University of the Philippines College of Law

Block F2022 - Persons

Topic Crimes Against Public Order – Evasion of Service of Sentence

Case No. G.R. No. L-27191 | February 28, 1967 | 19 SCRA 564
Case Name Tanega vs Masakayan
Petitioner Adelaida Tanega
Respondent Hon. Honorato Masakayan (CFI of Rizal, Brach V) and Chief of Police of Quezon City
Ponente Sanchez, J.:

RELEVANT FACTS

Adelaida Tanega was convicted of slander by the City Court of Quezon City and sentenced to arresto
manor of 20 days and to indemnify Pilar B. Julio with PhP 100, subsidiary imprisonment and to pay costs.
This was confirmed by CA.

On January 11, 1965, CFI directed execution to be on 01/27/65. On appeal, it was deferred to 02/12/65
at 8:30 AM – on said date petitioner did not show up. Judge then issues a warrant of arrest and an alias
warrant of arrest on February 15, 1965 and March 23, 1965, respectively.

On December 10, 1966, petitioner’s counsel moved to quash the warrants due to prescription. On
December 19, 1966, Judge ruled penalty be imposed and directed issuance of another alias warrant.

ISSUE
 Whether or not the imposed penalty on petitioner has prescribed

RATIO DECIDENDI

Ratio
No.

Art. 92 of the RPC provides that light penalties prescribe in one year. Moreover, Art. 93 states that the
prescription period shall commence to run from the date when the culprit should evade the service of
his sentence. Art 157 defines such as:

"ART. 157. Evasion of service of sentence. — The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon any convict who shall evade service of his sentence by escaping
during the term of his imprisonment by reason of final judgment. However, if such evasion or escape shall
have taken place by means of unlawful entry, by breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs, or floors, or
by using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence or intimidation, or through connivance with other
convicts or employees of the penal institution, the penalty shall be prision correccional in its maximum
period."

Thus, elements of evasion of service of sentence: (1) conviction by final judgement, (2) serving his/her
sentence which consists of deprivation of liberty and (3) evades service by escape during the term of
sentence. Reason dictates that one can “escape” only after he/she has begun to serve his/her sentence.
 University of the Philippines College of Law
Block F2022 - Persons

Thus, for prescription of penalty of imprisonment imposed by final sentence to commence to run, the
culprit should escape during the term of such imprisonment.

In present case, convict was never placed in confinement, hence, prescription of penalty does not run in
her favour,

RULING

For the reasons given, the Court resolved to dismiss the petition for certiorari and
prohibition. No costs. So ordered.

NO SEPARATE OPINION