Rule No. 34. Prision Correccional in its medium and maximum periods.

If the penalty
prescribed by law, or reduced by degree is prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods (a divisible penalty not composed of periods), the indeterminate minimum penalty
shall be fixed anywhere within the range of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period (4 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months), which is
the penalty next lower in degree, while the indeterminate maximum penalty shall be fixed
after taking into consideration modifying circumstances anywhere within the range of the
proper imposable period of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, which
is broken down in accordance with Article 65.

Sub-rule no. 1 – No modifying circumstances – If the penalty prescribed by law, or

reduced by degree is prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and there are
no aggravating and mitigating circumstances, this penalty shall be imposed in its medium
period (Article 64, par. 1). In such case, the indeterminate minimum penalty shall be fixed
anywhere within the range of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional
in its medium period (4 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months), which is the penalty
next in degree, while the indeterminate maximum penalty shall be fixed anywhere within
the range of “medium period” of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods (3
years, 6 months and 21 days to 4 years, 9 months and 10 days).

JURISPRUDENCE

The United States v. Legaspi, G.R. No. L-5110, August 19, 1909
The trial court, in imposing the penalty, gave the accused the benefit of the
provisions of article 11 of the Penal Code, and sentenced them to two years, four
months, and one day of prision correccional, that being the minimum penalty
prescribed for the crime of adultery: there is nothing in the record which discloses that
the defendants are members of uncivilized or semicivilized tribes or persons of notably low
order of intelligence, nor does it appear that the commission of the crime of adultery, of
which they were convicted, was marked by such exceptional circumstances as to suggest a
holding that they are entitled to the benefit of the provisions of this article, and this court
has in general declined to affirm the extension of the benefits of its provisions to persons
convicted of the crime of adultery. (U. S. vs. Borjal et al., 9 Phil. Rep., 140; U.S. vs. Mercado et
al .,1 decided August 3, 1909.)
We therefore reverse so much of the sentence of the trial court as imposes upon the
defendants the penalty of two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional, and
instead thereof we impose upon them and each of them the penalty of three years, six
months, and twenty-one days of prision correccional, and thus the sentence of the
trial court is affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the appellants.

Maquilan v. Maquilan, G.R. No. 155409, June 8, 2007

Herein petitioner and herein private respondent are spouses who once had a
blissful married life and out of which were blessed to have a son. However, their once sugar
coated romance turned bitter when petitioner discovered that private respondent was
having illicit sexual affair with her paramour, which thus, prompted the petitioner to file a
case of adultery against private respondent and the latter's paramour. Consequently, both
the private respondent and her paramour were convicted of the crime charged and were
sentenced to suffer an imprisonment ranging from one (1) year, eight (8) months,
minimum of prision correccional as minimum penalty, to three (3) years, six (6)
months and twenty one (21) days, medium of prision correccional as maximum
penalty.