Choa vs.

Chiongson
December 14, 2012 by Lagangang Butas

Choa vs. Chiongson (A.M. No. MTJ-95-1063. February 9, 1996) Complainant: Alfonso C. Chua Respondent: Judge Roberto S. Chiongson Ponente: J. Davide, Jr. FACTS: A complaint was filed against Alfonso Choa for making untruthful statements or falsehoods in his Petition for Naturalization. The case was docketed as Criminal Case No. 50322 and was assigned to Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MCTC) of Bacolod City Branch III presided by the respondent Judge Roberto Chiongson. On February 21, 1995, respondent Judge found the complainant guilty of the crime of perjury and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of six months and one day of prision correccional and to pay the costs. The complainant moved for a reconsideration of the judgment but was subsequently denied for lack of merit. He then filed the instant complaint against the respondent Judge and prayed for the latters removal from office alleging, inter alia, that he was sentenced to suffer a penalty higher than that provided by law, without applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. ISSUE: Whether or not the respondent Judge erred in not applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law in the crime of perjury. HELD: No. Section 2 of R.A. No. 4103 (Indeterminate Sentence Law) substantially provides that the Act shall not apply to those penalties whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year. The penalty for perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code is arresto mayor in its maximum period which is one (1) month and one (1) day to six (6) months to prision correccional in its minimum period which is six (6) months and one (1) day to two (2) years and four (4) months. The complainant was sentenced to suffer the penalty of six months and one day of prision correccional. Thus, the respondent Judge was correct in not applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law.