISHED UNDER SPECIAL LAW.
reasons of public
policy, as in illegal
possession of
firearms

Term refers generally Term refers

to felonies defined and generally to acts
penalized by the RPC made criminal by
special laws

There are crimes in the RPC which were

originally defined and penalized by special
laws. Among them are possession of opium,
malversation, brigandage and libel.

The degree of The act gives rise to

accomplishment of the a crime only when it
crime is taken into is consummated
account in punishing
the offender
SPL NOTES

INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW ascertained. It is true that Section 1 of said law, after
(Act No. 4103 as amended by Act No. 4225) providing for indeterminate sentence for an offense
under the Revised Penal Code, states that "if the
WHEN AN ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO offense is punished by any other law, the court shall
RECLUSION PERPETUA, HE IS NOT ENTITLED sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence,
TO THE APPLICATION OF THE INDETERMINATE the maximum term of which shall not exceed the
SENTENCE LAW maximum fixed by said law and the minimum shall
not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the
Accused-appellant cannot avail of the benefits of the same" We hold that this quoted portion of the section
Indeterminate Sentence Law because Indeterminate indubitably refers to an offense under a special law
Sentence Law does not apply to persons convicted wherein the penalty imposed was not taken from and
of offenses punishable with reclusion perpetua. is without reference to the Revised Penal Code, as
(People v. Aquino; GR 125906, Jan. 16, ’98) discussed in the preceding illustrations, such that it
may be said that the "offense is punished" under that
APPLICATION OF INDETERMINATE SENTENCE law. There can be no sensible debate that the
LAW EXPLAINED aforequoted rule on indeterminate sentence for
offenses under special laws was necessary because
In the case of People vs. Gabres, the Court has had of the nature of the former type of penalties under
occasion to so state that — said laws which were not included or contemplated
"Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the in the scale of penalties in Article 71 of the Code,
maximum term of the penalty shall be 'that which, in hence there could be no minimum "within the range
view of the attending circumstances, could be of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the
properly imposed' under the Revised Penal Code, Code for the offense," as is the rule for felonies
and the minimum shall be within the range of the therein. In the illustrative examples of penalties in
penalty next lower to that prescribed' for the offense. special laws hereinbefore provided, this rule applied,
The penalty next lower should be based on the and would still apply, only to the first and last
penalty prescribed by the Code for the offense, examples. Furthermore, considering the vintage of
without first considering any modifying circumstance Act No. 4103 as earlier noted, this holding is but an
attendant to the commission of the crime. The application and is justified under the rule of
determination of the minimum penalty is left by law to contemporanea expositio. Republic Act No. 6425, as
the sound discretion of the court and it can be now amended by Republic Act No. 7659, has
anywhere within the range of the penalty next lower unqualifiedly adopted the penalties under the
without any reference to the periods into which it Revised Penal Code in their technical terms, hence
might be subdivided. The modifying circumstances with their technical signification and effects. In fact,
are considered only in the imposition of the for purposes of determining the maximum of said
maximum term of the indeterminate sentence. sentence, we have applied the provisions of the
"The fact that the amounts involved in the instant amended Section 20 of said law to arrive at prision
case exceed P22,000.00 should not be considered in correccional and Article 64 of the Code to impose the
the initial determination of the indeterminate penalty; same in the medium period. Such offense, although
instead, the matter should be so taken as analogous provided for in a special law, is now in the effect
to modifying circumstances in the imposition of the punished by and under the Revised Penal Code.
maximum term of the full indeterminate sentence. (People v Martin Simon)
This interpretation of the law accords with the rule
that penal laws should be construed in favor of the WHEN THE BENEFITS OF INDETERMINATE
accused. Since the penalty prescribed by law for the SENTENCE LAW IS NOT APPLICABLE;
estafa charge against accused-appellant is prision
correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum, a. Offenses punished by death or life imprisonment.
the penalty next lower would then be prision b. Those convicted of treason (Art. 114), conspiracy
correccional minimum to medium. Thus, the or proposal to commit treason (Art. 115).
minimum term of the indeterminate sentence should c. Those convicted of misprision of treason (Art.
be anywhere within six (6) months and one (1) day to 116), rebellion (Art. 134), sedition (Art. 139), or
four (4) years and two (2) months . . ." espionage
(People v. Saley; GR 121179, July 2, ’98) (Art. 117).
d. Those convicted of piracy (Art. 122).
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW; APPLICABLE e. Habitual delinquents (Art. 62, par. 5).
ALSO IN DRUG CASES: f. Those who escaped from confinement or those
The final query is whether or not the Indeterminate who evaded sentence.
Sentence Law is applicable to the case now before g. Those granted conditional pardon and who
us. Apparently it does, since drug offenses are not violated the terms of the same (Art. 159). (People v.
included in nor has appellant committed any act Corral, 74 Phil. 359).
which would put him within the exceptions to said h. Those whose maximum period of imprisonment
law and the penalty to be imposed does not involve does not exceed one year.
reclusion perpetua or death, provided, of course, that i. Those who are already serving final judgment upon
the penalty as ultimately resolved will exceed one the approval of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
year of imprisonment. The more important aspect, j. those offenses or crimes not punishable by
however, is how the indeterminate sentence shall be imprisonment such as distierro and suspension.
SPL NOTES

the penalty of life imprisonment. Where the law

RECIDIVISTS ARE ENTITLED TO THE BENEFITS imposes the penalty of life imprisonment, do not
OF THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE impose reclusion perpetua. (People -vs- Rolando
Recidivists are entitled to an indeterminate sentence. Madriaga, 211 SCRA 698)
(People v. Jaramilla, L-28547, Feb. 22, 1974).
Offender is not disqualified to avail of the benefits of THE REASON WHY RECLUSION PERPETUA HAS
the law even if the crime is committed while he is on A RANGE DESPITE THE SAME BEING
parole. (People v. Clareon, CA 78 O.G. 6701, Nov. INDIVISIBLE
19, 1982). (Bacar v. De Guzman)
There we also said that "if reclusion perpetua was
NATURE OF PENALTY OF RECLUSION reclassified as a divisible penalty, then Article 63 of
PERPETUA the Revised Penal Code would lose its reason and
In "People -vs- Conrado Lucas, 240 SCRA 66, the basis for existence." The imputed duration of thirty
Supreme Court declared that despite the (30) years of reclusion perpetua, therefore, only
amendment of Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, serves as the basis for determining the convict's
reclusion perpetua remained an indivisible penalty. eligibility for pardon or for the application of the
Hence, the penalty does not have any minimum, three-fold rule in the service of multiple penalties.
medium and maximum period. Hence, there is no (People -vs- Aspolinar Raganas, et al., GR No.
such penalty of medium period of reclusion perpetua. 101188, October 12, 1999)
(People versus Tiburcio Baculi, 246 SCRA)

IMPOSITION OF WRONG PENALTY: IT DOES NOT RARE CASE OF APPLICATION OF RPC IN A

OBTAIN FINALITY SUPPLETORY CHARACTER DESPITE THE
Suppose the court imposed a penalty of 25 years of PENALTY BEING LIFE IMPRISONMENT
reclusion perpetua for the crime of rape and the
accused did not appeal, does the judgment become Where the accused committed qualified violation of
final and executory? No, such judgment is null and PD 704 (fishing with the use of explosives), the
void because it imposed a non-existent penalty. imposable penalty for which is life imprisonment to
Hence, the court may nevertheless correct the death. If the accused is entitled to a mitigating
penalty imposed on the accused, that is, reclusion circumstance of voluntary surrender, the court
perpetua, it is merely performing a duty inherent in should impose life imprisonment applying, in a
the court. (People versus Nigel Gatward, GR No. suppletory character, Articles 13 and 63 of the
119772-73, February 7, 1997) Revised Penal Code. (People -vs- Priscilla Balasa,
GR No. 106357, September 3, 1998)
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RECLUSION PERPETUA
AND LIFE IMPRISONMENT ACCUSED WHO IS SENTENCED TO RECLUSION
The penalty of reclusion perpetua is different from PERPETUA IS STILL ENTITLED TO EITHER FULL
life imprisonment. The former carries with it OR ¾ OF HIS PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT
accessory penalties, whereas life imprisonment does
not carry with it any accessory penalties; reclusion If, during the trial, the accused was detained but,
perpetua is that provided for under the Revised after trial, he was meted the penalty of reclusion
Penal Code and under crimes defined by special perpetua, he is still entitled to the full credit of his
laws using the nomenclature under the Revised preventive imprisonment because Article 29 of the
Penal Code ; life imprisonment is that provided for Revised Penal Code does not distinguish between
violations of the Revised Penal Code. Reclusion divisible and indivisible penalties. (People -vs-
Perpetua may be reduced by one or two degrees Rolando Corpuz, 231 SCRA 480)
while life imprisonment cannot be so reduced.
(People -vs- Rolnando Madriaga, GR No. 82293,
July 23, 1992.) QUALIFIED THEFT

WHICH IS MORE BURDENSOME LIFE

IMPRISONMENT OF RECLUSION PERPETUA QUALIFIED THEFT IS PENALIZED BY RECLUSION
Reclusion perpetua has accessory penalties while PERPETUA IF AMOUNT INVOLVED IS OVER
life imprisonment does not. However, life P22,000.00
imprisonment does not have a fixed duration or
extent while reclusion perpetua has a duration of Under Article 309 of the Revised Penal Code, the
from twenty years and one day to forty years. life maximum of the penalty for qualified theft is prision
imprisonment may span the natural life of the mayor to reclusion temporal. However, under Article
convict. (People -versus- Rallagan, 247 SCRA 537) 310 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for the
crime shall be two (2) degrees higher than the
RECLUSION PERPETUA AND LIFE specified in Article 309 of the Code. Under Article 74
IMPRISONMENT CANNOT BE INTER-CHANGE of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty higher by
WHEN IMPOSED AS PENALTY one degree than another given penalty, and if such
higher penalty is death, the penalty shall be reclusion
Where the law violated provides for the penalty of perpetua of forty (40) years with the accessory
reclusion perpetua, impose the said penalty and not penalties of death under Article 40 of the Revised
SPL NOTES

Penal Code. The accused shall not be entitled to IN CASE THE APPLICANT FOR PROBATION
pardon before the lapse of forty (40) years. (People CANNOT BE PRODUCED BY THE CUSTODIAN
-vs- Fernando Canales, 297 SCRA 667) ON RECOGNIZANCE, WHAT HAPPENS?

The custodian must be asked to explain why he

THE PROBATION LAW (P.D. 968) AND ITS should not be cited for contempt for failing to
AMENDMENTS produce the probationer when required by the court;
Summary hearing will be held for indirect contempt,
PROBATION, ITS MEANING and if custodian cannot produce the petitioner, nor to
explain his failure to produce the petitioner, the
A disposition under which a defendant, after custodian on recognizance shall be held in contempt
conviction and sentence, is subject to conditions of court.
imposed by the Court and under the supervision of a
probation officer. WHAT IS A POST SENTENCE INVESTIGATION
REPORT?
PURPOSES OF PROBATION:
a. to promote the correction and rehabilitation of an It is a report of the Parole and Probation Officer after
offender by providing him with personalized conducting post sentence investigation and
community based treatment; interviews containing the circumstances surrounding
b. to provide an opportunity for his reformation and the offense for which the petitioner was convicted.
reintegration into the community; The findings should be drawn from the court records,
c. to prevent the commission of offenses. police records, statement of defendants, the
aggrieved party and other persons who may know
the petitioner and all other matters material to the
SUBMISSION OF PETITION AND TIME OF FILING petition.
OFPETITION
It will also include the psychological and social
The petition or application for probation must be filed information regarding the probationer; evaluation of
directly with the Court which sentenced the accused the petitioner; suitability for probation; his potential
within 15 days from date of promulgation of the for rehabilitation; and may include the program for
decision convicting the accused, or in short within supervision and suggested terms of conditions of
the period to appeal otherwise the judgment shall probation and a recommendation either to deny or
become final and the accused shall be deemed to grant the probation.
have waived his right to probation.
WHAT ARE THE MANDATORY CONDITIONS OF
EFFECT OF FILING OF PETITION FOR PROBATION?
PROBATION
a. To present himself to the probation officer
Upon filing of petition for probation, the court shall concerned for supervision within 72 hours from
suspend the execution of sentence. receipt of said
order and
Likewise, the filing of a petition for probation shall be
deemed a waiver of the right to appeal and in case b. to report to the probation officer at least once a
an appeal is made immediately after conviction, a month during the period of probation.
filing of petition for probation still within the period to
appeal, that is within fifteen days from date of WHAT ARE THE OTHER CONDITIONS OF
promulgation shall be deemed a withdrawal of the PROBATION?
appeal.
a. cooperate with a program of supervision;
PENDING RESOLUTION OF PETITION, WHAT b. meet his family responsibilities;
ARE THE PRIVILEDGE THAT MAYBE GIVEN TO c. devote himself to a specific employment and not to
THE ACCUSED-PETITIONER? charge said employment without prior written
approval of the probation officer;
1. if the accused, prior to the promulgation of d. comply with a program of payment of civil liability
decision of conviction is out on bail, he may be to the victim of his heirs;
allowed on e. undergo medical, psychological or psychiatric
temporary liberty under his bail filed in said case; examination and treatment and/or enter and remain
2. if he is under detention, upon motion, he may be in a
allowed temporary liberty, if he cannot post a bond, specific institution, when required for that purposes;
on f. pursue a prescribed secular study or vocational
recognizance of a responsible member of a training;
community who shall guarantee his appearance g. attend or reside in a facility established for
whenever instruction or recreation of persons on probation;
required by the court. h. refrain from visiting houses of ill-repute;
i. abstain from drinking intoxicating beverages to
excess;
SPL NOTES

j. permit the probation officer or an authorized social six thousand pesos shall be imposed upon any
worker to visit his home and place of work; person who violates Section 17 hereof.
k. reside at premises approved by the court and not
to change his residence w/o prior written approval; MODIFICATION OF CONDITION OR PERIOD OF
and PROBATION
l. satisfy any other condition related to the
rehabilitation of the probationer and not unduly The court, on motion, or motu propio may modify the
restrictive of his conditions of probation or modify the period of
liberty or incompatible with his freedom of probation as circumstances may warrant.
conscience.
m. plant trees ( see circular of the SC )
WHO ARE DISQUALIFIED TO UNDERGO
PROBATION

RULES ON OUTSIDE TRAVEL OF PROBATIONER 1. Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of

imprisonment of more than six years.
A probationer who desires to travel outside the 2. Those convicted of any offense against the
jurisdiction of the city or provincial probation officer security of the state;
for not more than 30 days, the permission of the 3. Those who have been previously convicted by
parole and probation officer must be sought. If for final judgment of an offense punished by
more than thirty (30) days, aside from the permission imprisonment of not less than one moth and one day
of the parole and probation officer, the permission of and/or a fine of not less than P200.00;
the court must likewise be sought. 4. Those who have been once on probation under
the provisions of this decree.
EFFECT OF APPEAL BY THE ACCUSED OF HIS 5. Those convicted of RA 9156.
CONVICTION 6. Those convicted of violation of election laws.

a. If the accused appeals his conviction for the PERIOD OF PROBATION

purpose of totally reversing his conviction, he is
deemed to have waived his right to probation. 1. If the probationer has been sentenced to an
imprisonment of not more than one year, the
b. The rule that if the accused appeals his conviction probation shall not exceed two years;
only with respect to the penalty, as he believes the 2. In all other cases, not to exceed six years;
penalty is excessive or wrong, as the penalty is 3. In case the penalty is fine, the probation shall not
probationable, and the appellate court sustains the be less than the period of subsidiary imprisonment
accused may still apply for probation, has already nor more than twice of the subsidiary imprisonment.
been abandoned. An appeal therefore, irrespective
of its purpose, to overturn the entire decision or only AMENDMENT TO SECTION 4 OF PD 968:
with respect to penalty is a waiver to probation, has
already been abandoned. An appeal therefore, "Sec. 4. Grant of Probation. - Subject to the
irrespective of its purpose, to overturn the entire provisions of this Decree, the trial court may, after it
decision or only with respect to penalty is a waiver to shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant,
probation. and upon application by said defendant within the
period for perfecting an appeal, suspend the
CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS OF execution of the sentence and place the defendant
PROBATION on probation for such period and upon such terms
and conditions as it may deem best; Provided, That
The investigation report and the supervision and no application for probation shall be entertained or
history of a probationer obtained under PD No. 968 granted if the defendant has perfected the appeal
and under these rules shall be privileged and shall from the judgment of conviction.
not be disclosed directly or indirectly to anyone other
than the probation administration or the court "Probation may be granted whether the sentence
concerned the court which granted the probation or imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. An
where the probation was transferred may allow the application for probation shall be filed with the trial
probationer to inspect the aforesaid documents or court. The filing of the application shall be deemed a
his lawyer, whenever such disclosure may be waiver of the right to appeal.
desirable or helpful to them.
"An order granting or denying probation shall not be
Any government office may ask for the records of appealable."
probation from the court for its official use or from the
administrator. Thus, a person who was sentenced to destierro
cannot apply for probation. Reason: it does not
Sec. 29, PD 968: VIOLATION OF CONFIDENTIAL involved imprisonment or fine. (PD 1990)
NATURE OF PROBATION RECORDS. The penalty
of imprisonment ranging from six months and one
day to six years and a fine ranging from hundred to JURISPRUDENCE
SPL NOTES

Although an order denying probation is not

UNDERLYING PHILOSOPHY OF PROBATION appealable, the accused may file a motion for
Certiorari from said order (Heirs of Francisco Abueg
The underlying philosophy of probation is indeed one v. C.A., 219 SCRA 78)
of liberality towards the accused. It is not served by a
harsh and stringent interpretation of the statutory
provisions. Probation is a major step taken by our EFFECT OF FILING PETITION FOR PROBATION,
Government towards the deterrence and minimizing WAIVER OF RIGHT TO APPEAL AND FINALITY OF
of crime and the humanization of criminal justice. In JUDGEMENT
line with the public policy behind probation, the right
of appeal should not be irrevocably lost from the A judgment of conviction becomes final when the
moment a convicted accused files an application for accused files a petition for probation. However, the
probation. Appeal and probation spring from the judgement is not executory until the petition for
same policy considerations of justice, humanity, and probation is resolved. The filing of the petition for
compassion. (Yusi v Morales, 4/28/83) probation is a waiver by the accused of his right to
appeal the judgement of conviction (Heirs of
Francisco Abueg v. C.A., supra).
PROBATION IS NOT A RIGHT BUT A PRIVILEGE

Probation is a mere privilege and its grant rests MULTIPLE CONVICTIONS IN SEVERAL CASES
solely upon the discretion of the court. As aptly noted PROBATIONABLE IF PENALTY FOR EACH
in U.S. vs. Durken, this discretion is to be exercised CONVICTION IS PROBATIONABLE
primarily for the benefit of organized society and only
incidentally for the benefit of the accused. (Tolentino ." Evidently, the law does not intend to sum up the
v. Alconcel, G.R. No. 63400, 3/18/83). Even if a penalties imposed but to take each penalty,
convicted person is not included in the list of separately and distinctly with the others.
offenders disqualified from the benefits of a decree, Consequently, even if petitioner was supposed to
the grant of probation is nevertheless not automatic have served his prison term of one (1) year and one
or ministerial, (Pablo Bernardo v. Balagot, 215 SCRA (1) day to one (1) year and eight (8) months of
526) therefore a petition for probation may be denied prision correccional sixteen (16) times as he was
by the Court. sentenced to serve the prison term for "each crime
committed on each date of each case, as alleged in
the information(s)," and in each of the four (4)
MAIN CRITERION FOR DETERMINING WHO MAY informations, he was charged with having defamed
BE GRANTED PROBATION. the four (4) private complainants on four (4) different,
separate days, he was still eligible for probation, as
The main criterion laid down by the Probation law in each prison term imposed on petitioner was
determining who may be granted probation is based probationable. (Francisco v. CA; 4/16/95)
on the penalty imposed and not on the nature of the
crime. By the relative lightness of the offense, as
measured by the penalty imposed, more than by its REASON FOR FIXING CUT OFF POINT AT A
nature, as the law so ordains the offender is not such MAXIMUM OF SIX YEARS IMPRISONMENT FOR
a serious menace to society as to be wrested away PROBATION.
therefrom, as the more dangerous type of criminals
should be. Hence, in the case at bar, the first reason Fixing the cut-off point at a maximum term of six (6)
given by the respondent judge for his denial of the years imprisonment for probation is based on the
petition for probation that, "probation will depreciate assumption that those sentenced to higher penalties
the seriousness of the offense committed" would pose too great a risk to society, not just because of
thus be writing into the law a new ground for their demonstrated capability for serious wrongdoing
disqualifying a first-offender from the benefits of but because of the gravity and serious
probation. (Santos v. Cruz-Pano, 1/17/83) consequences of the offense they might further
commit. The Probation Law, as amended,
disqualifies only those who have been convicted of
TIMELINESS OF FILING APPLICATION FOR grave felonies as defined in Art. 9 in relation to Art.
PROBATION 25 of The Revised Penal Code, and not necessarily
those who have been convicted of multiple offenses
The accused must file a Petition for Probation within in a single proceeding who are deemed to be less
the period for appeal. If the decision of conviction perverse. Hence, the basis of the disqualification is
has become final and executory, the accused is principally the gravity of the offense committed and
barred from filing a Petition for Probation (Pablo the concomitant degree of penalty imposed. Those
Francisco v. C.A., 4/6/95). sentenced to a maximum term not exceeding six (6)
years are not generally considered callous, hard core
criminals, and thus may avail of probation
ORDER DENYING PROBATION NOT
APPEALABLE, REMEDY CERTIORARI
SPL NOTES

VIOLATION OF RA 6425, A VALID CAUSE FOR temerarious and uncalculating. Let it be stressed to
DISMISSAL IN SERVICE IN THE GOVERNMENT herein petitioner that the lawyer's oath is not a mere
DESPITE PROBATION formality recited for a few minutes in the glare of
flashing cameras and before the presence of select
Drug-pushing, as a crime, has been variously witnesses. Petitioner is exhorted to conduct himself
condemned as "an especially vicious crime," "one of beyond reproach at all times and to live strictly
the most pernicious evils that has ever crept into our according to his oath and the Code of Professional
society." For those who become addicted to it "not Responsibility. And, to paraphrase Mr. Justice
only slide into the ranks of the living dead, what is Padilla's comment in the sister case of Re: Petition of
worse, they become a grave menace to the safety of Al Argosino To Take The Lawyer's Oath, Bar Matter
law-abiding members of society," while "peddlers of No. 712, March 19, 1997, "[t]he Court sincerely
drugs are actually agents of destruction. The hopes that" Mr. Cuevas, Jr., "will continue with the
deserve no less than the maximum penalty [of assistance he has been giving to his community. As
death]." a lawyer he will now be in a better position to render
legal and other services to the more unfortunate
There is no doubt that drug-pushing is a crime which members of society". (In Re: Cuevas, Jr.; 1/27/98)
involves moral turpitude and implies "every thing
which is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty
or good morals" including "acts of baseness, EXPIRATION OF PERIOD OF PROBATION IS NOT
vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties TERMINATION, ORDER OF COURT REQUIRED
which a man owes to his fellowmen or to society in
general, contrary to the accepted rule of right and The mere expiration of the period for probation does
duty between man and man." Indeed nothing is more not, ipso facto, terminate the probation. Probation is
depraved than for anyone to be a merchant of death not co-terminus with its period, there must be an
by selling prohibited drugs, an act which, as this order from the Court of final discharge, terminating
Court said in one case,"often breeds other crimes. It the probation. If the accused violates the condition of
is not what we might call a 'contained' crime whose the probation before the issuance of said order, the
consequences are limited to that crime alone, like probation may be revoked by the Court (Manuel Bala
swindling and bigamy. Court and police records v. Martinez, 181 SCRA 459).
show that a significant number of murders, rapes,
and similar offenses have been committed by
persons under the influence of dangerous drugs, or
while they are 'high.' While spreading such drugs,
the drug-pusher is also abetting, through his agreed
and irresponsibility, the commission of other crimes."
The image of the judiciary is tarnished by conduct,
which involves moral turpitude. While indeed the
purpose of the Probation Law (P.D. No. 968, as
amended) is to save valuable human material, it
must not be forgotten that unlike pardon probation
does not obliterate the crime of which the person
under probation has been convicted. The reform and
rehabilitation of the probationer cannot justify his
retention in the government service. He may seek to
reenter government service, but only after he has
shown that he is fit to serve once again. It cannot be
repeated too often that a public office is a public
trust, which demands of those in its service the
highest degree of morality. (OCA v. Librado 260
SCRA 624, 8/22/96)

PETITIONER MAY STILL EXHORT OFFENDER TO

PERFORM CERTAIN ACTS DESPITE DISCHARGE
FROM PROBATION IN CERTAIN CASES

Petitioner Arthur M. Cuevas, Jr.'s discharge from

probation without any infraction of the attendant
conditions therefor and the various certifications
attesting to his righteous, peaceful and civic-oriented
character prove that he has taken decisive steps to
purge himself of his deficiency in moral character
and atone for the unfortunate death of Raul I.
Camaligan. The Court is prepared to give him the
benefit of the doubt, taking judicial notice of the
general tendency of the youth to be rash,