IMPOSITION OF SEVERAL SENTENCES

It happens where an accused is charged for more than one crime. The consequence is
that he will be sentenced separately for each of those crimes, and he will have to serve
the penalty for each of those crimes also.

An issue to be resolved here is how the convict will serve multiple sentences: will it be
SUCCESSIVE or will it be SIMULTANEOUS?

In the successive service of sentence, the convict will serve one penalty after the other,
until all penalties have been served. The rule here is that the penalties must be
INCOMPATIBLE with each other.

In the simultaneous service of sentence, the convict may serve more than one sentence
at the same time. The rule here now is that the penalties must be COMPATIBLE with
each other.

Recall that the scale of penalties under Article 71 is for the graduation of penalties. For
this purpose now we must refer to Article 71 which provides for the scale of penalties
which must be served according to SEVERITY – start with the most severe penalty and
end with the least severe one.
WHAT PENALTIES MAY BE SERVED SIMULTANEOUSLY

The following penalties may be served AT THE SAME TIME:

1. Imprisonment and fine

2. Imprisonment and suspension
3. Imprisonment, suspension and fine
4. Imprisonment and disqualification whether temporary or perpetual
5. Imprisonment, disqualification, suspension and fine
6. Destierro and fine
7. Destierro and suspension
8. Destierro, suspension and fine
9. Destierro and disqualification whether temporary or perpetual
10. Destierro, disqualification, suspension and fine.
11. All of the above, with public censure.

These penalties are COMPATIBLE because while an accused is serving sentence or

destierro he may also pay the fine. At the same time the accused may be suspended
and disqualified.
WHAT PENALTIES MAY BE SERVED SUCCESSIVELY

Only the penalty if imprisonment must be served successively because no convict may
serve two or more prison sentences at the same time.

The goal of a penalty is to impose some sort of suffering to deter future wrongdoing. If a
convict is allowed to serve more than one sentence simultaneously it will seriously
degrade the seriousness of the offenses committed. For this purpose we apply Article 70
of the Revised Penal Code which provides the scale of penalties according to severity:

Death
Reclusion perpetua Note that death is still the most
Reclusion temporal grave penalty just because it is still
Prision mayor in the Revised Penal Code, while
Prision correccional public censure is the least severe
Arresto mayor penalty.
Arresto menor
Destierro
Perpetual absolute disqualification
Temporary absolute disqualification
Suspension from public office, of suffrage and to exercise profession
Public censure
From the scale below based on Article 70 of the RPC, we are shown the penalties that
must be served successively, or one after the other.

When the death penalty was still applicable, a convict sentenced to death would
have been considered to have served ALL incompatible sentences when the death
penalty was carried out, for very obvious reasons.

Under present law where the death

Death penalty is not applicable anymore the
Reclusion perpetua accused must first serve reclusion
Reclusion temporal perpetua. After completing its service, the
Prision mayor accused will continue to serve reclusion
Prision correccional temporal, then arresto mayor and so on
Arresto mayor until destierro.
Arresto menor
Destierro The accused may serve the penalties of
Perpetual absolute disqualification imprisonment and destierro along with
Temporary absolute disqualification disqualification, suspension and public
Suspension censure.
Public censure
IMPOSITION OF SEVERAL SENTENCES

Where more than one incompatible penalty is imposed by the Court, we note THREE
SYSTEMS OF PENALTY being observed under Philippine jurisdiction:

1. The Material Accumulation System;

2. The Juridical Accumulation System; and

3. The Absorption System.

FIRST: The Material Accumulation System

The Material Accumulation System is also known as the Theory of Absolute

Accumulation (paragraphs 1,2 and 3 of Article 70) where the court will impose as many
penalties as are imposable even of the entire duration of all those penalties would
exceed the lifetime of the convict.

For instance, for violation of R.A. 9165, the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act the
accused was sentenced to life imprisonment. For violation of R.A. 9208, the Anti-
Trafficking in Persons Act the accused was also sentenced to life imprisonment. For
commission of robbery with rape the accused was sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

While two life sentences and one sentence of reclusion perpetua would obviously last
beyond the convict’s lifetime, the court must impose those three penalties because our
law requires that a penalty be imposed for every conviction.

In another case, an accused was charged for 376 counts of violation of Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22 by issuing 376 worthless checks. She was sentenced to suffer 1 year
imprisonment for each count, or a total of 376 years.
SECOND: The Juridical Accumulation System

The Juridical Accumulation System is also known as the THREEFOLD RULE under
paragraph 4 of Article 70 which states that “the maximum duration of the convict’s
sentence shall not be more than threefold the length of time corresponding to the most
severe penalties imposed upon him, but in no case shall the maximum term of his
imprisonment exceed forty years.”

This rule applies only if there is more than one INCOMPATIBLE PENALTY imposed upon
the convict. In other words, this will apply if the convict is sentenced to suffer more
than one penalty of deprivation of liberty. The logical conclusion is that a subsidiary
penalty of imprisonment is also included. The rule applies also even if the convict was
sentenced to different penalties of deprivation of liberty by different courts, even by
courts located in different places.

Example: EDMOND was sentenced to suffer the following penalties of imprisonment:

12 years, 6 years, 2 years, 10 years and 8 years. The total years of his penalties is 38
years. The most severe penalty is 10 years and when multiplied threefold is 30 years.
Edmond should suffer 30 years only because under the rule, the maximum duration of
his sentence should not be more than threefold the duration of the most severe
penalty. The maximum term of his imprisonment is 38 years which is more than
threefold of the most severe penalty which is 30 years.
The Threefold Rule

In applying the Threefold Rule, observe the following guide:

1. Determine if the accused is sentenced to more than one incompatible penalty;

2. Determine the total duration of all the incompatible penalties;

3. Determine which among those penalties is the most severe;

4. Multiply the duration of the most severe penalty threefold;

5. Compare the TOTAL DURATION of all the penalties against the THREEFOLD
DURATION of the most severe penalty;

6. If the total duration is higher, the accused will suffer the threefold duration;

7. If the threefold duration is higher, the accused will suffer the total duration;

8. In no case shall the accused suffer imprisonment for more than 40 years.
THIRD: The Absorption System

Under the Absorption System, an accused who may have committed more than one
crime will only be made to suffer one penalty for all those crimes.

This system is applied in case of Complex Crimes under Article 48 of the Revised Penal
Code where a single act results to two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when the
commission of one crime is a necessary means to commit another crime. It also applies
to special complex crimes, such as robbery with homicide, robbery with rape and
robbery with violence. In this case, even if the accused may have actually committed
more than one crime he will be penalized with the penalty for the most severe crime,
imposed in its maximum. In case of a special complex crime the accused will be
sentenced to suffer a specific penalty specially provided by law.

This system is also applied in case of a continuing crime, where a series of crimes
committed by the same person will only be punished as one crime and subject to only
one penalty, as in the case where the accused defrauded all 40 members of a
cooperative. He will not be charged for each of the 40 cases of fraud – rather, he will be
charged for only once crime.
Reclusion Perpetua and Life Imprisonment

While the penalties of reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment may look and sound
the same, these two penalties, while sharing some similarities are in fact very
different from each other:

Comparison RECLUSION PERPETUA LIFE IMPRISONMENT

Source Revised Penal Code Special Penal Laws
Duration 20 years and 1 day to 40 years No specific duration
Nature Deprivation of liberty Deprivation of liberty
Divisibility No - Indivisible No - Indivisible
Limit 40 years 40 years

A convict sentenced for a felony under the Revised Penal Code should not be
sentenced to life imprisonment. Neither should a convict sentenced for an offense
under a special penal law be sentenced to reclusion perpetua.
RECLUSION PERPETUA AS AN INDIVISIBLE PENALTY

It must be noted that both reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment are both
INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES, which do not admit of a minimum, medium or maximum
period.

Hence, if a convict is sentenced to either reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment and

there is a mitigating or aggravating circumstance, these modifying circumstances will
not have any effect. Life imprisonment has no specific duration either by minimum or
maximum. Reclusion perpetua has a minimum, but legally, no maximum duration.

While reclusion perpetua has a specified duration of 20 years and 1 day to 40 years,
that is not intended to mean that the penalty is capable of division; rather, the range
of the penalty, “20 years and 1 day” is intended to distinguish reclusion perpetua
from reclusion temporal maximum, which ends at 20 years. It is intended only to
mark the boundary from where reclusion temporal ends and where reclusion
perpetua starts. The other end of the range of reclusion perpetua, which is “40 years”
may have been intended to mark the limit where a convict may remain imprisoned.
Recall that under the Threefold Rule, it is stated that “in no case shall a convict
remain imprisoned for more than 40 years.”
RECLUSION PERPETUA AS AN INDIVISIBLE PENALTY

Query: What is the legal duration of reclusion perpetua?

Answer: Art. 27 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by R.A. 7659 provides that
reclusion perpetua shall be from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.

Query: Is Reclusion perpetua a divisible or indivisible penalty?

Answer: R.A. 7659 (1993) appeared to have reclassified reclusion perpetua as a

divisible penalty by amending Art. 27 of the RPC and giving it a legal duration of 20
years and 1 day to 40 years.

But in People of the Philippines vs. Conrado Briones Lucas (232 SCRA 537, GR No.
108172-73, January 9, 1995), the Supreme Court resolved that reclusion perpetua is
still an indivisible penalty because Congress, in enacting R.A. 7659 did not have the
intention to make it divisible (Note that Art. 63 was not amended)
RECLUSION PERPETUA AS AN INDIVISIBLE PENALTY

Query: What is the purpose why Art. 27 fixes reclusion perpetua at 20 years and 1
day to 40 years?

Answer: The minimum was fixed to distinguish it from reclusion temporal. In

reclusion perpetua, 20 years and 1 day is the minimum (because 20 years is reclusion
temporal maximum)

Under Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code, the THREE-FOLD RULE states that if the
convict must serve successive sentences, the maximum should not be more than
threefold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties, but in
no case shall exceed 40 years.

The maximum of 40 years indicated in Art. 27 referring to reclusion perpetua is by

ANALOGY, in reference to Art. 70. Reclusion perpetua LEGALLY still has no maximum
duration.