FIRST DIVISION
ZACARIA A.
CANDAO, ABAS A. CANDAO
AND ISRAEL B.
HARON, Petitioners, - versus - |
G.R. Nos. 186659-710 Present: CORONA,
C.J., Chairperson, BERSAMIN, DEL
CASTILLO, VILLARAMA,
JR., and SERENO,* JJ. |
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND
SANDIGANBAYAN, Respondents. |
Promulgated: February 1, 2012 |
x-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -x
RESOLUTION
VILLARAMA, JR., J.:
Acting on the motion for reconsideration
of our Decision dated October 19, 2011 filed by the petitioners, the Court
finds no compelling reason to warrant reversal of the said decision which
affirmed with modifications the conviction of petitioners for malversation of
public funds.
However, the suggestion of our
esteemed colleague, Justice Lucas P. Bersamin to correct the maximum of the indeterminate sentence,
which our decision erroneously fixed at 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal medium, is
well-taken. Justice Bersamin explained the matter as follows:
The
penalty of imprisonment prescribed for malversation when the amount involved
exceeds P22,000.00 is reclusion temporal in its maximum period
to reclusion perpetua. Such penalty is not composed of three periods.
Pursuant to Article 65 of the Revised
Penal Code, when the penalty prescribed by law is not composed of three
periods, the court shall apply the rules contained in the articles of the Revised Penal Code preceding Article 65,
dividing
into three equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed, and
forming one period of each of the three portions. Accordingly, reclusion perpetua being indivisible, is at once the maximum
period, while reclusion temporal in
its maximum period is divided into two to determine the medium and minimum
periods of the penalty.
Conformably
with Article 65, therefore, the periods of reclusion temporal in its maximum period
to reclusion perpetua are the
following:
Minimum period - 17
years, 4 months, and 1 day to
18 years, 8 months;
Medium period - 18
years, 8 months, and 1 day to
20 years;
Maximum period - Reclusion perpetua
With
the Court having found no modifying circumstances -- whether aggravating or modifying to be
present, the maximum of the indeterminate sentence should be taken
from the medium period of the
penalty, i.e., from 18 years, 8 months, and 1 day to 20 years.
x
x x x
WHEREFORE,
the motion for reconsideration filed by the petitioners is DENIED.
The brief discussion on penalty and
the dispositive portion of our October 19, 2011 Decision, are hereby amended to
read as follows:
Under
Article 217, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, the
penalty of reclusion temporal in its
maximum period to reclusion perpetua shall
be imposed if the amount involved exceeds P22,000.00, in addition to fine equal
to the funds malversed. Considering that
neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstance attended the crime charged, the
maximum imposable penalty shall be within the range of the medium period of reclusion temporal maximum to reclusion perpetua, or eighteen (18)
years, eight (8) months and one (1) day to twenty (20) years. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the
minimum penalty, which is one degree lower from the maximum imposable penalty,
shall be within the range of prision
mayor maximum to reclusion temporal medium,
or ten (10) years and one (1) day to seventeen (17) years and four (4)
months. The penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan was therefore proper and
correct.
WHEREFORE,
the petition for review on certiorari is DENIED for lack of merit. The Decision
dated October 29, 2008 in Criminal Case Nos. 24569 to 24574, 24575, 24576 to
24584, 24585 to 24592, 24593, 24594,
24595 to 24620 finding petitioners guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
of Malversation of Public Funds under Article 217, paragraph 4 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended, and the Resolution dated February 20, 2009 of the
Sandiganbayan (First Division), denying petitioners motion for reconsideration
are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that in
addition to the payment of the fine ordered by the Sandiganbayan, and by way of
restitution, the petitioners are likewise ordered to pay, jointly and
severally, the Republic of the Philippines through the ARMM-Regional Treasurer,
the total amount of P21,045,570.64 malversed funds as finally determined by the
COA.
In
the service of their respective sentences, the petitioners shall be entitled to
the benefit of the three-fold rule as provided in Article 70 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended.
With
costs against the petitioners.
SO
ORDERED.
SO ORDERED.
|
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR. Associate
Justice |
WE
CONCUR: RENATO
C. CORONA Chief Justice Chairperson |
|
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Associate Justice |
MARIANO
C. DEL CASTILLO Associate Justice |
MARIA
LOURDES P. A. SERENO Associate Justice |
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII
of the 1987 Constitution, I certify that the conclusions in the above Resolution
had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of
the opinion of the Courts Division.
|
RENATO
C. CORONA Chief Justice |
|
* Designated
additional member per Raffle dated October 17, 2011 vice Associate Justice
Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro who recused herself from the case due to prior
action in the Sandiganbayan.