Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR NO. 171447 2006-11-29	PEOPLE v. FEDERICO ARNAIZ Y ARMONIO TINGA, J.
As regards the OSG's prayer that the duration of 20 years and 1 day to 40 years as stated in the dispositive portion of the RTC Decision be deleted for being a surplusage, we feel the statement of said duration is innocuous. In the case of People v. Lucas,[63] we ruled, thus:x x x x
	GR No. 139907 2003-03-28	PEOPLE v. MARCELO BATES AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
For the guidance of both the bench and bar, it must be mentioned that the trial court committed an error in imposing the penalty of "forty (40) years of reclusion perpetua". We reiterate our earlier pronouncements in a number of cases that while Section 21 of RA No. 7659 amended Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code by fixing the duration of reclusion perpetua from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years, reclusion perpetua remains to be an indivisible penalty in the absence of a clear legislative intent to alter its original classification as an indivisible penalty.[25] Hence, in applicable cases such as the present case, "reclusion perpetua" should simply be imposed without specifying its duration.