Nullum Crimen Nulla Poena Sine Lege Case No.

29

Source: Art. 3 of the 1987 Constitution

Double Jeopardy

People v. Pimentel

288 SCRA 542 (1998)

FACTS:

In 1983, private respondent Antonio Tujan was charged with subversion under RA
1700 (Anti-Subversion Law). As a consequence thereof, a warrant for his arrest has
been issued on July 29,1983 but it could not be served because he could not be
found.
7 years later (June 5, 1990), he was arrested on the basis of his warrant of arrest
of the subversion case. When arrested, an unlicensed .38 caliber special revolver and
six rounds of live ammunition were found on his possession.
On June 14, 1990, he was charged with illegal possession of firearms and ammunition
in furtherance of subversion under Presidential Degree 1866. On July 16 1990, Tujan
filed the motion to quash the second criminal case contending that common crimes
such as illegal possession of firearms and ammunition should actually be deemed
absorbed by the crime subversion. He is entitled to invoke constitutional protection
against double jeopardy.

ISSUE: Whether or not Presidential Degree 1866 be quashed on ground of double

jeopardy

RULING: No

RATIO DECIDENDI: The Article III of the Constitution and Rule 117 Revised Rules of
Court state that for double jeopardy to occur, acquittal, conviction or dismissal in
previous cases must have occurred. In this case, first case was not even arraigned yet.
Also the cases are not of the same issue. R.A. 1700 punishes subversion while PD
1866 punishes illegal possession of firearms.

However, since RA 7636 totally repealed subversion or RA 1700, and since this is
favorable to the accused, we can no longer charge accused with RA 1700 even if they
didn’t raise this issue. PD 1866 should be amended to mere illegal possession of
firearms without furtherance of subversion.