Author: Dompor, Joachim, Alfonso P.

DAMASCO vs LAQUI (1988)

Petition: Review on Certiorari
Petitioner: Efigenio S. Damasco
Respondent: Judge Hilario L. Laqui in his capacity as Presiding Judge of
Metropolitan Trial Court, Br. 59, Mandaluyong, Metro Manila and the People
of the Philippines
Ponencia: Padilla
DOCTRINE:
While the Supreme Court has the power to promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and
procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated
Bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged, such rules shall not
however diminish, increase or modify substantive rights
FACTS:
1. On September 17, 1987, in the MTC of Mandaluyong presided by
Judge Laqui, petitioner Atty. Damasco was charged with the crime of
grave threats. Based on the information, he threatened to shoot one
Rafael Sumadohat for not paying certain amounts back to him
2. Judge Laqui found Damasco guilty of light threats and sentenced him
to pay a fine of P100 and costs
3. Petitioner filed a motion to set aside and rectify the dispositive
portion for the reason that he cannot be charged for the crime of light
threats because the offense had already prescribed when the
information was filed
a. Crime committed July 8, information filed September 17 71
days
b. Light threats = 60 days to file
4. Lower court denied this motion, stating: since the Court acquired
jurisdiction to try the case because the information was filed within
the prescriptive period for the crime charged, which is Grave Threats,
the same cannot be lost by prescription, if after trial what has been
proven is merely light threats
ISSUES:
1. WoN Damasco was correctly convicted of the crime of light threats
despite the period for filing a complaint having prescribed at the time
the information for grave offenses was filed
PROVISION:
Section 5, Art VIII of the Constitution
o The Supreme Court may [p]romulgate rules concerning
the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,

pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission

to the practice of law, the integrated Bar, and legal
assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a
simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy
disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the
same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify
substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and
quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless
disapproved by the Supreme Court.
RULING + RATIO:
1. NO. Damasco was incorrectly convicted of the crime of light threats
a. Francisco vs. Court of Appeals
i. Where an accused has been found to have
committed a lesser offense includible within the
graver offense charged, he cannot be convicted of
the lesser offense if it has already prescribed
ii. To hold otherwise would be to sanction a
circumvention of the law on prescription by the
simple expedient of accusing the defendant of the
graver offense
b. In the case of Reyes vs. IAC, A Memorandum prepared for
the Court, entitled "An Examination of the Rule Which Holds
That One Cannot Be Convicted Of A Lesser Offense
Includible Within a Greater Offense, Where Prosecution For
The Latter Was Commenced After Expiration Of Limitations
Applicable To The Lesser Offense"
i. There can be a possible attempt to depart from the
rule laid down in Francisco vs. CA
1. principle of presumption of regularity in the
performance of official acts and duties, and
by interpreting the phrase "prescription of a
crime or offense" as merely "a bar to the
commencement of a criminal action
ii. Philippine jurisprudence considers prescription of a
crime or offense as a loss or waiver by the State of
its right to prosecute an act prohibited and punished
by law (Art.89 RPC)
iii. Attempt to depart from ruling in Francisco vs. CA will
have to contend with the Constitutional provision that
while the Supreme Court has the power to
promulgate rules (), such rules shall not diminish,
increase or modify substantive rights
DISPOSITION: Petition GRANTED. Questioned decision SET ASIDE.

Author: Dompor, Joachim, Alfonso P.