A.M. Matter No. 604-CFI February 20, 1981
TEOFILO A. HUMILDE, Assistant City Fiscal of Dagupan City; RODOLFO R. AQUINO, Assistant Provincial Fiscal of Pangasinan, and SANTOS B. ARREOLA, Practising Lawyer,
complainants,
vs.
JUDGE MAGNO B. PABLO of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, Alaminos, Branch XIII, respondent.
AQUINO, J.:
Two fiscals and a practising lawyer denounced respondent Judge for his mistakes in the imposition of penalties.
Judge Magno B. Pablo sentenced the accused in Criminal Case No. 161-A. People vs. Bustamante, to suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency although the indeterminate penalty imposed on the accused was four years, two months and one day of prision correccional as minimum to eight years of prision mayor as maximum.
The imposition of subsidiary imprisonment is contrary to the provision of article 39(3) of the Revised Penal Code that "when the principal penalty imposed is higher than prision correccional no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit".
Moreover, Republic Act No. 5465, which amended article 39 and which took effect on April 21, 1969, requires subsidiary imprisonment only for non-payment of the fine and not for the civil liability. Respondent Judge did not specify for what pecuniary liability the accused was being required to serve subsidiary imprisonment.
In Criminal Case No. L-122-A, People vs. Apolonio Tazal, Judge Pablo sentenced the accused to an indeterminate penalty of two months and one day as minimum to four months of arresto mayor as maximum.
That sentence is not sanctioned by the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Act No. 41003, as amended, whose section 2 provides that it does not apply "to those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year".
The plea of the respondent that those mistakes were committed in good faith does not exculpate him for his failure to familiarize himself with some elementary rules in the imposition of penalties.
He could have avoided those blunders if he had been more careful and assiduous in reading the Revised Penal Code and the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The fact that before his appointment as Judge he served as an assistant provincial fiscal of Tarlac makes his mistakes all the more inexcusable and deplorable. (He was admitted to the bar in 1963 and was appointed Judge in 1973.)
WHEREFORE, respondent Judge is severely censured or reprimanded for those errors and ordered to pay a fine equivalent to his salary for one month. He is warned that a more drastic disciplinary action would be taken against him for similar irregularities.
SO ORDERED.
Barredo, Concepcion, Jr., Abad Santos and De Castro, JJ., concur.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
