Characteristic of Criminal Law

Prospective (Art. 366 of RPC)

- Crimes are PUNISHED under the laws enforced at the time (so your basis of punishment is
according to CURRENTLY APPLICABLE laws)
- EXCEPT: 1) When current laws are like “ok, this law is not applicable to currently pending
actions or existing causes of action”, 2) offender is a habitual criminal
- EFFECTS: 1) New punishment is lighter- new punishment is enforced, 2) New punishment is
heavier- old punishment is enforced, 3) New law makes the crime totally fine and no longer
punishable, crime is destroyed (NOTE: Punishment is always in favor of offender)
-

People vs. Crisanto Tamayo

61 Phil 225

Facts:
 Defendant-appellant committed a crime, right, and he was convicted and fined for that. Then he tried
to appeal that decision of conviction.

Issues:
 While waiting for the court decision of that appeal, the law he violated was repealed.
 Because of that law repeal, technically, his crime/violation didn’t exist anymore because there is no
law to violate (basically the thing he did is no longer illegal)
 So D-A dude decided to move for court dismissal of his original conviction and his fine (because
duh, why should he be criminalized for something that’s perfectly fine and legal)
 Everybody’s basically confused if he really gets off or not

Principles:
 Two previous cases (US vs. Cuna, and Wing vs. US) say that repeal would not destroy criminal
liability
 Philippine rule is more in conformity with Spain where when an offense ceases to be criminal,
prosecution cannot be had (1 Pachecho Commentaries, 296)

Rulings:
 Conduct is no longer deemed a crime
 Very illogical of the court to punish D-A for something which is no longer a crime
 Proceedings against appellant, dismissed, BYE
 Basically, D-A gets off his criminal charges and his fine