Decision

Perlas-Bernabe v. Peralta

A.C. No. 5333 · 2017-03-13 · PER CURIAM, J. · LawPhil

<http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/march2017 /5333 .pdf> [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, First Division]. [5](https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt5) Id. at 7. [6](https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt6)…

En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt2) 748 Phil. 18 (2014) [Per Curiam, En Banc]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt3) Id.

at 24. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt4) A.C. No. 5333, March 13, 2017, <http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/march2017 /5333 .pdf> [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, First Division]. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt5) Id.

at 7. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt6) People v. Peralta, 134 Phil. 703, 731 (1968) [Per Curiam, En Banc]. See REV.

PEN. CODE, art. 70, which states: (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt7) Art. 70.

Successive service of sentences. - When the culprit has to serve 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 may be possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed, or should they have been served out. Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, 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 said maximum period. Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt8) 134 Phil. 703, 731 (1968) [Per Curiam, En Banc].

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt9) Id. at 731. (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt10) Id.

(https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#rnt11) In The Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Pete C. Lagran, 415 Phil. 506, 510 (2001) [Per J. Puno, First Division]. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation [![](https://lawphil.net/images/back.gif)](javascript:history.back\(1\)) [![](https://lawphil.net/images/top.gif)](https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/aug2017/ac11149so2017.html#top) ![](https://lawphil.net/imgs/bckgnds/010.gif)