A.I. Powered: Philippine Bar Reviewer

Question

A. Felonies (Article 3): Duty of the Courts in Case of Non-Punishable Act and Excessive Penalty

1. X was charged with the crime of theft. However, during the trial, it was established that X did not commit the crime and was wrongly accused. The court acquitted X. Despite the acquittal, the court ordered X to pay restitution to the victim. X argues that the court's order is a violation of the duty of the courts in case of non-punishable acts. Is X correct? Discuss.

2. Y was convicted of drug trafficking and was sentenced to life imprisonment under Republic Act No. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Y believes that the penalty imposed on him is excessive considering the circumstances of his case. He wants to appeal the sentence based on the excessive penalty provision under Article 5 of the Revised Penal Code. Analyze the legality of Y's claim.

3. Z was convicted of arson and was sentenced to death. Z’s lawyer argues that the penalty of death is excessive and violates Article 5 of the Revised Penal Code. Discuss the duty of the courts in imposing penalties and the validity of Z's lawyer's argument.

4. A was charged with the crime of estafa. During the trial, it was revealed that the amount allegedly embezzled by A was lower than the threshold amount set by law for estafa. The court convicted A for estafa and imposed the corresponding penalty. A claims that the court erred in convicting him as the act committed only amounts to a misdemeanor. Examine A's argument in light of the courts' duty in case of non-punishable acts.

5. B was convicted of murder and was sentenced to a penalty higher than what is prescribed by law. B argues that the court's imposition of an excessive penalty violates his constitutional rights. Assess the validity of B's claim and explain the duty of the courts in dealing with excessive penalties.

---

Answer