Flora Cadimas v. Director of Prisons
Supreme Court
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-9725 October 19, 1955
FLORA CADIMAS, petitioner,
vs.
THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS,respondent.
Villanueva & Associates for petitioner.
Office of the Solicitor General Ambrosio Padilla and Florencio Villamor for respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
REYES, J.B.L.,J.:
It appearing that petitioner's husband, Donato Cachola, is at present a prisoner at the Iwahig Penal Colony, under the control of respondent Director of Prisons, pursuant to a final decision of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur dated January 18, 1955, sentencing him to five (5) years imprisonment and a fine of P1,000, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, for the crime of illegal possession of military ammunition (hand grenade), committed on or about March 16, 1951, allegedly in violation of Republic Act No. 4;
Considering that in March 1951, such unlicensed possession of firearms or ammunitions was not unlawful, for the reason that Republic Act No. 482 had extended the period for the surrender of unlicensed arms and ammunition to June 10, 1951; that during the extended period, only makingusethereof, or carrying themon the personof the possessor, was made punishable; and neither of these acts was attributed to the accused Donato Cachola;
Considering, further, that while Donato Cachola pleaded guilty to the information, such plea, as pointed out in the return of the Solicitor General, constituted only an admission of the facts alleged in the information, but was not an admission that the acts charged were unlawful, nor did it have the effect of curing the defect in the Court's jurisdiction (Peoplevs.Santos Lopez, 45 Off. Gaz., [No. 5] 2089);
Considering that the information against Donato Cachola did not charge any crime, and therefore, his conviction was void;
The writ ofhabeas corpusprayed for is granted, and in view of the admitted facts, the prisoner Donato Cachola is ordered released from custody. Without costs.
Bengzon, Acting C. J., Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, and Concepcion, JJ.,concur.
Related decisions
Decisions on similar questions that neither cites the other: they rely on the same precedents, are cited together, or apply the same law.
- L-4706 July 24 v. Villasco1951cited together 1× · both apply Act 4, Act 482, RA 4
- L-80066 May 24 v. Asuncion1988both apply Act 4, Act 482, RA 4
- L-4710 March 19 v. Epimaco Tabunares Office of the…1953both apply Act 4, Act 482, RA 4
- En Banc A.m. No. Rtj-91-752 June 23 v. Dizon1993both apply Act 4, Act 482, RA 4
- People v. Danilo Guevarra y Capillan the…1990both apply Act 4, Act 482, RA 4
- L-6353 May 26 v. Concepcion1954both apply Act 482, RA 482
- L-6216 April 30 v. Kapunan1954both apply Act 482, RA 482
- L-5847 February 17 v. Dionisio Feliciano Crisostomo F.…1953both apply Act 482, RA 482
Laws it applies
Links and connections are read from the text by pattern matching, not checked by a person. A guide, not a finding.