Self Digest - HErnan and Elbambuena

Case: IN RE: CORRECTION/ADJUSTMENT OF PENALTY PURSUANT TO REPUBLIC ACT
NO. 10951, IN RELATION TO HERNAN V. SANDIGANBAYAN [G.R. No. 237721, July 31,
2018]
Facts of the Case:
Petitioner Elbanbuena worked as a Disbursing Officer of Alingilan National High School in
Alingilan, Bacolod. He was charged with four counts of malversation of public funds through
falsification of a public document under Articles 217 and 171 in relation to Article 48 of the
Revised Penal Code (RPC). After trial, Elbanbuena was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt
of the crimes charged in the Information.4
Since Elbanbuena did not appeal the ruling, it became final and executory on August 10, 2000.6
On January 9, 2003, Elbanbuena started serving his sentence at the New Bilibid Prison in
Muntinlupa City.7
On August 29, 2017, RA No. 10951 was promulgated. It amended Act No. 3815, otherwise
known as the Revised Penal Code, and reduced the penalties for certain crimes.
Hence, this petition which seeks, among others, the modification, in conformity with RA No.
10951, of the Decision10 dated July 5, 2000 rendered by Branch 41 of the Regional Trial Court
of Bacolod City and, pursuant thereto, Elbanbuena's immediate release from confinement.
In a Resolution11 dated April3, 2018, this Court required the Office of the Solicitor General
(OSG) to comment on the petition (and its consolidated cases) and recommend guidelines
relative thereto and similar petitions.
On July 4, 2018, the OSG filed its consolidated comment wherein it agreed that petitioners may
invoke RA No. 10951 to seek a modification/reduction of the penalties for some of the crimes for
which they are presently serving sentence. The OSG, however, took the position that
Elbanbuena (and the other petitioners similarly situated) may not be immediately released at
this point.
12. x x x While R.A. No. 10951 did reduce the imposable penalties for petitioners'
crimes under the RPC, the reduced penalties to be actually imposed for these
crimes have yet to be fixed by a court of competent jurisdiction.
13. The determination of whether petitioners are now entitled to be released
requires that the court exercising jurisdiction over this petition first: (a) fix the new
penalties for the crimes for which petitioners are presently serving sentence, as
provided under R.A. No. 10951; and, thereafter (b) ascertain whether petitioners
have indeed fully served their respective sentences based on such new
penalties. Both have yet to be made.12 (Italics in the original.)
petitioner Elbanbuena here seeks not only a modification of his sentence in accordance with RA
No. 10951; he also seeks immediate release from confinement on account of his alleged full
service of the re-computed sentence.
Guidelines Issued:
Scope:
These guidelines shall govern the procedure for actions seeking (1) the modification, based on
the amendments introduced by RA No. 10951, of penalties imposed by final judgments; and, (2)
the immediate release of the petitioner-convict on account of full service of the
penalty/penalties, as modified.
Who may file
The Public Attorney's Office, the concerned inmate, or his/her counsel/representative, may file
the petition.
Where to file.
The petition shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court exercising territorial jurisdiction over the
locality where the petitioner-convict is confined. The case shall be raffled and referred to the
branch to which it is assigned within three (3) days from the filing of the petition.
Pleadings.
The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the petition and the comment from the OSG. No
motions for extension of time, or other dilatory motions for postponement, shall be allowed. The
petition must contain a certified true copy of the Decision sought to be modified and, where
applicable, the mittimus and/or a certification from the Bureau of Corrections as to the length of
the sentence already served by petitioner-convict.
Verification.- The petition must be in writing and verified by the petitioner-convict himself.
Comment by the OSG. Within ten (10) days from notice, the OSG shall file its comment to the
petition.
Effect of failure to file comment. - Should the OSG fail to file the comment within the period
provided, the court, motu proprio, or upon motion of the petitioner-convict, shall render judgment
as may be warranted.
Judgment of the court.
To avoid any prolonged imprisonment, the court shall promulgate judgment no later than ten
(10) calendar days after the lapse of the period to file comment. The judgment shall set forth the
following:
a. The penalty/penalties imposable in accordance with RA No. 10951 (AN ACT
ADJUSTING THE AMOUNT OR THE VALUE OF PROPERTY AND DAMAGE ON
WHICH A PENALTY IS BASED, AND THE FINES IMPOSED UNDER THE REVISED
PENAL CODE, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE
KNOWN AS "THE REVISED PENAL CODE", AS AMENDED)
b. Where proper, the length of time the petitioner-convict has been in confinement (and
whether time allowance for good conduct should be allowed
c. Whether the petitioner-convict is entitled to immediate release due to complete service
of his sentence/s, as modified in accordance with RA No. 10951.
The judgment of the court shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to the filing before
the Supreme Court of a special civil action under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court where
there is showing of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
Applicability of the regular rules. - The Rules of Court shall apply to the special cases herein
provided in a suppletory capacity insofar as they are not inconsistent therewith.
Issues:
Whether the case of Elbambuena can be released pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act
(RA) No. 109512 and this Court's ruling in Hernan v. Sandiganbayan
Ruling of the Court:
remises considered, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated July 5, 2000 in Criminal
Cases Nos. 95-17263, 95-17264, 95-17265, and 95-17266 is hereby REMANDED to the
Regional Trial Court in Muntinlupa City for the determination of: (1) the proper penalty/penalties
in accordance with RA No. 10951; and (2) whether petitioner ROLANDO ELBANBUENA y
MARFIL is entitled to immediate release on account of full service of his sentences, as modified.

Self Digest - HErnan and Elbambuena

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Self Digest - HErnan and Elbambuena

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Self Digest - HErnan and Elbambuena

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case: IN RE: CORRECTION/ADJUSTMENT OF PENALTY PURSUANT TO REPUBLIC ACT

You might also like