Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fajardo Vs CA
Fajardo Vs CA
CA Case Digest
0
Facts:
In 1981, Fajardo was charged with violation of BP 22. At the time he committed the
offense, PD No. 968 allows an accused who appeals his conviction to still apply for
probation.
In 1988, the trial court convicted Fajardo of the crime charged and sentenced him
to suffer the penaltyPD No. 968, became effective (in 1986), providing that no
application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has
perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction. Fajardo, however, still
appealed his conviction.
When he lost the appeal, he filed motion for probation before the trial court
contending that he was eligible for probation because at the time he committed the
offense in 1981, an accused who had appealed his conviction was still qualified to
apply for probation and that the law that barred an application for probation of an
accused who had interposed an appeal was ex post facto in its application and
hence, not applicable to him. The trial court denied Fajardo’s motion for probation
and so did CA.
Issue:
Held:
It is not ex post facto in its application. The law applies only to accused convicted
after its effectivity. An ex post facto law is one that punishes an act as a crime
which was innocent at the time of its commission. Presidential Decree No. 1990,
like the Probation Law that it amends, is not penal in character. It may not be
considered as an ex post facto law.