People v.
Simon The court held that parents-in-law may be included in the petition for the issuance
Republic Act No. 6425, as now amended by Republic Act No. 7659, has
unqualifiedly adopted the penalties under the Revised Penal Code in their technical
terms, hence with their technical signification and effects. In fact, for purposes of
determining the maximum of said sentence, the court have applied the provisions
of the amended Section 20 of said law to arrive at prision correccional and Article
64 of the Code to impose the same in the medium period. Such offense, although
provided for in a special law, is now in effect punished by and under the Revised
Penal Code.
EVANGELINE LADONGA, petitioner,  vs.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly proscribe the suppletory application of the
provisions of the RPC. Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, the
general provisions of the RPC which, by their nature, are necessarily applicable,
may be applied suppletorily.
People v. Mantalaba
 A violation of Section 5 of RA 9165 merits the penalty of life imprisonment to
death; however, in Section 98, it is provided that, where the offender is a minor,
the penalty for acts punishable by life imprisonment to death provided in the same
law shall be reclusion perpetua to death. Basically, this means that the penalty can
now be graduated as it has adopted the technical nomenclature of penalties
provided for in the Revised Penal Code.
People v. Bustinera
There is no arguing that the anti-carnapping law is a special law, different from the
crime of robbery and theft included in the Revised Penal Code.  The anti-carnapping
law particularly deals with the theft and robbery of motor vehicles. Hence a motor
vehicle is said to have been carnapped when it has been taken, with intent to gain,
without the owner's consent, whether the taking was done with or without the use
of force upon things. Without the anti-carnapping law, such unlawful taking of a
motor vehicle would fall within the purview of either theft or robbery which was
certainly the case before the enactment of said statute.
GO-TAN V. SPOUSES TAN
the principle of conspiracy under Article 8 of the RPC may be applied suppletorily
to R.A. No. 9262 because of the express provision of Section 47 that the RPC shall
be supplementary to said law. Thus, general provisions of the RPC, which by their
nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied suppletorily.
of a PPO, in accordance with RA 9262 as Section 5 of R.A. No. 9262 expressly
recognizes that the acts of violence against women and their children may be
committed by an offender through another.
Citibank v Tanco-Gabaldon
Act 3362 applies when a special law does not provide for prescriptive periods for
the enforcement of criminal liabilities
PCGG v. CARPIO-MORALES
there are two reckoning points for the counting of the prescription of an offense:
1) the day of the commission of the violation of the law; and
2) if the day when the violation was committed be not known, then it shall begin to
run from the discovery of said violation and (UNTIL) the institution of judicial
proceedings for investigation and punishment.
Disini v. Sandiganbayan
GR: the prescriptive period shall commence to run on the day the crime is
committed. That an aggrieved person "entitled to an action has no knowledge of
his right to sue or of the facts out of which his right arises," does not prevent the
running of the prescriptive period.
XPN’s: "blameless ignorance" doctrine. - "the statute of limitations runs only upon
discovery of the fact of the invasion of a right which will support a cause of action.
In other words, the courts would decline to apply the statute of limitations where
the plaintiff does not know or has no reasonable means of knowing the existence of
a cause of action."
PEOPLE VS PANGILINAN
The prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the
guilty person, and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for
reasons not constituting jeopardy.
 filing of the complaint in the MTC even if for purposes of preliminary
investigation should interrupt the prescription period of the criminal
responsibility if there was no trial on the merits yet.
 filing of the complaint before the fiscal’s office also suspended the
prescriptive period.
PEOPLE V BON
Following the scale prescribed in Article 71, the penalty two degrees lower than
death is reclusion temporal, which was the maximum penalty imposed by the CA
on appellant for attempted rape

At the same time, the Indeterminate Sentence Law prescribes that "the court shall
sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which
shall be that which, in view of the attending circumstances, could be properly
imposed under the rules of the said Code, and the minimum which shall be within
the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense"  The Probation Law is not a penal statute. The provisions were clear and
The purpose of the prescription of minimum and maximum periods under the
Indeterminate Sentence Law is to effect the privilege granted under the same law,
for prisoners who have served the minimum penalty to be eligible for parole per
the discretion of the Board of Indiscriminate Sentence
Re: Penalty imposed by Judge Teofilo Guadiz, Jr.
Specifying the minimum and maximum terms of imprisonment, in accordance to
the ISL, is a mandatory requirement and applicable for ALL criminal offenses in the
RPC as well as in special laws.
XPN: those with indivisible penalties
BATISTIS v. PEOPLE
The straight penalty the CA imposed was contrary to the Indeterminate Sentence
Law, whose Section 1 requires that the penalty of imprisonment should be an
indeterminate sentence. According to Spouses Bacar v. Judge de Guzman,Jr., the
imposition of an indeterminate sentence with maximum and minimum periods in
criminal cases not excepted from the coverage is mandatory, viz:
The need for specifying the minimum and maximum periods of the indeterminate
sentence is to prevent the unnecessary and excessive deprivation of liberty and to
enhance the economic usefulness of the accused, since he may be exempted from
serving the entire sentence, depending upon his behavior and his physical, mental,
and moral record.
Dimakuta v. People
What Section 4 of the Probation Law prohibits is an appeal from the judgment of
conviction, which involves a review of the merits of the case and the determination
of whether the accused is entitled to acquittal. However, under the recommended
grounds for appeal which were enumerated earlier, the purpose of the appeal is
not to assail the judgment of conviction but to question only the propriety of the
sentence, particularly the penalty imposed or the crime for which the accused was
convicted, as the accused intends to apply for probation upon correction of the
penalty or conviction for the lesser offense.
LLAMADO VS CA
"Perfecting an appeal" has no sensible meaning apart from the meaning given to
those words in our procedural law and so the law-making agency could only have
intended to refer to the meaning of those words in the context of procedural law.
unambiguous. The true legislative intent must be given effect. The meaning set
forth in Sec. 4 is plain and unmistakable.
PEOPLE V GALUGA Y WAD-AS
Galgua, as he is sentenced herein to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua,
cannot apply for parole
Galuga is likewise disqualified from applying for probation as Section 9 (a) of the
Probation Law is clear that the benefits of probation shall not extend to those
sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six (6) years
An accused must not have appealed his conviction before he can avail himself of
probation. Jurisprudence treats appeal and probation as mutually exclusive
remedies because the law is unmistakable about it
SALGADO v. CA
The primary consideration in granting probation is the reformation of the
probationer. That is why, under the law, a post sentence investigation, which is
mandatory, has to be conducted before a person can be granted probation to help
the court in determining whether the ends of justice and the best interest of the
public as well as the defendant will be served by the granting of the probation 
The trial court is given the discretion to impose conditions in the order granting
probation "as it may deem best."
Re: Anonymous Letter Complaint v Samson
Probation is not a sentence, but rather a suspension of the imposition of sentence
Grant of probation suspends the imposition of the principal penalty of
imprisonment as well as the accessory penalties of suspension from public office
and from the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual special
disqualification from the right of sufferage
Bala v. Martinez
Probation is not coterminous with its period. There must first be issued by the
court of an order of final discharge based on the report and recommendation of
the probation officer. Only from such can the case of the probationer be deemed
terminated.

The period of probation may either be shortened or made longer, but not to
exceed the period set in the law. This is so because the period of probation, like the
period of incarceration, is deemed the appropriate period for the rehabilitation of
the probationer.