BOOK ONE
GENERAL PROVISIONS REGARDING THE
DATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND
APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS
CODE, AND REGARDING THE OFFENSES,
THE PERSONS LIABLE AND THE PENALTIES
Title Three: P E N A L T I E S
Chapter Four APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Section Three. - Provisions common in
the last two preceding sections
Article 73. Presumption in regard to the
imposition of accessory penalties. - Whenever the
courts shall impose a penalty which, by provision
of law, carries with it other penalties, according to
the provisions of Articles 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of
this Code, it must be understood that the
accessory penalties are also imposed upon the
convict.
---------------------------------------------------------
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Provisions common in the last two preceding
sections (SECTION 1 & 2)
ACCESSORY PENALTIES
- RULE: Accessory penalties are deemed imposed. NO NEED TO
EXPRESSLY STATE.
- In a case, the Solicitor General suggested that the
decision below be modified to show expressly that
appellants were also sentenced to the accessory
penalties provided by law. It was held that there was
no necessity for such modification, as the accessory
penalties are deemed imposed. (People vs. Baltazar,
CA-G.R. No. 14882-R, May 25, 1956)
- RULE: Subsidiary imprisonment, not an accessory penalty. IT
MUST BE EXPRESSLY STATED.
- Subsidiary imprisonment is not an accessory penalty
and therefore, the judgment of conviction must
expressly state that the offender shall suffer the
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. (People
vs. Fajardo, 65 Phil. 539, 542)
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 74. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua
in certain cases. - In cases in which the law
prescribes a penalty higher than another given
penalty, without specially designating the name
of the former, if such higher penalty should be
that of death, the same penalty and the accessory
penalties of Article 40, shall be considered as the
next higher penalty.
---------------------------------------------------------
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Provisions common in the last two preceding
sections (SECTION 1 & 2)
PENALTY HIGHER THAN RECLUSION PERPETUA
- Death cannot be the penalty next higher in degree when not
provided by law.
- But under the provisions of Art. 74, when a given
penalty has to be raised by one or two degrees and
the resulting penalty is death according to the scale,
- but is not specifically provided by law as a penalty,
- the latter cannot be imposed.
- The penalty higher than reclusidn perpetua cannot be
death, because the penalty of death must be
specifically imposed by law as a penalty for a given
crime.
- RULE: Judgment should provide that the convict should not be
given the benefit of Art. 27
- The Code has meant to say here that the judgment
should provide that the convict should not be given
the benefit of Art. 27 (that he should be pardoned after
undergoing the penalty for 30 years) until 40 years
have elapsed;
- otherwise, there would be no difference at all between
reclusion perpetua when imposed as the penalty next
higher in degree and when it is imposed as the penalty
fixed by law. (Albert)
- In this opinion, the given penalty is reclusion perpetua.
---------------------------------------------------------
• __

- RULE: This article specifically mentions the word "minimum" of

the fine. Under this article, the fine must have a minimum and a
maximum fixed by law.
- This article, therefore, does not apply when the law
does not fix the minimum of the fine.
- In Articles 143, 144 and 150, for instance, the Code fixes
the minimum as well as the maximum of the fines.
- In Articles 114, 115 and 129, for instance, the minimum
of the fine is not fixed.

- RULE: When the minimum is not fixed by law. [ sound discretion

Article 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of
of the courts]
fine by one or more degrees. - Whenever it may - When only the maximum of the fine is fixed, the
be necessary to increase or reduce the penalty of determination of the amount to be imposed is left to
fine by one or more degrees, it shall be increased the sound discretion of the courts, without exceeding
the maximum authorized by law. (People vs. Quinto, 60
or reduced, respectively, for each degree, by one-
Phil. 351, 357)
fourth of the maximum amount prescribed by law,
without however, changing the minimum.
FINE WITH A MINIMUM FINE WITHOUT A MINIMUM

The same rules shall be observed with regard of In both, the law fixes the maximum of the fine.
fines that do not consist of a fixed amount, but
are made proportional. When the law fixes the when the law does not state
minimum of the fine, the minimum of the fine but
---------------------------------------------------------
only the maximum, t
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
the court cannot change that he court can impose any
minimum; amount not exceeding such
Provisions common in the last two preceding
maximum.
sections (SECTION 1 & 2)
When the law fixes both the when only the maximum is
INCREASING/REDUCING PENALTY BY ONE OR MORE minimum and the maximum, fixed,

DEGREES
the court can impose an THE COURT cannot impose an
- RULE: Fines are graduated into degrees for the accomplices amount higher than the amount higher than the
and accessories and for the principals in frustrated and maximum; maximum.
attempted felonies.
- Fines are also graduated into degrees for the
imposition of the proper amount of the fine on
accomplices and accessories or on the principals in EXAMPLES OF REDUCING FINE BY ONE OR
frustrated or attempted felonies. (Arts. 50 to 57) TWO DEGREES.
- RULE: INCREASE/DECREASE by one-fourth of the Suppose the fine is from P200 to P2,000.
maximum amount prescribed by law
To find each degree is to take 1/4 of P2,000 or f*500.

The minimum of P200 is not changed.

- RULE:without however, changing the minimum.
[Even if, poor status]
- A, a minor fifteen years and two months old,
committed acts tending to prevent the meeting of a
provincial board under Art. 143.
- The penalty is prision correccional or a fine from P200 to
P2.000 or both.
- Being a minor, A must be given a penalty one degree
lower in accordance with Article 68.
- The penalty one degree lower is arresto mayor or a fine
from P200 to PI,500 .
- Under Art. 75, the court cannot change the minimum of
P200, even if the offender is a poor man. (See People
vs. Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-6300, April 20, 1954)
For each degree, take P500 from the maximum of the next
higher degree.
Therefore, one degree lower would be P200 as minimum to
PI,500 as maximum.
And two degrees lower would be P200 as minimum to P1,000
as maximum.
For the guidance of the bench and bar, in reducing the
penalty of fine by one or more degrees, the basis for the
reduction of the first as well as the second degree
- must necessarily be the penalty prescribed by law

2
• __

for the consummated felony.

Thus, where the maximum fine fixed for the consummated

offense is not more than P2,000,
- the fine for the frustrated felony is determined by
reducing the maximum by one-fourth, which is
Pl,500.00.
Reducing it further by one degree for attempted felony,
- the second reduction by one-fourth should be
based on P2,000, not on the penalty as reduced
(Pl,500.00) so that the maximum fine as reduced by
two degrees would be PI,000.00. (De los Angeles vs.
People, 103 Phil. 295, 297-298)

Example of increasing fine by one
degree.
Let us suppose that a certain crime is punished with a fine of
not less than P200 and not more than P6,000.
One-fourth of the maximum of P6,000 is Pl,500.
- The fine immediately higher in degree in accordance with
this article will be from P200.00 to P7.500.00.
RULE: As to "fines that do not consist of fixed amount, but ar e
made proportional." examples
- When the negligent act resulted in damage to
property of another,
- the fine shall be from an amount equal to the
value of the damage to three times such
value, but shall in no case be less than 25
pesos. (Art. 365, par. 3)
- In the crime of direct bribery (Art. 210) involving a bribe
of P2,300,
- the maximum fine is f*6,900 (three times the
value of the gift),
- and that amount (f*6,900) should be the basis
for lowering the penalty by two degrees,
- which is the penalty for attempted bribery.
(De los Angeles vs. People, 103 Phil. 295, 298-
299)
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 76. Legal period of duration of divisible
penalties. - The legal period of duration of
divisible penalties shall be considered as divided
into three parts, forming three periods, the
minimum, the medium, and the maximum in the
manner shown in the following table:
(TABLE IN ANOTHER FILE)
---------------------------------------------------------
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Provisions common in the last two preceding
sections (SECTION 1 & 2)
LEGAL PERIOD OF DURATION OF DIVISIBLE PENALTIES.
- Article 76 shows the manner divisible penalties are divided into
three periods.
- For instance, the time included in each of the periods
of reclusion temporal is determined, as follows:
- (1) Reclusion temporal has a duration of from
- 12 years and 1 day as the minimum,
- to 20 years, as the maximum.
- (2) Subtract the minimum (disregarding the 1 day) from
the maximum; thus —
- 20 years - 12 years = 8 years
- (3) Divide the difference by 3; thus —
- 8 years / 3 = 2 years and 8 months.
- (4) Use the minimum of 12 years and 1 day of reclusion
temporal as the minimum of the minimum period.
- 12 years and 1 day as the minimum,
- Then add 2 years and 8 months to the minimum
(disregarding the 1 day) to get the maximum of the
minimum period.

3
• __

- Thus, we have 14 years and 8 months as the

maximum of the minimum period.
- Medium — 4 years, 2 months and 21 days to 6 years, 1
- The range of the minimum period is, therefore, 12 years
month and 10 days, and
and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months.

- (5) Use the maximum of the minimum period as the

- Maximum — 6 years, 1 month and 11 days to 8 years
minimum of the medium period, and add 1 day to
distinguish it from the maximum of the minimum period;
- we have 14 years, 8 months and 1 day. - The division of arresto mayor into three equal periods does not
- Then add 2 years and 8 months to the maximum? of follow the rule. According to the table prepared under Art. 76,
the medium period (disregarding the 1 day); the three periods of arresto mayor are:
- we have 17 years and 4 months, as the Minimum period — 1 month and 1 day to 2 months.
maximum of the medium period. Medium period — 2 months and 1 day to 4 months.
- The range of the medium period is, therefore, 14 years, Maximum period — 4 months and 1 day to 6 months.
8 months and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months.
- (6) Use the maximum of the medium period as the
PERIOD DEGREE
minimum of the maximum period, and add 1 day to
distinguish it from the maximum of the medium period;
TheRevised Penal Code,
- we have 17 years, 4 months and 1 day.
unlike the old Penal Code,
- Then add 2 years and 8 months to the maximum? of
clearly establishes a
the maximum period (disregarding the 1 day);
distinction between "period"
- and we have 20 years.
and "degree,"
- Hence, the range of the maximum period is 17 years, 4
months and 1 day to 20 years.
by designating as a "period" designating as a "degree" the
each of the three equal parts diverse penalties mentioned
of a divisible penalty by name in the Revised Penal
Code. (People vs. Padilla, 36
O.G. 2404)

- RULE: It seems that the intention of the Legislature when it

enacted the law (Revised Penal Code) is to give the three ---------------------------------------------------------
periods of a divisible penalty equal or uniform duration.
- Even in cases in which the penalty prescribed by law is
not composed of three periods,
- the courts shall divide "into three equal portions the
time included in the penalty prescribed, x x x forming Article 77. When the penalty is a complex one
one period of each of the three portions." (Art. 65)
composed of three distinct penalties. - In cases in
- It is clear that the duration of each of the periods of
the divisible penalties as fixed in the table in Art. 76 of
which the law prescribes a penalty composed of
the Revised Penal Code is not controlling when the three distinct penalties, each one shall form a
penalty prescribed is composed of three periods period; the lightest of them shall be the minimum
corresponding to different divisible penalties. the next the medium, and the most severe the
maximum period.
- RULE: When the penalty is composed of three periods
corresponding to different divisible penalties. Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have
- If the Revised Penal Code prescribes the penalty of one of the forms specially provided for in this
- prision correccional in its medium and Code, the periods shall be distributed, applying
maximum periods to
- prision mayor in its minimum period,
by analogy the prescribed rules.
- what is the duration of each of its three periods? ---------------------------------------------------------
what is the duration of each of its three periods? APPLICATION OF PENALTIES

The time included in the prescribed penalty is from 2 years, 4 Provisions common in the last two preceding
months and 1 day to 8 years.
sections (SECTION 1 & 2)
THE time included in the prescribed penalty be divided into
three equal portions, each to form one period, as follows: COMPLEX PENALTY
composed of three distinct penalties.
- Minimum — 2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 4 years, 2 months
and 20 days,
- What is a complex penalty?

4
• __

- It is a penalty prescribed by law composed of three

distinct penalties,
- each forming a period;
- the lightest of them shall be the minimum, the next the
medium, and the most severe the maximum period.
(Art. 77)
- When the law prescribes a penalty composed of three
distinct penalties

- RULE: When the law prescribes a penalty composed of three

distinct penalties, each one shall form a period.
- Example: Reclusidn temporal to death (Art. 114).
- Maximum — Death.
- Medium — Reclusion perpetua
- RULE: (this is between reclusion temporal and
death).
- Minimum — reclusion temporal

- Example: Art. 294, par. 2, provides a penalty of

reclusidn temporal in its medium period to reclusidn
perpetua.
- The penalty is composed of two distinct penalties.
- The maximum is reclusidn perpetua, it being indivisible;
- the medium is reclusion temporal in its maximum
period;
- and the minimum is reclusion temporal in its medium
period.
---------------------------------------------------------