j) Pecuniary Liabilities (Article38)

Order of Payment - in case the property of the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities, the same shall be met in the following order:1) The reparation of the damage caused;2) Indemnification of consequential damages;3) Fine;4) Costs of the proceedings

Reparation – amount of the damage, taking into consideration the price of the thing, whenever possible, and its sentimental value to the injured party (Art. 106).

Indemnification of consequential damage – shall include not only those caused the injured party, but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by reason of the crime (Art. 107).

P50, 000 – death; unearned earnings.

k) Costs (Article 37)

Costs - shall include fees and indemnities in the course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be fixed or unalterable amounts previously determined by law or regulations in force, or amounts not subject to schedule.

If the convict has no property to pay the fine, he shall be a subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of 1 day for each P8.

Article 39: Subsidiary Penalty

Subsidiary penalty - a penalty that takes the place of a fine for insolvent convicts

It is neither a principal or accessory penalty, but a substitute penalty for fine only, subject to the following rules:1) If the principal penalty imposed is higher than PC – no subsidiary imprisonment;2) If the principal penalty imposed is PC or Arresto and Fine - shall remain under confinement until his fine is satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed 1/3 of the term of sentence and in no case continue for more than 1 year.

Example:Offender is sentenced to 6 years of PC and a P4,000 fine.Divide the number of days such fine of P4,000 at the rate of P8.00 per day = 500 days.

1/3 of 6 years = 2 years (730 days)500 days is lesser than the 1/3 term-730In no case will it exceed - 1 year – 365 days.So, the subsidiary imprisonment – 365 days

3) If the principal penalty is only Fine- the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed 6 mos., if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for grave or less grave felony, and shall exceed 15 days, if for a light felony.

Example:Penalty is P4, 000Divide this by P8.00 = 500 days.Fine of P4,000 is Less Grave - so the subsidiary imprisonment shall be limited only to 6 mos. or 180 days.

4) If the penalty is Fine and Destierro (not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution, but has a fixed duration) – computation is the same as in no. 1.5) Service of subsidiary imprisonment will not relieve the offender of his pecuniary liabilities to pay the fine if his financial position improves after his release.

Offender cannot be made to undergo the subsidiary imprisonment unless expressly provided in the judgment because this is not an accessory penalty.

Subsidiary imprisonment is not imprisonment for debt because the constitutional prohibition refers to debts incurred in the fulfilment of contracts.

Distinctions between Degree & Period of Penalty:Degree refers to the entire penalty imposable for a felony committed; period refers to the three equal portions - maximum, medium and minimum.

Significance of the 1 day – differentiates the gravity of a degree or period of penalty.Example: 6 years is PC; but 6 yrs. and 1 day is already PM.

Article 65: Rules in arriving the 3 periods for the divisible penalty

Subtract the minimum from the maximum;Divide by three to get the 3 periods

A) Prision Mayor - 6 yrs. & 1 day to 12 yearsMax = 12 – 6 = 6 / 3 = 2 yrs.Min = 6 plus 2 = 8 (6 yrs. & 1 day to 8 yrs)Med = 8 plus 2 = 10 (8 yrs. & 1 day to 10 yrs)Max = 10 plus 2 = 12 (10 yrs. & 1 day to 12 yrs.)

B) Prision Correccional - 6 mos. & 1 day to 6 yearsConvert 6 years to months = 72 mos.72 – 6 = 66 / 3 = 22 mos(22 + 6 = 28 / 12 = 2 yrs. & 4 mos)Min = 6 mos. & 1 day to 2 yrs. & 4 mos.(28 + 22 = 50 / 12 = 4 yrs. & 2 mos)Med = 2 yrs. 4 mos. & 1 day to 4 yrs. & 2 mos.50 + 22 = 72 mos / 12 = 6 yrsMax = 4 yrs. 2 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs.

Article 45: Confiscation & Forfeiture of the Proceeds or Instruments of the Crime

This accessory penalty is included in every penalty imposed for the commission of a crime.

Confiscation is in favour of the government.

Property of a third person not liable for the offense is not subject to confiscation.

Property not subject of lawful commerce though it belongs to a third person shall be destroyed.

Articles 50 to 57: C F APrincipal - 0 - 1 - 2

Accomplice - 1 - 2 - 3Accessory - 2 - 3 - 4

Article 60:The provisions contained in the above articles shall not be applicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories.

Examples of cases wherein the law punish the Accomplice with a penalty corresponding to the Principals:1) Article 346 - Ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and any person who by abuse of authority or confidential relationship shall cooperate as accomplices in Rape, Acts of Lasciviousness, Seduction, Corruption of Minors, White Slave Trade or Abduction; 2) Article 268 - One who furnished the place for the perpetration of the crime of Slight Illegal Detention.

Cases in which the law punishes an accessory with a penalty corresponding to that of a Principal or of one degree lower instead of two degrees:

1) Article 162 - Knowingly using counterfeit seal or forged signature of the President;2) Article 168 - Illegal Possession and Use of False Treasury or Bank Notes;3) Article 172 (par. 3) - Using Falsified Document;4) Article 173 (par. 2) - Using Falsified Dispatch

Article 28: Computation of Penalties

Effectivity of Penalties:1) From the day the judgment becomes final – temporary penalties like suspension, if the offender is in prison;2) From the day the offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities for the enforcement of the penalty - penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty if the offender is not in prison;3) From the day the defendant commences to serve the sentence – other penalties. 4) Since a commitment order in case the offender is in prison does not take effect until after the judgment of conviction becomes final, or fifteen (15) days after its promulgation, when no appeal is filed- it is only then that the service of sentence is legally commenced;5) If the accused is in prison at the time the judgment is promulgated, he is deemed to have submitted himself for the execution of the said judgment as of the date of promulgation.

Article 29: Preventive Imprisonment

Offenders or accused who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment, if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, Except in the following cases:1) when they are recidivists, or have been convicted previously twice or more of any crimes; and2) when upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily.

If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the service of his sentence with 4/5 of the time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment (Pp. vs. Abanes - 73 SCRA 44).

Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal or more than the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is Destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment (Pp. vs. Magonawal, et al - 63 SCRA 106 & Pp.vs. Bastasa- Feb. l979). (Destierro constitutes deprivation of liberty). An accused sentenced to life imprisonment is entitled to deduction (U.S. vs. Ortencio – 38 Phil. 941).

This also holds true if the penalty is Reclusion Perpetua - because the law does not make any distinction between temporal or perpetual penalties (Pp. vs. Corpuz- March l994-49 SCAD). More so since Reclusion Perpetua now has a fixed period although still indivisible (RA 7659- Pp. vs. Lucas & Pp, vs. Reyes – August 1992).

This does not apply if the sentence does not involve a term of imprisonment like fine, as the law says “deprivation of liberty.”

An accused undergoes preventive imprisonment if the offense of which he is charged is not bailable or if bailable he cannot post bail and he is not entitled to recognizance. The offense is not bailable if it is punished with Reclusion Perpetua to Death and the evidence of guilt is strong. The mere fact that the offense is punishable with Death or Reclusion Perpetua does not per se make the offense not bailable. There is the other requirement that the evidence of guilt is strong.

What is the remedy when the person has already served the maximum penalty imposable?The appropriate remedy of the accused is to file a Petition for Habeas Corpus considering that the decision in this case is now final (In accordance with the resolution in Angeles vs. Bilibid - Jan. 4, 1995 and Pp. vs. Agustin - Sept. 5, 1995).

Pp. vs.Labriaga (Nov. 1995 - 65 SCAD) - The accused-appellant Rita Labriaga having served more than the maximum imposable penalty of PC, should be released.

Article 70: Successive Service of Sentence

When the culprit has two or more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit, otherwise the following rules shall be observed: In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective severity shall be

followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed, or should they have been served out.

For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding par. the respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance with the following scale:

1) Death2) Reclusion Perpetua

3) Reclusion Temporal4) Prision Mayor5) Prision Correccional 6) Arresto Mayor7) Arresto Menor 8) Destierrro 9) Perpetual Absolute Disqualification10) Temporary Absolute Disqualification11) Suspension from public office, the right to vote & be voted for, the right to follow profession or calling12) Public Censure

Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum period of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties upon him. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period.

Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties (penal

perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years.

What is the rule when a convict is given multiple sentences?The general rule is that he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties permits simultaneous service of sentence. Otherwise, the penalties shall be served successively in the order of severity as prescribed under this article.

Example:Destierro and FinePrision Correccional and Perpetual Special DisqualificationSuspension From Office and Fine (Rodriguez vs. Dir. of Prisons - 47 SCRA 353).

What are the limitations of the service of sentence?a) The maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period (3-fold rule). b) Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years.

What is the three-fold rule?It is the rule that the maximum duration of the sentence should not exceed 3 times the most severe penalty imposed upon the convict and the added limitation that the maximum period thus computed shall in no case exceed 40 years.

How is the penalty computed?Steps:

1) Get the most severe penalty meted as listed under Art. 70;2) Multiply the duration of the most severe penalty by 3;3) Add the duration of all the different penalties;4) Compare the results of steps 2 & 3;5) Accused to serve the lesser period unless it is in excess of 40 years in which case the accused shall only serve for 40 years.

Examples:

1) Case of Paco Larranaga, et al Sentence is two Reclusion Perpetua

Range - 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.(Although the highest period is 40, we do not start it with the same, because the last provision of Art. 70 provides: “In applying the provisions of this rule, the duration of perpetual penalties (penal perpetua) shall be computed at 30 years)30 x 3 = 90 yearsPaco, et al will only serve 40 years because the law provides that shall in no case that the maximum period exceed 40 years.

2) Conviction of four (4) PMRange - 6 yrs. & 1 day to 12 years12 x 3 = 36Add the four penalties – (12+12 + 12 + 12) = 48Compare the two results = 36 years is lower, so this will be the penalty that will be serve, as this does not exceed 40 years.

3) Aspra vs. Director of Prisons (85 Phil. 737)This applies to equal penalties:Conviction – Six (6) Estafas - sentenced to 3 months and 11 days in each

case.3 x 3 = 9 mos / 11 x 3 = 33 days= 9 mos. & 33 days or 10 mos. & 3 days Add all - (3+3+3+3+3+3) = 18 mos. - (11+11+11+11+11+11) = 66 days18 mos. & 66 days or 20 mos. & 6 daysAcc. will only serve the period of – 10 mos. & 3 days.

The three-fold rule applies although the penalties were imposed for different times and under separate informations. (Torres vs. Superintendent - 56 Phil. 847)

The three-fold maximum penalty does not preclude subsidiary imprisonment. This means to say that after the prisoner has served the highest penalty under the three-fold rule, he still has to serve the payment of all indemnities (fine) with or without subsidiary imprisonment provided the principal penalty does not exceed 6 years. So, if the prisoner after serving the three-fold maximum penalty cannot pay the fine, he still has to serve the subsidiary imprisonment as long as the principal does not exceed 6 years (Bagtas vs. Dir. of Prisons- 47 O.G. l743).

Should the court refrain from imposing the correct penalties if these would exceed the limitation of the three-fold rule?NO. It is the duty of the court to impose the penalty for all crimes of which the accused was found guilty. This article deals with SERVICE OF SENTENCE and not imposition, hence this article is for the Director of Prisons to follow and not for the court.

The rationale for imposing the correct penalty is that when the convict is pardoned, he will still serve the other sentences meted upon him.

Distinction between Imposition of Penalty & Service of Sentence: The imposition of penalty is determined by the nature, gravity and number of offenses charged and proved, whereas, service of sentence is determined by severity and character of the penalties imposed, in the impossibility or practicability of the service of sentence, since actual service is a contingency, subject to various

factors like escape of the convict, grant of executive clemency, or natural death of the prisoner (Pp. vs. Peralta, et al – 25 SCRA 759).

Multiple Death Penalty - Reasons:The imposition of multiple death penalties, far from being a useless formality, has practical importance. The sentencing of an accused to several capital penalties is an indelible badge of his extreme criminal perversity, which may not be accurately projected by the imposition of only one death sentence irrespective of the number of capital felonies for which he is liable. Showing thus the reprehensible character of the convict in its real dimensions, the possibility of a grant of executive clemency is justifiably reduced in no small measure. Hence, the imposition of multiple death penalties could effectively serve as a deterrent to an improvident grant of pardon or commutation. Faced with the utter delinquency of such a convict, the proper penitentiary authorities would exercise judicious restraint in recommending clemency or leniency in his behalf.

“Granting, however, that the Chief Executive, in the exercise of his constitutional power to pardon (one of the presidential prerogatives which is almost absolute), deems it proper to commute the multiple death penalties to multiple life imprisonments, then the practical effect is that the convict has to serve the maximum 40 years of multiple life sentences. If only one death penalty is imposed, and then is commuted to life imprisonment, the convict will have to serve a maximum of only thirty years corresponding to a single life sentence” (Pp. vs. Jaime Jose, et al- Feb. 6, l971- 37 SCRA 450; Pp. vs. Peralta –ibid).

If the multiple penalties are death, how will the rule under Art. 70 be complied?When the sentence is executed, all the death sentences are deemed simultaneously served (Pp. vs. Peralta - ibid).

Article 71: Graduated Scales

In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees than another given penalty, the rules prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty.

The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which is comprised the given penalty.

The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the following graduated scales:Scale No. 1

1) Death2) Reclusion Perpetua 3) Reclusion Temporal4) Prision Mayor5) Prision Correccional 6) Arresto Mayor7) Destierro 8) Arresto Menor 9) Public Censure10) Fine

Scale No. 21) Perpetual Absolute Disqualification2) Temporary Absolute Disqualification

3) Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, and the right to follow a profession or calling4) Public Censure5) Fine

In Article 70, the penalty next lower in severity to Arresto Mayor regarding the successive service of sentence is Arresto Menor; but in Article 71, as to graduated scales, the penalty next lower in degree to Arresto Mayor is Destierro.

Example: Pp. vs. Cabanban (May 7, 1960) - Accused was convicted of Simple Seduction which carries a penalty of Arresto Mayor. As he was under l8 at the time of the commission of the crime, the penalty imposed was Destierro.

Article 61: Rules of Graduating Penalties

For the purpose of graduating the penalties which, according to the provisions of Articles 50 - 57, inclusive of this Code, are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals or any frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories, the following rules shall be observed:1) When the penalty prescribed for the felony is SINGLE & INDIVISIBLE, the next penalty lower in degree shall be that immediately following such scale prescribed under Art. 71;

Single and Indivisible penalties are Death and Reclusion Perpetua.If the single penalty is Death – one degree lower to this is Reclusion Perpetua If the single penalty is Reclusion Perpetua - one degree lower to this is Reclusion Temporal.Example: Art. 267 - Kidnapping & Serious Illegal Detention - punishable w/ Death - If the accused is only an Accomplice – penalty is Reclusion Perpetua.

2) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of TWO INDIVISIBLE penalties, or of ONE or MORE DIVISIBLE penalties to be imposed to their full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale;

a) Two indivisible penalties - Reclusion Perpetua to DeathExample: Parricide (Article 248) - Reclusion Perpetua to Death

One degree lower to this - If the crime is frustrated - Reclusion Temporalb) Divisible penalty imposed in its full extent- Prision MayorPenalty next lower in degree of PM is Prision Correccional Example: Intentional Abortion - Art.256 (par. 2) – PM - If the crime is only frustrated - penalty is only Prision Correccional.

3) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and minimum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately following in said respective scale;

Penalty prescribed consists of ONE or MORE INDIVISIBLE and the MAXIMUM of a DIVISIBLE PENALTY - next lower in degree consists of medium and minimum period of proper divisible penalty and the maximum of the divisible penalty immediately following: Reclusion Temporal maximum to DeathExample: Pp. vs. Paredes, Jr. (Nov. 1996) - convicted of Murder (prior to RA 7659) - carries a penalty of Reclusion Temporal Maximum to Death-

Period Penalty prescribedMaximum DeathMedium Reclusion Perpetua

Minimum Reclusion Temporal Maximum One degree lower:Maximum Reclusion Temporal MediumMedium Reclusion Temporal MinimumMinimum Prision Mayor Maximum

One degree lower – Prision Mayor maximum to Reclusion Temporal medium4) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several periods, corresponding to the different divisible penalties, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum prescribed and of the two next following, which shall be taken from the penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the penalty immediately following in the above-mentioned respective graduated scale;

Example:a) Penalty is Prision Mayor maximum to Reclusion Temporal medium period

Max. - Reclusion Temporal med.Med. - Reclusion Temporal min.Min. - Prision Mayor max.One degree lower:Max. - Prision Mayor med.Med. - Prision Mayor min. Min. - Prision Correccional max.

One degree lower = Prision Correccional in its max. period to Prision Mayor in its medium period.b) Article 306- Brigandage- Prision Mayor in its medium period to Reclusion

Temporal in its minimum period.Max. - Reclusion Temporal min.Med. - Prision Mayor max.Min. - Prision Mayor med.One degree lower:Max. - Prision Mayor min.Med. - Prision Correccional max.Min. - Prision Correccional med.

One degree lower – Prision Correccional in its medium period to Prision Mayor in its minimum period.

5) Penalty prescribed in a manner not provided in the preceding 4 rules - Court proceeds by analogy and shall impose the corresponding penalty:a) if the penalty prescribed by law is composed of three periods, the penalty lower in degree is the penalty consisting of three periods down the scale;b) if the penalty prescribed by law consists of two periods, the penalty next lower in degree is the penalty consisting of two periods down the scale;

Example: Penalty for Abduction – (Article 343)- Prision Correccional in its min. and med. periods:

Prision Correccional med.Prision Correccional min.One degree lower- Arresto Mayor max.Arresto Mayor med.

c) if the penalty prescribed by law consists of one period, the penalty next lower in degree is the next period in the scale:

Example: Art. 166 (par. 5) Forging Treasury Notes - the penalty is Reclusion Temporal in its minimum period - penalty next lower in degree is Prision Mayor in its maximum period

Reclusion Temporal min.Prision Mayor max.

In lowering the penalty by degree, aggravating or mitigating circumstances are not yet considered, because Article 61 refers to the penalty prescribed for the felony. After the penalty next lower in degree is determined, aggravating or mitigating circumstances are then considered to determine the proper period of penalty.

This is so, as in arriving at the imposable penalty, the following circumstances will be considered by the Court:1) Stages of the commission of the crime(C, F, A)2) Degree of participation (P, Acco., Acce.)3) Presence of Aggravating or mitigating circumstances;4) Indeterminate Sentence law5) Probation (if the penalty does not exceed 6 yrs)

Article 62: Rules for Application of Penalties with Regard to Mitigating & Aggravating Circumstances

Effects of the attendance of mitigating and aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency:1) Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefore shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty;

a) Those which in themselves constitute a crime especially punishable by lawExample: “Explosion” (Art. 14, par. 12) - Art. 324 - Crimes involving Destruction (now amended by PD 1613 - Law on Arson); “by means of fire”- crime of Arson. b) Those included by law in defining the crimeExample: ”Abuse of confidence” (Art. 14, par. 4) - crimes of Qualified Theft (Art. 310) and Estafa (Art. 315).

1(a) When in the commission of the crime, advantage was taken by the offender of his public position, the penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances.The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed by any person who belongs to an organized/syndicated crime group.An organized /syndicated crime group means a group of 2 or more persons collaborating, confederating or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of any crime (As am. by RA 7659).2) The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.

Example: Evident premeditation - Art. 14, par. 13 - crimes of Robbery w/ Force Upon Things (Art. 299) and Murder (Art. 248).

3) Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private relations with the offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom each circumstances are attendant.

a) Moral attributes of the offender - Passion or obfuscation – If A and B killed C and A acted with passion, such mitigating circumstance will only affect A.In rape - relationship as aggravating circumstance will be appreciated only against the person who is related to the victim.In Adultery - abandonment of the wife by the husband mitigates not only the liability of the wife, but also of her paramour because in Adultery, the act is one, juridically (Pp. vs. Avelino – 40 O.G. 115).

4) The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein.

a) Material execution of the actExample: If A cooperated with B in the killing of C who killed the latter with ignominy. Such will aggravate not only the liability of B but also of A, if he has knowledge of it at the time of the execution of the act.b) Means to accomplish the crimeExample: A induced B to kill C. A left to B the means he might employ to execute the act. B killed with treachery. Such aggravating circumstance will affect B only (Pp. vs. Otero - 51 Phil. 201). But if A was present when B was killed, such aggravating circumstance will also affect him. In a Per Curiam decision, the Supreme Court held that since there was conspiracy, the law should be appreciated against the mastermind as a generic aggravating circumstance even when he was not present when the crime was committed. The Otero case was not held applicable as in that case the accused was convicted as principal by inducement without proof of conspiracy with the other accused. In conspiracy, the rule is, every conspirator is responsible for the acts of the other accused (Pp. vs. Pareja - 30 SCRA - 693).

5) Effects of Habitual Delinquency

Article 63: Rules for the Application of Indivisible Penalties

1) Penalty is single and indivisible - penalty shall be applied regardless of the presence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Death or Reclusion Perpetua.2) Penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties - Reclusion Perpetua to Death.

i) one aggravating cir. present- higher penalty – Deathii) no mit. nor agg. cir. present- lesser penalty – Reclusion Perpetua iii) one mit. cir. present- lesser penalty – Reclusion Perpetua.

2) When both agg. and mit. are present, the courts shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in consideration of their number and importance.

Article 64: Rules for the Application of Divisible Penalties

1) No aggravating and no mitigating circumstance - medium period;2) One mitigating - minimum period;3) One aggravating – maximum period;4) Mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present – offset each other.5) Two or more mitigating and no aggravating - one degree lower.6) Any number of aggravating circumstances – penalty cannot exceed the penalty provided by the law in its maximum period.

Cases wherein Article 64 do not apply:1) Penalty that is single and indivisible;2) Felonies thru negligence;3) Penalty is fine;4) Penalty is prescribed by special law.

Act 4103: Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISL)

Purpose: Is to uplift and redeem valuable human material and prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of personal liberty and economic usefulness (Pp. vs. Onate - 78 SCRA 43).

As a rule, it is intended to favor the accused particularly to shorten his term of imprisonment, depending upon his behavior and his physical, mental, and moral record as a prisoner to be determined by the Board of Pardon and Parole.

Covers crimes punishable under the RPC or SPL:a) RPC

Minimum - one degree next lower to the penalty imposed. The term of the minimum is left to the discretion of the court and this discretion is unqualified. The only limitation is that it is within the range of the penalty next lower in degree to that prescribed by the RPC for the offense committed.

Maximum – the penalty imposed as provided by law.b) SPL

Maximum term of the indeterminate sentence shall not exceed the maximum fixed by law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum prescribed by law. Penalty 1 year to 5 years - (1 year to 3 years or 3 years to 5 years)

ISL will not apply in the following cases:1) Offenses punished by Death or RP2) Those convicted of Treason, Conspiracy or Proposal To Commit Treason, Misprision of Treason, Rebellion, Sedition, Espionage, & Piracy.

3) Habitual Delinquents4) Those who escaped from confinement;5) Those granted with conditional pardon and who violated the term of the same;6) Those whose maximum period does not exceed one year.7) Those already serving final judgment upon the approval of this act.

Rationale: After serving the minimum term, the prisoner may be released on parole.

Examples:1) Convicted of Homicide - Reclusion Temporal – 12 years and 1 day to 20 years.

Accused – principalCrime is consummated

Maximum – 17 years, 4 mos. & 1 day to 20 years;Medium – 14 years, 8 mos. & 1 day to 17 years and 4 mos.Minimum – 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 mos.

Prision Mayor - 6 years & 1 day to 12 yrs;Max. - 10 years & 1 day to 12 years Med. - 8 years & 1 day to 10 yearsMin. - 6 years & 1 day to 8 years

Prision Correccional - 6 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs.Max. - 4 yrs., 2 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs.Med. - 2 yrs., 4 mos. & 1 day to 4 yrs. 2 mos. Min. - 6 mos. & 1 day to 2 yrs. & 4 mos.

During the trial, he pleaded guilty – (Plea of guilt is an ordinary mitigating circ.)

12 years and 1 day to 14 years & 8 mos. Applying the ISL - one degree for the minimumPrision Mayor min. – 6 yrs and 1 day to 8 yrs.Penalty - 6 yrs. & 1 day of PM in its min. period as its minimum to 14 years & 8 mos. of RT in its min. period as its maximum.

Probation – PD 968 as amended

Is a disposition under which a defendant, after conviction and sentence, is released subject to the conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer (for those imposed the penalty of 6 years and below).

Article 67: Increasing or Reducing the Penalty of Fines

A) If the law prescribes the minimum as well as the maximum - the court cannot impose a fine next higher.

Example: Fine of P200 to P1, 000 (each degree will be equal to ¼ of P1,000 or P250.00. P250.00 added to P1, 000 to determine the next higher in degree without changing the minimum of P200 = P 200 to P1, 250.

Fine next lower in degree = P200 to P750.00B) If the law imposing the fine does not fix the minimum, the determination of the fine is left to the discretion of the court, provided that it shall not exceed the authorized maximum - P4,000 ( P200 or P2,000)

Circumstances to be considered by the court:1) Mitigating or agg. circs2) Wealth or means of the culprit 3) Gravity or seriousness of the charge.(Nizurtado vs. Sandiganbayan – the SC reduced the P10, 000 fine to P2, 000 because of the presence of mitigating circumstance.)

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

How is criminal liability extinguished?1) Totally2) Partially

Article 89: Total Extinction of Criminal Liability

1) By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties, and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefore is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment;2) By service of the sentence;3) By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effect;4) By absolute pardon;5) By prescription of the crime;6) By prescription of the penalty;7) By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Art. 344 of this Code.

A) DEATHThe criminal and civil liabilities are extinguished if the offender dies before final judgment (Pp. vs. Jose, et a l- June 17, l976).This is so, as when death occurs, nobody will serve the penalty for the crime (Pp. vs. Bayotas- Sept. l994-55 SCAD & Petralba vs. Sandiganbayan- Aug. 16, l991).

What is “Final Judgment”?“Sentencia firma” should be understood as one which is definite. The legal import of the term final judgment is similarly reflected in Articles 72 & 78 of this Code, which mention the term final judgment in the sense that it is already enforceable. Also Sec. 7 of Rule ll6 of the Rules of Court states that a

judgment in a criminal case becomes final after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal for when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served or the defendant has expressly waived in writing the right to appeal.

Judgment becomes final when:1) No appeal is seasonably perfected;2) Accused commences to serve the sentence;3) Right to appeal is expressly waived in writing, except where death penalty was imposed by the trial court; and4) Accused applies for probation, thereby waiving his right to appeal (Pp. vs. Salle- Dec. l995 - En banc- 66 SCAD).

If death however, occurs after final judgment, the pecuniary liabilities devolve upon the heirs only if some properties are left.

Article 89, par. 1 applies only if the civil liability arises from the criminal liability as its sole basis (Article 100 - “Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable”). However, it cannot apply if the civil liability arises not only from the crime but from another source like a contract of purchase and sale. Example:The accused was convicted of Estafa for selling a parcel of land twice. Pending appeal, he died. His civil liability was not extinguished as it arose out of the contract of sale.

Under the Civil Code, the civil liability of the accused remains as this civil liability is independent of his criminal liability. If the accused dies while his case is pending appeal, the motion for recovery of money may not be dismissed; but when he dies before final judgment by the trial court, the money claim should be presented before the probate or intestate court (Torrijos vs. CA- L-40336, 67 SCRA 394).

The possible civil liability of the deceased accused can be determined in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction arising from the alleged criminal acts complained of as if no criminal case has been instituted against him and Art. 30 of the Civil Code will apply in determining his civil liability (Pp. vs. Sendaydiego - Jan. 20, l978). This rule was applied in the case of Pp. vs. Tirol- L-30588- Jan. 31, l981- where one of the accused-appellants died pending appeal, the case was dismissed as to his criminal liability, but the appeal was to be resolved concerning him to determine his criminal liability as the basis of his civil liability for which his estate may be liable (Pp. vs. Naboa- 132 SCRA 410).

Does Art. 30 of the Civil Code authorize the appellate court to continue exercising appellate jurisdiction over the accused’s civil liability ex-delicto when his death supervenes during appeal? No. What Art. 30 recognizes is an alternative and separate civil action which may be brought to demand civil liability from a criminal offense independently of any criminal action.

The intendment of Article 100 on civil liability ex-delicto is rooted in the court’s pronouncement of the guilt or innocence of the accused. Death dissolves all things (“Mors omnia solvi”).

Article 30 refers to the institution of a separate civil action that does not draw its life from a criminal proceeding.

How about the death of the offended party?The death of the offended party does not extinguish criminal liability, as it is not included in Art. 89. Neither is it mentioned as one of the grounds for a Motion to Quash under the Rules on Criminal Procedure (Pp. vs. Bandalian - 117 SCRA 718).

B) SERVICE OF SENTENCE

Article 89 of the RPC stipulates that the penalties consisting of deprivation of liberty shall be executed and served in the places and penal establishments provided by the Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law. The Code thus requires that the service of sentence be in a penal institution (Martin vs. Eduardo – 121 SCRA). Thus the period during which the accused was at large during his escapes from the jail cannot be included in the service of his sentences in fixing the date of his release (Ibid).

C) AMNESTY

Amnesty - is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or a general pardon for a past offense, and is rarely, if ever, exercised in favor of a single individual, and is usually exercised in behalf of a certain class of persons, who are subject to trial but have not yet been convicted.

Amnesty extinguishes the criminal liability & not merely the penalty but also its effects. But the civil liability is not extinguished.

D) ABSOLUTE PARDON

Two kinds of pardon:1) PARDON BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (Article 36)

Pardon- is an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has committed.

2 kinds: a) Absolute

b) Conditionala) An ABSOLUTE PARDON extinguishes criminal liability of the offender. But this does not exempt the offender from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed in the sentence. It does not also restore the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage unless such rights are expressly restored by the terms of the pardon.

A pardon to be effective, must be delivered and accepted. The pardon given by the President upon the woman convicted of Adultery affects her only and cannot benefit the paramour (U.S. vs. Guarin- 30 Phil. 85).

When may the right to hold public office and to exercise suffrage be considered restored although not expressly stated in the pardon?

Only in a case when the pardon is granted after the offender has served the term of imprisonment, because such conviction removes all that is left on the consequence of conviction (Cristobal vs. Labrado – 71 Phil. 34). This is the exception to the provisions of the law, that is, where the facts and circumstances of the case clearly show that the purpose of the Chief Executive is precisely to restore rights although not expressly stated in the pardon (Pelobello vs. Palatino- 72 Phil. 441).

Limitations of the pardoning power of the President:1) Such power does not extend in cases of impeachment.2) The power can only be exercised after conviction.3) In election offenses, it can be exercised only upon prior recommendation of the COMELEC.

What is the effect of an appeal of judgment of conviction on the pardoning power of the President?An appeal brings the entire case within the exclusive jurisdiction of the appellate court. A becoming regard for the doctrine of separation of powers demands that such exclusive authority of the appellate court be fully respected and kept unimpaired. Had not the present Constitution adopted the “conviction by final judgment” limitation, the President could, at any time and even without the knowledge of the court, extend executive clemency to anyone whom he in good faith or otherwise believes to merit presidential mercy. To allow the President to do so, will be a derogation of the jurisdiction of the appellate court.

If an appeal is filed, an appellant may be granted pardon, but he must first withdraw his appeal, i.e. the appealed conviction must first be brought to finality.

b) CONDITIONAL PARDON (Art. 94 - par.1) - This must be accepted to be efficacious because of the conditions imposed which must be complied strictly.

A Conditional Pardon is in the nature of a contract between the sovereign power or the Chief Executive and the convicted criminal to the effect that the former will release the latter subject to the condition that if he does not comply with the terms of the pardon, he will be recommitted to prison to serve the unexpired portion of the sentence or an additional one (Alvarez vs. Dir. Of Prison – 80 Phil. 50). By the pardonee’s consent to the terms stipulated in the contract, the pardonee has placed himself under the supervision of the Chief Executive or his delegate who is duty-bound to see to it that the pardonee complies with the terms and conditions of the pardon. Under Sec. 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code, the Chief Executive is authorized to order “the arrest & re-incarceration of any such person who, in his judgment, shall fail to comply with the condition/s of his pardon (Torres vs. Dir. of Bureau of Corrections- Dec. l995- 66 SCAD) and he can be prosecuted under Art. 159 of the RPC.

May the grant of pardon be subject to the review of the courts?No. It is now a well-entrenched rule in this jurisdiction that this exercise of presidential judgment is beyond judicial review. The

determination of the violation of the conditional pardon rests exclusively in the sound judgment of the Chief Executive. The pardonee, having consented to place his liberty on conditional pardon upon the judgment of the power that has granted it cannot invoke the aid of the courts, however erroneous the findings may be upon which his recommendation was ordered (Tesoro vs. Dir. of Prisons- 68 Phil. 154).

Is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus the remedy for a person incarcerated because of violation of the terms of the conditional pardon? No. Habeas Corpus lies only when the restraint of a person’s liberty has been judicially adjudged as illegal or unlawful. Solely vested in the Chief Executive, who in the first place was the exclusive author of the conditional pardon and its revocation, is the corollary prerogative to reinstate the pardon.

Conditional pardon does not also extinguish civil liability (Monsanto vs. Factoran, Jr. - 170 SCRA l989 & Pp. vs. Nacional- Sept. l995 - 64 SCAD).

2) PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARTY (Article 23)This does not extinguish criminal liability, except in Art. 266-C and Art. 344 of the RPC (amendment of the Anti-Rape Law), which requires a valid marriage between the rapist and the victim to effect an extinguishment of criminal liability. But civil liability is extinguished by express waiver of the offended party.

The criminal action in public crimes is not extinguished. Thus, the criminal liability for Estafa is not affected by the compromise or novation of contract, for it is a public offense which must be prosecuted and punished by the government in its own motion even though complete reparation should have been made of the damages suffered by the offended party (Javier vs. Pp. - 70 Phil. 550).

Reimbursement of, or compromise as to the amount of the crime affects only the civil liability but does not relieve him from the penalty prescribed by the law for the offense committed (Pp. vs. Miranda - G.R.No. L- 16122).

Regarding private crimes, which are mentioned under Art. 344, like Rape, Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness, Adultery and Concubinage, the criminal action is barred if:a) the pardon is made before the institution of the action; b) in Adultery & Concubinage, the pardon must refer to both offenders, which may either be expressed or implied;c) in Rape, and other private crimes, the pardon must be expressed (Pp. vs. Infante- 57 Phil. 138);d) the marriage between the offender and the offended party totally extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender.

In Rape cases, the pardon given by the parents of the minor victim to be effective must have the concurrence of the minor victim herself (Art. 266-C R.A. 8353).

Pp. vs. Lacson, Jr - The pardon given by the parents cannot stand alone. This is inefficacious. This is not sufficient to remove the criminal responsibility of the offender. Rather, this must be accompanied by the express pardon of the victim herself (U.S. vs. Luna -1 Phil. 360 & Pp. vs. Tadulan - April l997- 81 SCAD).

What is the effect of an affidavit of desistance?An affidavit of desistance is merely an additional ground to buttress the accused’s defenses, not the sole consideration that can result to acquittal. There must be other circumstances which, when coupled with the retraction or desistance, create doubts as to the truth of the testimony given by the witnesses at the trial and accepted by the judge (Pp. vs. Ballabare- Nov. l996- 76 SCAD). All that the accused offered as defenses mainly consisted of denial and alibi which cannot outweigh the positive identification and convincing testimonies given by the prosecution (Pp. vs. Echegaray - Feb. l997- 79 SCAD).

Pardon by the Chief Executive Distinguished from the Pardon by the Offended Party: 1) Pardon by the Chief Executive extinguishes criminal liability, whereas that is not the case if the pardon is given by the offended party except in case of marriage, as it only bars the institution of the criminal action; 2) Pardon by the Chief Executive is granted after conviction by final judgment, whereas pardon given by the offended party is given before the institution of the action; 3) Pardon by the Chief Executive cannot include the civil liability of the offender, whereas the civil liability may be expressly waived by the offended party.

Distinction between Amnesty & Absolute Pardon:

1) ApplicationAmnesty – generally to political crimes & offendersPardon – generally to ordinary crimes & offenders

2) Effect Amnesty – obliterates the effects of conviction as if the act were not criminalPardon – relieves the offender of penalty but the effects of conviction stay

3) CongressAmnesty – concurrence requiredPardon – concurrence not required

4) When givenAmnesty – even before convictionPardon – after final conviction

5) To whom givenAmnesty – usually to class of personsPardon – specific individual

E) PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME (Article 90)

Prescription of crime – It is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the offender after the lapse of a certain time fixed by law.

Prescriptive periods: a) Death, Reclusion Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal – 20 yearsb) Afflictive penalties – 15 yearsc) Correctional penalties – 10 years

Arresto Mayor – 5 yearsd) Libel or other similar offenses – 1 yeare) Oral Defamation & Slander By Deed – 6 mos.f) Light offenses – 2 mos.g) Compound crime – highest penalty shall be made the basis.

Article 91: Computation of Prescription of OffensesThe period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago.

Prescriptive period is not waivable. Since it is for the benefit of the accused, this cannot be extended. Once prescription sets in, the court loses its jurisdiction.

In computing the period of prescription, the first day is excluded and the last day is included (Pp. vs. Galano - 75 SCRA 193).

February 28 and 29 of a leap year as held in Namarco vs. Tuazon, should be counted as separate days in computing the prescriptive period.

When the last day to file an Information falls on Sunday or legal holiday, the period of prescription cannot be extended to the next working day. So, this should be filed on the last working day before the legal holiday (Yapdiangco vs. Buencamino, et al – 122 SCRA 713).

What is the effect of the delay in the reporting of crimes in its prosecution? None. The law on prescription would be meaningless if we were to yield to the proposition that delay in the prosecution of crimes would be fatal to the State and the offended party. In fixing the different prescriptive periods on the basis of the gravity of the penalty prescribed therefore, the law takes into account or allows reasonable delays in the prosecution thereof. In the case of Pp. vs. Gecomo -254 SCRA- the court ruled that 17 days, 35 days or even 6 mos. delay by a rape victim in reporting the attack on her honor does not detract from the veracity of her charge. Who is the offended party referred to in Art. 91?State or the private complainant. The law does not make any distinction between a private crime or public crime. In both cases then, the discovery may be by the offended party, the authorities or their agents (Garcia vs. CA- Jan. l997- 78 SCAD). Besides, under Sec. 12, Rule 110 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the offended party is defined as the party to whom the offender is civilly liable. Furthermore, under Art. 100, it is expressly stated that “every person criminally liable is civilly liable”.

The prescriptive is interrupted upon the filing of the case before the Prosecutor’s Office or that of the Office of the Ombudsman (Francisco vs. CA).

The prescriptive periods for the crimes punished under SPL - basis is Act no. 3326 - Prescription shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the violation of the law and if the same be not known at the time, from the discovery thereof, and the institution of judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment (Presl. Ad Hoc Committee on Behest Loans vs. Ombudsman- August 2001).

Sec. 52 of PD 1529 (Property Registration Decree) – provides for constructive notice. Knowledge is counted at the time of registration. This constructive notice, in view of registration, does not apply to the registration of the marriage contract in the crime of bigamy. This is so, as bigamous marriage is really entered in secrecy in order to conceal the legal impediment (Pp. vs. Reyes- July 1989).

Can brief trips abroad qualify as “absence” as contemplated under Art. 91?No. This is not the absence referred to in said article, as these trips were very brief.Example: Slight Physical Injuries-inflicted on July 20, 2009- prescriptive period is 2 mos. a) If committed by a public official in relation to office – no need of going to the Lupong Tagapamayapa

– 31 days for July - 20 60 – 42= 18 days -------- September 18, 2009 - last 11 - July day of filing 31- August --------- 42 days

b) If not a public official or a public official and the act is not in relation to office – undergo a conciliation at the Lupong Tagapamayapa. Filing of the complaint at the barangay will toll the running of the prescriptive period but only for 60 days and thereafter, the prescriptive period will again run.

F) PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY (Article 92)

Prescription of penalty - It is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the government to execute the final sentence after the lapse of a certain time fixed by law.

Prescriptive periods of penalties:1) Death & Reclusion Perpetua- 20 years2) Other afflictive penalties- 15 years3) Correctional penalties – 10 years, except Arresto Mayor – 5 years4) Light penalties – 1 year

Article 93: Computation of Prescription of Penalty

Period commences to run from the date the culprit evades the service of sentence. It is interrupted:a) if the defendant surrenders;b) if he is captured;

c) if he should go to foreign country with which the Philippines has no extradition treaty;

d) if he should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.

Evasion of sentence is an essential element of prescription of penalties and takes place before the running of the period and cannot interrupt it.

Article 94: Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability

1) Conditional pardon2) Commutation of the sentence3) Good conduct allowance which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence.4) Parole (Under ISL)5) Probation

6) Partial repeal of penal law

Article 96: Commutation of Sentence

The commutation of the original sentence for another of a different length and nature shall have the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place of the former.

It is the change in the sentence of the court made by the President which consists in reducing the penalty imposed upon the offender. Such substitutes the original penalty.

Article 97: Allowance for Good Conduct

The good conduct of a prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle him to the following deductions from the period of his sentence:1) First two years – 5 days for each month of good behavior 2) Third to fifth year - 8 days for each mo.3) Following years to the 10th year - 10 days each mo.

4) Eleventh year and successive years – 15 days for each mo.

The allowance is given in consideration of the good conduct of the prisoner while serving his sentence (Pp. vs. Martin-68 Phil. 122).

These allowances are granted by the Director of Prisons and once given, these cannot be revoked (ARTICLE 99).

This right can be enjoyed even though the prisoner has been sentenced to several penalties and the same have been cut down by Article 70 to three times the most severe of the penalties.

This does not embrace detention prisoners. Detention prisoners are entitled only to preventive imprisonment, if he agreed in writing to abide by the rules of the jail (Baking vs. Director of Prisons, et al. L-30603-28 SCRA 851).

Article 98: Special Time Allowance For Loyalty

A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned

in Art. 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said articles.

When is the special time allowance given?1) The occurrence of disorder resulting from a conflagration, earthquake, explosion or similar catastrophe or a mutiny in which the prisoner did not participate;2) The convict must evade the service of his sentence. This article does not apply to the prisoners who did not escape (Lozada vs. Acenas – 78 Phil. 226); 3) He must give himself up w/n 48 hours after the issuance of a proclamation by the President announcing the passing away of such calamity.

Loyalty award - 1/5 deduction of the period of his sentence. If he does not return, additional 1/5 of the term remaining to be served will be imposed, but not to exceed 6 months.

Article 48: Penalty for Complex Crime

Two kinds of complex crimes:1) Compound (Delito Compuesto)

When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies;2) Complex Crime Proper ( Delito Complejo)

When an offense is a necessary means of committing another crime.

Compound Crimes: Single act results to: a) two or more grave feloniesExample:Pp. vs. Guillen – 47 O.G. 3433 - single • Act of throwing a hand grenade resulted to the killing of several persons

(Murder w/ Multiple Frustrated & Attempted Murders);• One single shot killed two persons- Double Homicide. (Pp. vs. Pama- 44

O.G. 3339);• When a person planted a bomb in the airplane and it exploded – several

murders and damage to property (Pp. vs. Largo – 99 Phil. 1061);• Where a paper bag was given by the accused to the occupant of the

house containing some vegetables but when opened it exploded resulting to the death of several persons and injuring another – complex crime of Murder with Frustrated Murder (Pp. vs. Villaflores – 115 SCRA 570).