Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    People vs. Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Michael A. Berturan
    Romeo Gonzales was charged with two criminal cases for possession and selling of marijuana in 1991. He was found guilty by the trial court and sentenced to 6 years and 1 day imprisonment and a fine for the possession charge, and life imprisonment and a fine for the selling charge. Gonzales appealed, arguing that the death penalty law passed in 1993 should apply retroactively to his case from 1991. However, the court ruled that an amendatory law cannot be applied retroactively unless it is favorable to the accused. As the death penalty would impose a heavier penalty, it did not apply retroactively to Gonzales' case. The trial court's decision of life imprisonment was therefore affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People vs. Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Michael A. Berturan
    1K views2 pages
    Romeo Gonzales was charged with two criminal cases for possession and selling of marijuana in 1991. He was found guilty by the trial court and sentenced to 6 years and 1 day imprisonment and a fine for the possession charge, and life imprisonment and a fine for the selling charge. Gonzales appealed, arguing that the death penalty law passed in 1993 should apply retroactively to his case from 1991. However, the court ruled that an amendatory law cannot be applied retroactively unless it is favorable to the accused. As the death penalty would impose a heavier penalty, it did not apply retroactively to Gonzales' case. The trial court's decision of life imprisonment was therefore affirmed.

    Original Title

    People Vs. Gonzales

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Romeo Gonzales was charged with two criminal cases for possession and selling of marijuana in 1991. He was found guilty by the trial court and sentenced to 6 years and 1 day imprisonment and a fine for the possession charge, and life imprisonment and a fine for the selling charge. Gonzales appealed, arguing that the death penalty law passed in 1993 should apply retroactively to his case from 1991. However, the court ruled that an amendatory law cannot be applied retroactively unless it is favorable to the accused. As the death penalty would impose a heavier penalty, it did not apply retroactively to Gonzales' case. The trial court's decision of life imprisonment was therefore affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views2 pages

    People vs. Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Michael A. Berturan
    Romeo Gonzales was charged with two criminal cases for possession and selling of marijuana in 1991. He was found guilty by the trial court and sentenced to 6 years and 1 day imprisonment and a fine for the possession charge, and life imprisonment and a fine for the selling charge. Gonzales appealed, arguing that the death penalty law passed in 1993 should apply retroactively to his case from 1991. However, the court ruled that an amendatory law cannot be applied retroactively unless it is favorable to the accused. As the death penalty would impose a heavier penalty, it did not apply retroactively to Gonzales' case. The trial court's decision of life imprisonment was therefore affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Subject: Criminal Law 1

    Topic: Prospective Application


    Title: People Vs. Gonzales
    Citation: G.R. Nos. 113255-56

    FACTS:

    On February 27, 1991, Asst. Provincial Prosecutor Jaime J. Bustos of Pampanga filed
    with the Regional Trial Court, Angeles two informations charging accused Romeo
    Gonzales y Sun with violation of R.A. No. 6425, Sections 8 4 and 4,5 reading as follows:

    Crim. Case No. 91-180 on the possession, custody and control two (2) block size of
    marijuana weighing 1.5 kilos more or less and ten (10) medium size plastic bags of dry
    marijuana weighing 300 grams more or less.

    Crim. Case No. 91-181 on selling more or less one (1) kilo of high-grade marijuana, for
    and in consideration of the amount of ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS
    (P1,200.00).

    Early in February 1991, the police in Agusu, Brgy. San Francisco, Mabalacat,
    Pampanga received an information that accused Romeo Gonzales was selling large
    quantities of marijuana. They conducted a surveillance for four (4) days. On February
    13, 1991, they conducted a buy-bust operation. 8

    After the arrest, the team brought accused Gonzales to their office for interrogation. Pfc.
    Cruz informed him of his constitutional rights. Pfc. Cruz testified that accused Gonzales
    orally admitted that he was selling marijuana to different buyers, but claimed that
    somebody else owned the marijuana he sold. When asked to identify the owner, he kept
    silent. He also refused to give a written statement, so Pfc. Cruz proceeded to prepare
    the charges against him.21

    On July 5, 1993, the trial court rendered a decision finding the accused guilty as
    charged, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:

    "WHEREFORE, considering that the prosecution has abundantly established the


    guilt of the accused by proof beyond reasonable doubt, judgment is hereby
    rendered finding accused ROMEO GONZALES y SUN guilty beyond reasonable
    doubt for Violation of Sections 8 and 4, Art. II., R. A. 6425, and hereby
    accordingly imposes upon him the penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years and
    one (1) day and a fine of P6,000.00 with regard Criminal Case No. 91-180 and
    the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P20,000.00 with regard Criminal
    Case No. 91-181.
    Issue:

    WON Death Penalty Law in so far as prospective application of the law applicable to
    Criminal Case No. 91-181.

    Ruling:

    NO, under our criminal justice system, an amendatory law can not be given retroactive
    effect unless it is favorable to the accused. In the case at bar, accused-appellant,
    therefore, shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment imposed by the trial court.

    Decision:

    The decision appealed from is AFFIRMED. In Criminal Case No. 91-181, the accused-
    appellant is sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P20,000.00.

    Note: Death Penalty Law was approved on December 13, 1993. The commission of
    crime was on February 13, 1991. DPL cannot retroactively apply as it imposes a
    heavier penalty against the accused-appellant.

    You might also like