Practice question
A court establishes that two valid penalties can, by their nature, be served at the same time. An administrator insists that every pair of penalties must nevertheless be served one after another. Is that position consistent with Article 70?
- Yes, because simultaneous service is never allowed.
- Yes, because the number of convictions alone controls.
- No; Article 70 permits simultaneous service when their nature allows it.
- Yes, unless the accused receives a pardon.
- No, because all penalties automatically merge into one conviction.
Legal references
- Commonwealth Act No. 217, Section 2 amending RPC Article 70, simultaneous and successive service and threefold rule: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/29/15348
- Mejorada v Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-51065-72, June 30, 1987, main decision, service rather than imposition: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1987/jun1987/gr_l-51065_1987.html
- People v Escares, G.R. Nos. L-11128-33, December 23, 1957, main decision, separate penalties and Article 70 service: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1957/dec1957/gr_l-11128-33_1957.html
- RA 9346, Sections 1–4, death-penalty prohibition, substitute penalties and clemency: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2006/ra_9346_2006.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.