Facts:
Petitioner Mario Gumabon, after
pleading guilty, was sentenced on May 5, 1953 to suffer reclusion perpetua for
the complex crime of rebellion with multiple murder, robbery, arson and
kidnapping. Petitioners Gaudencio Agapito, Paterno Palmares and Epifanio Padua,
likewise pleaded guilty to the complex crime of rebellion with multiple murder
and other offenses, and were similarly made to suffer the same penalty in
decisions rendered, as to the first two, on March 8, 1954 and, as to the third,
on December 15, 1955. The last petitioner, Blas Bagolbagol, stood trial also
for the complex crime of rebellion with multiple murder and other offenses and
on January 12, 1954 penalized with reclusion perpetua. Each of the petitioners
has been since then imprisoned and served for more than 13 years by virtue of
the above convictions.
Issue:
Whether or not petitioners be
given a retroactive effect with habeas corpus as appropriate remedy.
Held:
Yes.
Ratio:
In Director v. Director of Prisons, it was explicitly announced by
the Court “that the only means of giving retroactive effect to a penal
provision favourable to the accused… is the writ of habeas corpus.” While the
above decision speaks of a trial judge losing jurisdiction over the case,
insofar as the remedy of habeas corpus is concerned, the emphatic affirmation
that it is the only means of benefiting the accused by the retroactive
character of a favourable decision holds true. Petitioners clearly have thus
successfully sustained the burden of justifying their release.
No comments:
Post a Comment