Petitioner was convicted of selling 0.13 grams of shabu and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of 20,000 pesos. Petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus arguing that a new law reduced penalties for drug crimes and should apply retroactively. The court denied the writ as premature since petitioner had not served the minimum of the sentence. However, the court noted that those convicted of drug crimes who have served the maximum revised sentences under the new law could file habeas corpus petitions, even if informally, to consider early release.
Petitioner was convicted of selling 0.13 grams of shabu and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of 20,000 pesos. Petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus arguing that a new law reduced penalties for drug crimes and should apply retroactively. The court denied the writ as premature since petitioner had not served the minimum of the sentence. However, the court noted that those convicted of drug crimes who have served the maximum revised sentences under the new law could file habeas corpus petitions, even if informally, to consider early release.
Petitioner was convicted of selling 0.13 grams of shabu and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of 20,000 pesos. Petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus arguing that a new law reduced penalties for drug crimes and should apply retroactively. The court denied the writ as premature since petitioner had not served the minimum of the sentence. However, the court noted that those convicted of drug crimes who have served the maximum revised sentences under the new law could file habeas corpus petitions, even if informally, to consider early release.
Facts Petitioner was charged with, and convicted of, selling and delivering 0.13 grams of shabu, in violation of Section 15,2 Article III, of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 (R.A. No. 6425) TC convicting accused; affirmed by SC. Petitioner to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P20,000.00. Petitioner now filed petition for habeas corpus, (a) R.A. No. 7659, has reduced the penalties prescribed under the original provision of the Dangerous Drugs Act only prision correccional. (b) Ruling in People vs. Simon, which has confirmed the retroactive application of RA 7659. . Issue W/N writ of habeas corpus is proper - No. Held Premature. Petitioner has only served the minimum of his sentence If at all, qualified, he may only be released on parole pursuant to Section 5 of the Indeterminate Sentence Law Further, Court had the occasion to express concern over the plight of persons convicted of said offence, who by virtue of of effectivity of RA 7659, could be entitled to parole for having served their minimum sentences, or who may be due for release from confinement after having served their maximum sentences Court said that All courts of competent jurisdiction may entertain petitions for habeas corpus to consider the release of prisoners convicted for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act who have served the maximum of the applicable penalties newly prescribed by RA 7659. That the formalities required for petitions for habeas corpus shall be construed liberally, and such petitions, although de cient in form (e.g. in letter- petition forms), may be entertained so long as they are suf cient in substance