Data Center College of the Philippines, Laoag City

Non-Institutional Correction
Midterm 2nd Semester A.Y 2021-2022
JEMUEL T. ALEJO
Instructor

General Instructions: This module is for the duration of the whole prelim period. It has ___ lessons divided
across ___ weeks. Take each lesson per week for a smooth flow in doing your tasks and to internalize deeply
the salient learnings that you should acquire at the end of the period.
Exclusive Instructions: This uses different techniques to cater the competencies for this course. This means to
say that you will expect some online assessments, online class, enrichment videos, and etc.

Learning objectives:
At the end of the term, the students are expected to have acquired the following:

1. understand, summarize and discuss the historical development of probation particularly in England,
United States and Philippines.
2. name the personalities and recognized their contribution to the development of probation.
3. understand, digest and discuss the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of People vs. Vera.
4. differentiates P.D. 968 to Act no. 4221.
5. identify and discus the forerunners of probation.
6. understand, summarize and explain amendments to P.D. 968.
7. explain the nature of granting probation;
8. identify those qualified and disqualified offenders for probation; and
9. illustrate, understand and summarized the procedure in the application of probation as well as its
resolution or grant

1 COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION OF THE PROBATION

I. Elements of Probation

a. Four Essential Elements of Probation

1. A post sentence investigation report which will serve as the informational for the court’s decision
to grant or deny probation.
2. The conditional suspension of execution of sentence by the court.
3. Condition of probation imposed by the court to protect public safety and to faster the rehabilitation
and reformation of the probationer.
4. Supervision, guidance and assistance of the offender by a probation officer.

b. Essential Elements of the Probation System under PD 968

The following are the essential elements of the probation system under Presidential Decree No. 968:
1. Probation is a single or one-time" affair.
2. Probation system is highly selective.
3. Persons under probation retain their civil rights, like the right to vote, or practice one's profession,
or exercise parental or marital authority.

II. Objectives of Probation

Adscollections2022
 The following are the fundamental objectives of a Probation Agency
1. Assist the court in matters pertaining to sentencing
2. Promote community protection by supervising and monitoring the activities of persons on probation
3. Promote the betterment of offenders by ensuring that they receive appropriate rehabilitation services

III. Purpose of Probation

The purpose of the Probation Law as stated in Section 2 thereof reiterates the above-mentioned
characteristics and vests in them the mandate of law. It provides that the purpose of the Decree is to:
1. Promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him with individualized
treatment;
2. provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might be less probable
if he were to serve a prison sentence; and 3. Prevent the commission of offenses.

IV. Advantages of Probation

The implementation of the Probation Law will confer benefits and advantages not only to society in
general but more soon the part of the offender and the government. Specifically the following are the
advantage of probation:
1. Probation prevents crime by offering freedom and aid only to those who are not likely to assault
society again.
2. It protects the society by placing under close supervision non-dangerous offenders while
undergoing treatment and rehabilitation in the community.
[Link] conform the modern humanistic trends in Penology.
4. It prevents youthful of first time offenders from turning into hardened criminals.
5. It is a measure of cutting enormous expends in maintaining jails.
6. It reduces recidivism and overcrowding of jails and prisons.
7. It reduces the burden of police forces and institution in feeding and guarding detainees.
8. It gives the first and light offenders a second chance in life.
9. It makes the offender productive or taxpayers instead of tax eaters.
10. It restores to successful probationers his civil rights which was previously lost or suspended as a
result of conviction.
11. It has been proven effective in developing countries that have adopted it.
12. It is advocated by the United Nations in its various congresses in crime prevention and treatment of
offenders

V. Benefits of Probation

It protects society
a. from the excessive cost of detention
b. from the high rate of recidivism of detained offender

It protects the victim

a. it provides restitution
b. it preserves justice

It protects the family

a. it does not deprive the wife and children of husband and father
b. it maintains the unity of a home

It assists the government

a. it reduces the population of prisons and jail
b. it lessens the clogging of courts
c. it lightens the load of prosecutors

It helps the offender

a. it maintains his earning power
b. it provides rehabilitation in the community
c. it restores his dignity
Adscollections2022
 It justifies the philosophy of men
a. that life is sacred
b. that all men deserve a second chance
c. that and individual can change
d. that society has the moral obligation to lift the fallen

VI. Savings of Probation

The following are the savings of probation:
1. Probation is one tenth the cost of detention. As illustrated, the per capita cost of maintaining
one offender in the Philippines is estimated at Php 11,000.00 annually, while it costs only Php 300.00
to maintain one offender on probation.
2. This means savings of Php 30,000.00 when 10,000 of 40,000 offenders are on probation
annually. It is expected that at least one third of the prisons and jail population in the country would
benefit from probation.
3. The average per capita income of a Filipino in 2003 according to the National Statistics and
Coordination Board (NSCB) was Php 30,703.00. It means that when 10,000 probationers are making a
living they will produce Php 307,030,000.00 in goods and service annually. A part of this goes to the
government in forms of taxes. Indeed, detention makes tax eaters while probation makes TAX
PAYERS.
4. The cost of constructing and preparing prisons and jails is enormous which would run to at least
Php10,000,000 annually in order to accommodate 40,000 offenders.
5. The probation system saves the government a total of Php 4.678 Billion in terms of prisoners
maintenance in jails and prisons all over the country.
6. Philippine Probation System adheres to the concept of Restorative Justice. Thus, a total of Php
137.923 Million has been paid to clients’ victims and/or their heirs
7. The biggest savings of probation aside from money are, however, in the forms of human
resources, dignity, time and opportunity for development, which are most needed by our society.

VII. Probation under PD 603 as amended by RA 9344

The Presidential Decree (PD) 603 is known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code. The Decree was signed
by his Excellency President Ferdinand Marcos on December 10, 1974 and took effect on June 10, 1975. It
provides for the grant of probation to youthful offender as an alternative to imprisonment. It is considered as
the second probation law of the Philippines which is intended only for minors.
Presidential Decree No. 603 applies to youthful offenders. It suspends the sentence of minor offenders
whose ages range from 9 years old but not more than 21 years old (now 18) the time of the commission of the
offense and places them to rehabilitation center. It states, "if after hearing the evidence in the proper
proceedings, the court should find that the youthful offender has committed the acts charged against
him, the court shall determine the imposable penalty, including any civil liability chargeable against
him. However, instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, the court shall suspend further proceedings and
shall commit such minor to the custody or care of the Department of Social Welfare, or to any training
institution operated by the government, or duly licensed agencies or any other responsible person, until he shall
have reached 21 years of age (now 18), or for a shorter period as the court may deem proper.

a. Related Provisions under RA 9344

Sec. 5 of Republic act No. 9344: Rights of the Child in Conflict with the Law. - Every child in conflict
with the law shall have the following rights, including but not limited to: xxx
(m) the right to probation as an alternative to imprisonment, if qualified under the Probation
Law; xxx

Sec. 42 of Republic act No. 9344: Probation as an Alternative to Imprisonment. - The court may, after it
shall have convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and upon application at any time, place the
child on probation in lieu of service of his/her sentence taking into account the best interest of the child. For
this purpose, Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as the "Probation Law of 1976", is
hereby amended accordingly.

Adscollections2022
 Sec. 43 of Republic act No. 9344: Confidentiality of Records and Proceedings. - All records and
proceedings involving children in conflict with the law from initial contact until final disposition of the case
shall be considered privileged and confidential. The public shall be excluded during the proceedings and the
records shall not be disclosed directly or indirectly to anyone by any of the parties or the participants in the
proceedings for any purpose whatsoever, EXCEPT to determine if the child in conflict with the law may
have his/her sentence suspended or if he/she may be granted probation under the Probation Law, or to
enforce the civil liability imposed in the criminal action.
The component authorities shall undertake all measures to protect this confidentiality of proceedings,
including non-disclosure of records to the media, maintaining a separate police blotter for cases involving
children in conflict with the law and adopting a system of coding to conceal material information which will
lead to the child's identity. Records of a child in conflict with the law shall not be used in subsequent
proceedings for cases involving the same offender as an adult, except when beneficial for the offender and upon
his/her written consent.
A person who has been in conflict with the law as a child shall not be held under any provision of law, to
be guilty of perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason of his/her failure to acknowledge the case
or recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry made to him/her for any purpose.

Sec. 67 of Republic act No. 9344: Children Who Reach the Age of Eighteen (18) Years Pending
Diversion and Court Proceedings. - If a child reaches the age of eighteen (18) years pending diversion and
court proceedings, the appropriate diversion authority in consultation with the local social welfare and
development officer or the Family Court in consultation with the Social Services and Counseling Division
(SSCD) of the Supreme Court, as the case may be, shall determine the appropriate disposition. In case the
appropriate court executes the judgment of conviction, and unless the child in conflict the law has already
availed of probation under Presidential Decree No. 603 or other similar laws, the child may apply for probation
if qualified under the provisions of the Probation Law.

b. Distinction between Probation under PD 603 and under PD 968

PD 603 PD 968
Under Presidential Decree No. 603 the youthful Under Presidential Decree No. 968, the offender is
offender is neither convicted nor sentenced although convicted and sentenced. Section 3 defines probation
the court finding him guilty determines the imposable as a disposition under which a defendant, after
penalty and orders his commitment as a matter of conviction and sentence, is released subject to
course to any of the trustees for his correction and conditions imposed by the court and to the
rehabilitation, even without his asking for it and
supervision of a probation officer. The probationer is
without any prior investigation.
not committed to any institution but is set free under
the constructive custody of the court which heard his
application for probation. Section 4 of the Probation
Decree requires that defendant should apply for
probation.

2 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PROBATION

The concept of probation, from the Latin, probatio, "testing," has historical roots in the practice of judicial
reprieve.
In English common law, prior to the advent of democratic rule, the courts could temporarily suspend the
execution of a sentence to allow a criminal defendant to appeal to the monarch for a pardon. Probation first
developed in the United States when John Augustus, a Boston cobbler, persuaded a judge in the Boston police
court in 1841 to give him custody of a convicted offender, a "drunkard," for a brief period and then helped the
man to appear rehabilitated by the time of sentencing.
Even earlier, the practice of suspending a sentence was used as early as 1830 in Boston, Massachusetts, and
became widespread in U.S. courts, although there was no statutory provision for such a practice.
At first, judges, most notably Peter Oxenbridge Thatcher of Boston, used "release on recognizance" or bail
and simply refrained from taking any further action. In 1878 the mayor of Boston hired a former police officer,
the ironically named "Captain Savage," to become what many recognize as the first official probation officer.
By the mid-19th century, however, many Federal Courts were using a judicial reprieve to suspend sentence, and
this posed a legal question.
Adscollections2022
 In 1916, the United States Supreme Court, in the Killets Decision, held that a Federal Judge (Killets) was
without power to suspend a sentence indefinitely. This decision led to the passing of the National Probation Act
of 1925, thereby, allowing courts to suspend the imposition of incarceration and place an offender on probation.
Probation developed from the efforts of a philanthropist, John Augustus, who looked for ways to rehabilitate the
behavior of criminals.
Massachusetts developed the first state-wide probation system in 1880, and by 1920, 21 other states had
followed suit. With the passage of the National Probation Act on March 5, 1925, signed by President Calvin
Coolidge, the U.S. Federal Probation Service was established. On the state level, pursuant to the Crime Control
and Consent Act of 1936, a group of states entered into an agreement wherein they would supervise
probationers and parolees who reside in each other's jurisdictions on each other's behalf. Known as the Interstate
Compact for the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers, this agreement was originally signed by 25 states in
1937.
By 1951, all the states in the United States of America had a working probation system and ratified the
Interstate Compact Agreement. In 1959, the new states of Alaska and Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, and the territories of the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa ratified the act as well.

DEVELOPMENT OF PROBATION A. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PROBATION IN

ENGLAND
Early in the 19th century the English magistrates initiated experiments to save young and inexperienced
offenders from stigma of prison. They made use of the latitude allowed then under the common law to bind over
defendants, who should be brought back for sentence if the conditions of release were violated.
The need for supervision and assistance to those so released was met by assigning the young offender to the
care and guardianship of his parents or his employer with an occasional check on his progress by the police.

WHO IS MATHEW DAVENPORT HILL?

Mathew Davenport Hill is considered the father of probation in England. He left an interesting account of
his experiments in the Birmingham court. He was in the forefront of reforming juvenile offenders. He finds
persons who act as guardians of the juvenile offender. Then at an unexpected period, the confidential officer
visits the guardian, makes inquiries and keeps notes of information received.
He conducted his experiment in the Birmingham Court. Beginning in the early years of 1481, he acted for
and in behalf of juvenile offenders, when he believes:
1. The individual is not fully corrupt
2. There was reasonable hope of reformation
3. When there could be found persons to act
As guardian they are kind enough to take charge of the young convict. In the belief that there is better hope
for reformation under such guardians than in prison.
At unexpected period, confidential officers visits the guardians, make inquiries and register facts. He was
thus informed and records were kept.

B. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PROBATION IN UNITED STATES

The first state to enact a real probation law in United States is Massachusetts. The first practical
demonstration of probation, first use of the term as court service, and the enactment of the first probation law
occurred in Massachusetts.

Volunteer services evolved in Maryland. The prisoners Aid Association of Maryland, organized in 1869,
employed agents to visit the prison and assist released prisoners and gradually they began to investigate cases
and assist offenders before the Baltimore courts. A 1894 law provided that any court in the state might release
on probation for “good conduct” a person convicted of any offense not capital, if no previous conviction was
proved against him, upon his entering into a recognizance, with or without sureties, and during such period as
the court may direct to appear and received judgment when called upon, and in the meantime to keep the peace
and be of good behavior.

Another state adopting a partial measure was Missouri with its “parole of convicted person’s law of 1897.”

The second state to enact a real probation law. The Vermont like Missouri and unlike Massachusetts
provided for probation only after suspension of the execution of sentence. The bills in both states were

Adscollections2022
supported by the state correctional agencies. Many features of the Massachusetts law were incorporated, with
several innovations since followed elsewhere. Vermont was the first to adopt a county plan.

The third state to enact a real probation law is Rhode Island. A complete state-administered probation
system appeared first in Rhode Island. The Act of 1899 empowered the board of state charities and corrections
to appoint a state probation officer and additional probation officers, “one of whom at least shall be a women,”
to serve all courts in the state. The Act followed Massachusetts in permitting the use of probation before the
imposition of sentence and even without conviction but the limitation of probation to less serious offenses was
an unfortunate departure from the laws of Massachusetts and Vermont.

Success of probation became known in other English speaking countries. Illinois and Minnesota in 1899
Plan for children only. New Jersey and New York enacted probation law in 1900.

Finally, on March 4, 1925 the UNITED STATES FEDERAL PROBATION ACT was enacted.

WHO IS JOHN AUGUSTUS?

John Augustus is the father of probation in the USA. He is a Boston shoemaker, first to develop a sustained
service to promote temperance and to reclaim drunkards. Although later he begun to take men and woman
charged with other crimes, then eventually children. As indicated by the story of the first case, his method was
to provide bail for a temporary suspension or postponement of sentence, during which he sought to counsel and
assist such persons find homes, securing employment and adjusting family difficulties. At the end of the
probation period, he brought back the offender to court, and if no further complaint had been lodged against the
offender, the judged imposed a nominal fine with costs. If the man was too poor, Mr. Augustus advanced the
amount, usually as loan.
John Augustus originated in rudimentary form, many of the techniques of probation officers and other social
workers today, including casework, foster home placement, and protective work for women and children.

This was brought about by the changing attitudes of the people towards law breaker and the removal of the
inherited attitudes from the PURITANS.

John Augustus was born in 1785 at Woburn Massachusetts and moved to Lexington Green and became a
Cordwainer or Bootmaker. He prospered and acquired large track of land apart conveyed to Lexington Academy
to erect a school. Which he became a trustee. In 1827 he moved to Boston and set up a shop at Franklin Avenue
near the Courthouse. He began to visit courthouse because of his membership with the Washington Total
Abstinence Society, formed in Boston in 1841 to promote temperance and to reclaim drunkards. During the first
year, he took only men charge with drunkenness. Then men and women charge with other offense and then
children/ number of cases increases each year

METHODS OF AUGUSTUS
1. Provide bail for temporary suspension of punishment of sentence
2. Then he sought counsel and assists his charges in finding homes, securing employment and adjusting
family difficulties.
3. At the end of probation he brought offender back to court-if no further charges are found- judge imposes
a nominal fine with cost if man is poor, Augustus advance fine as a loan.

AUGUSTUS EXPERIMENT
- August 1841- Rugged drunk man
- 3 weeks -The drunkard was brought back to court where the judge cannot recognize him. Imposes a
fine of $ 3.76.
- Augustus died on June 21, 1859. And out of 2000 person whom he extended his help, only 10 were
ungrateful. And out of 1100 cases, only one case was forfeited.
- Massachusetts became the 1st country to enact a probation law on April 21, 1878

WHO IS GOVERNOR ALEXANDER H. RICE?

He provided appointment and prescribed duties for paid probation officers.

WHO IS PRESIDENT CALVIN COOLIDGE? The former governor of Massachusetts.

Adscollections2022
A. HISTORY OF PROBATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

The Adult Probation Law of 1935

The Philippine Legislature enacted the first probation of the Philippines. The first legislation was Act No.
4221 enacted by the Philippine legislature on August 07, 1935 and which created a Probation Offices under the
Department of Justice led by a Chief Probation Officer appointed by the American Governor General with the
advice and consent of the United States. This Law provided probation for the first time offenders, eighteen years
of age and over, convicted of a certain crime.

However, the law stayed in the statue Books for only Two years. The act subsequently declared
unconstitutional by the Supreme Court on Nov. 16, 1937 in People vs. Vera 37 O.G. 164.

NOTA BENE:
The ill-fated Act was only procedural
framework that was antagonistic with the
constitution/charter.
Section 11 of Act no 4221, the fatal
provision of the Act, provided that "This Act
shall apply only in those provinces in which the
respective provincial boards have provided for
the salary of a probation officer . . .. "

The declaration of unconstitutionality of the Probation Act of 1935 created a gap in the criminal justice
system in the Philippines. The criminal justice system is the machinery which society uses in the prevention and
control of crimes. Its components are the police, the courts, the penal institutions, the probation and the parole
systems the components are highly dependent upon one another. The failure of one can destroy the effectiveness
of all the others within the system.

In order to heighten the awareness of interdependency and cooperation among the components of the
criminal justice system, as well as to improve judicial process and to reduce the level of criminality, the
National Police Commission created an Inter-Disciplinary Committee in 1974 to prepare a National Crime
Prevention Program. On July 24, 1976, a "National Strategy to Reduce Crimes" was finalized and presented to
the President of the Philippines. The Strategy proposed a two-pronged attack to reduce crime in the country,
namely: (1) to give emphasis on the prevention and control of high-fear and economic crimes by implementing
a number of priorities of actions; and (2) to improve the quality of the criminal justice system by facilitating
teamwork among its interdependent components.

The following priorities of action were recommended:

1) Improvement of the quality of the criminal justice system among its interdependent components;
2) Improvement of the management skills of law enforcement;
3) Reducing the delays in the criminal justice processes;
4) Making corrections more attuned to its role of rehabilitating law offenders; and 5) Increasing the
community participation in crime prevention.
There were a number of projects recommended under each of these priorities of action, among which was
the establishment of an adult PROBATION SYSTEM. It was a priority action under (4).

The rationale for recommending priority consideration to the establishment of a probation system is clearly
apparent.
1. The penal system in the country is characterized by substandard treatment of prisoners. To try to train
lawbreakers to obey the law in a substandard system is self-defeating.
2. The deterrent potentiality of the prisons is grossly exaggerated. No one has ever proved that the threat of
severe punishment actually deters crime.
3. Prisons heighten the offenders' weaknesses and erode their capacity for responsibility and sociability.
4. The maintenance of penal institutions is costly on the part of the government. In view of these
considerations, an alternative to institutionalization for certain types of offenders was proposed. Such
proposal was subsequently translated into a law on July 24, 1976, which is now known as the "Probation
Law of 1976" or Presidential Decree No. 968.

Adscollections2022
WHO IS TEODULO C. NATIVIDAD?
He is the Father of Probation in the Philippines. He headed the committee (IDCCP) primarily tasked with
the drafting of the adult probation law.

THE ADULT PROBATION LAW OF 1976

It took a long time before another attempt was made with introduction then by Congressman Teodulo C.
Natividad in collaboration with former Congressman Ramon D. Bagatsing, House Bill No. 393. The measure
was passed in the Lower House and was pending in the senate when Martial Law was proclaimed in 1972.

The Presidential decree No. 968, established a probation system less costly alternative to the imprisonment
of the offender who are likely to respond to individualized, community-based treatment program is the second
legislation that enforces a probation system in the country.

On Nov. 13, 1974, the Inter-Disciplinary Committee on Crime Prevention (IDCCP) was created to formulate
a national crime prevention program for the courtly.

NOTA BENE: The committee places emphasis on

“Pro-action (crime prevention) rather than
Reaction (action after occurrence of the crime).

INTER-DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE ON CRIME PREVENTION (IDCCP)

The delegation’s official report served as the turning point for the Inter-Disciplinary Committee on Crime
Prevention of the commission to formulate for a national crime prevention program. As mandated under Section
4(k) of republic Act no. 4864, otherwise known as the police Act of 1966”, the National Police Commission, on
November 13, 1974, created the IDCCP. The IDCCP then under the charge of Commissioner Teodulo C.
Natividad, was asked by the Secretary and Chairman of NAPOLCOM, Juan Ponce Enrile to draft the adult
probation decree.
This Committee, the Inter-Disciplinary Committee, is composed of authorities and representative from the
five pillars of the criminal justice system. After a laborious period of eighteen technical hearings involving sixty
source persons, came out with the draft decree for presentation at a seminar on the Probation System sponsored
by the National Police Commission and the U.P. Law Center on April 24, 1976 subsequently attended by 369
participants.

The Proposal was reviewed by a mixture of Jurist, Penologist, Policemen, Educators subsequently civic
leaders, social and behavioral scientist, media men blue and white collar workers and housewives. Two (2)
foreign experts participated namely Dr. Torsten Erickson, former United Nations Inter-Regional Adviser on
Crime Prevention Justice and Dr. A. Lamonth Smith. Director for Research Program Planning and Elicit
comments on the adoption of adult probation system in the country.

A survey was made to elicit comments on the adoption of the adult probation system in the country.
Favorable resulted showed 87.1% in favor of the adoption, 7.1% apprehensive and 5.8% non-committal.

Thereafter, the draft was sent to the Secretary of the Department of the National Defense, Secretary of the
Department of the Justice and to the Supreme Court for review and endorsement of the President.

The final forum of the proposed institutionalization of adult probation in the country was the First National
Conference on Crime Control, which was held at Camp Aguinaldo from July 22 to July 24, 1976. It was on this
historic last day of the Conference that the Presidential Decree No. 968 and thereby Transported the criminal
justice system of the country to the twentieth century. In the process, the president also appointed as the first
Probation Administration, NAPOLCOM Chairman, Teodolo C. Natividad in a concurrent capacity.

THE MULTI- SECTORAL BODY

As advocated by the United Nations, the five-penal multi-sectoral body is composed of experts from the
various sectors and disciplines comprising the five pillars of criminal justice system, namely: Police,
Prosecution,

Adscollections2022
Court, Correction and Community Participation. The panel on community participation has sub-panels on
education, welfare, religion, Barangay, health and economics.

Under the leadership of Commissioner Teodulo C. Natividad, the IDCCP, after barely two months of work
evolved a proposed system of probation for adults based on evaluation of projects on crime prevention and
treatment of offenders in the courtly, notably the Bacolod City experiment on social defense.

This was later incorporated as part of PD 968 which was signed into law by Pres. Ferdinand E. Marcos on
July 24, 1976. Note: Jan. 3, 1978 – affectivity of the substantive provisions of PD 968.

Activity #1. Digest and analyze the case (People of the Philippines v Vera, GR NO. L-45685,
November 16, 1937)
Issues:
1.
the Act No. 4221 encroaches upon the pardoning power of executive.
2.
the Act No. 4221 constitute on undue delegation of legislative power.
3.
the Act No. 4221 denies the equal protection of the law.

Differences between PD 968 and Act 4221

Presidential Decree 968 Act no. 4221
(Probation Law of 1976) (Probation Law of
1935)
Applicability
As to It expressly and explicitly provides
of It expressly and explicitly provides
probation that "There shall be at least one that this Act shall apply only in
the probation officer in each province those provinces in which the
law and city who shall be appointed by respective provincial boards have
the provided for the salary of a
Secretary of Justice upon probation officer . . . "
recommendation of the (Section 11)
Administrator and in accordance
with civil service law and rules."
(Section 23) ❖ The Probation Law applies
❖ The Probation Law applies only to provinces and cities
to all provinces and cities, in which their respective
uniformly and without provincial boards have
discrimination. provided for the salary of a
❖ The salary of the probation probation officer.
officer in each province or ❖ The salary of the probation
city is provided for by law, officer is to the discretion
no longer subject to the of the respective provincial
discretion of the respective boards.
provincial boards. ❖ The Probation Law divests
❖ The law expressly provides the provincial boards of
that "The Provincial or City the power to determine
Probation Officer shall whether or not salary of a
receive an annual salary of probation officer in their
at least eighteen thousand respective provinces would
four hundred pesos.” be appropriated.
As to the The conditions of Probation make it The imposition of the said
condition of the MANDATORY for the Court to conditions on the probationer was
probation order issue a probation order containing merely DISCRETIONARY on the
specific conditions for the part of the Court issuing the
probationer to probation order.
fulfill. (Section 10) (Section 3)
❖ The reparation or restitution ❖ There is reparation or
Adscollections2022
 by the probationer to the restitution by the
aggrieved parties for actual probationer to the
damages or losses caused by aggrieved parties for
his offense is DELETED. actual damages or losses
caused by his offense.
As to the period of It provides that "in all other cases, the It provides that the period of
probation probation period shall not exceed 6 probation of a probationer found
years. (Section 14) guilty of "any other offense" did
not exceed twice the maximum
The new law, therefore, provides for time of imprisonment to which he
a definite and shorter probation might be sentenced. (Section 7)
period.
As to the The Law provides that an order Nowhere in the old Probation Law
appealability of granting or denying probation shall can there be found a provision to
the order granting not be appealable. (Section 4) this effect.
or
denying probation

As to the offenses It contains a GENERAL It gave an enumeration of the

not covered enumeration. It provides that the offenses not covered by the Act.
benefits of this Decree shall not be This enumeration SPECIFIED the
extended to those: crimes not covered. These were:
(a) sentenced to serve a maximum 1. Homicide
term of imprisonment of more 2. Treason
than 6 years; 3. Misprision of treason
(b) convicted of any offense against 4. Sedition
the security of the State; 5. Espionage
(c) who have previously been
convicted by final judgment of
an offense punished by 6. Conspiracy or proposal to
imprisonment of not less than commit treason
one month and one day and/or 7. Piracy
fine of not less than two 8. Brigandage
hundred pesos; 9. Arson
(d) who have been once on 10. Robbery in band
probation under the provisions 11. Robbery with violence on
of this Decree; persons when it was found
(e) who are already serving that they displayed a deadly
sentence at the time the weapon and
substantive provisions of this 12. Corruption of
Decree became applicable. . .. "
minors."
(Section 9)
(Section 8)
N.B. Thus, besides a general
enumeration of the offense not
covered, the said Section further
broadened the scope of the
inapplicability of the Law.
Additional exemption from
coverage can be found in the
offenses enumerated under Section
9 (a, c, d and e) abovementioned.
As to The modification or revision of It provided that "The Court
modification or the conditions of probation, MAY, at any time, revise, modify
revision of the Presidential Decree No. 968, Section or enlarge the conditions or periodof
conditions of 12 provides in part, that "During the probation."
probation period of probation, the court may,
UPON APPLICATION of either
the probationer or the probation
officer, revise or modify the
Adscollections2022
 conditions or period of probation. . ..
"
N.B. Contrasting the two
Sections, it is evident that under the
new law, application of either the
probationer or the probation
officer is needed in order that the
Court may exercise its discretion to
revise or modify the conditions or
period of probation whereas the old
law granted to the Court the
exclusive discretionary power of
revision and modification without
need of prior application by the
probationer or the probation
officer concerned.
It is clear therefore, that under
the new law, the Court relies
heavily upon the probation officer
and places great faith in him.
As to name of ➢ Office - Probation ➢ Office - Probation Office
probation office Administration ➢ Chief Probation Officer - the
and its head ➢ Probation Administrator - the Head of the Probation Office
Executive Officer of the
Probation Administration

Forerunners of Probation
1. Benefits of the Clergy- earliest for softening of the brutal severity of punishment. This was a compromise
between the church and the king that, if any member of the clergy was brought to trial before the king’s
court, such clergy could be claimed from the jurisdiction by the bishop or chaplain representing him on the
ground that the prisoner was subject to the authority of the Ecclesiastical Court only. There was greater
leniency in sentencing and particularly escape from death penalty. Acquittal or guilt was established by a
Jury of Twelve Clerks.

2. Judicial Reprieve- withdrawal of sentence for an internal of time whereby the execution of the sentence is
suspended either before or after judgment such as when there is a favorable circumstance in the criminal’s
character in order to give him opportunity to apply to the King for either an absolute an or conditional
pardon. Early English courts began to grants reprieves to prisoners under sentence of death on condition that
they accept deportation to English settlements in America.

3. Recognizance or “Binding over for good behavior” – this is considered as the direct ancestor of
probation. This involves an obligation or promise sworn to under court order by a person not yet
convicted of crime he would keep the peace and be of good behavior.

4. Transportation- this was developed from an ancient practice of banishment and flourished for more than
two hundred years as a principal method of disposing offenders. It served mainly as cheap source of
supplying labor to the colonies of England.
The Probation Law and its Amendments
AMENDMENTS PRESIDENTIAL DECREE
NO. 968
Presidential Decree No. Section 1 xxx
1257 The prosecuting officer concerned shall be
notified by the court of the filling of the
application for probation and he may submit
his comment on such application within ten
days from receipt of the notification.
xxx

Adscollections2022
 Nota Bene: The prosecutor participates in the NONE
determination of the application for probation.
It is therefore mandatory the prosecuting
officer concerned shall be notified by the court
of the filling of the application for probation
and submits comment within 10 days from
receipt.
Section 2 xxx Section 7
The court shall resolve the application for xxx
probation not later than fifteen days after The court shall resolve the
receipts of said report." petition for probation not
xxx later than five days after
receipt of said report.
N.B. PD no. 257 extended the period of Xxx
resolving the application for probation by the
court from five (5) days to fifteen (15) days.
Section 3 xxx
In the hearing, which shall be summary in
nature, the probationer shall have the right to
be informed of the violation charged and to
adduce evidence in his favor. The court shall
not be bound by the technical rules of
evidence but may be inform itself of all the
NONE
facts which are material and relevant to
ascertain the veracity of the charge. The State
shall be represented by a prosecuting officer
in any contested hearing.
xxx
N.B.
The defendant has the right to be informed
of the violation charged and to adduce
evidence in his favor.

Sec. 4 xxx sec. 33 xxx

That the application of its substantive That, the application of its
provisions concerning the grant of probation substantive provisions
shall only take effect on January 3, 1978." xxx concerning the grant of
probation shall only take effect
twelve months.
xxx

Batas Pambansa Blg. 76 The probation system shall not be extended The probation system shall
to a convicted offenders sentenced to serve a not be extended to a convicted
maximum term of imprisonment of more offenders sentenced to serve a
than six (6) years and one (1) day. maximum term of
imprisonment of more than
N.B. The probational period is extended to six six (6) years.
(6) years and one (1) day and below N.B. The probational period is
six (6) years and below.

xxx
Any person sentenced to maximum penalty
of six years and one day on January 3, 1978
and thereafter may be placed on probation
upon his application therefore with the court NONE
of origin. However, such person serving
sentence shall remain in jail pending the
Adscollections2022
 approval of his application.
XXX

Presidential Decree No. The decree restore the provision of section 9

1990 of PD 968 that probation shall not be
extended to a convicted offenders sentenced
to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of
more than six (6) years. It that senses the
decree impliedly amended the provision of BP
76.
Section 1 amending Section 4 of PD no. 968.
Xxx
Provided; That NO APPLICATION FOR
PROBATION SHALL BE ENTERTAINED
OR GRANted if the defendant has perfected
the appeal from the judgment of conviction.
Xxx
NB: Appeal and probation is a mutually
exclusive remedy; meaning once a defendant
filed his appeal it is a deemed waiver of the
filing of probation. NONE
The period of perfecting an appeal is also the
period of perfecting an application/filing for
probation. In general, the period of perfecting
an appeal is fifteen (15) days from the
promulgation of sentence.
N.B. 1990 – The period of punishment which
is probationable is lowered again from 6 years
and 1 day to 6 years or less

Executive Order No. 292 It renamed the Probation Administration

created under PD 968 into Parole and
probation Administration.
It also extended the powers and function of
the PPA. It includes the following:
a. Administer the parole and probation
system;
b. Exercise general supervision over all
parolees and probationers;
c. Promote the correction and
rehabilitation of offenders; and
d. Such other functions as may hereafter
be provided by law.
xxx
(2)The Administration shall have a
Technical
Service under the Office of the
Administrator which shall serve as the
service arm of the Board of Pardons and
Parole in the supervision of parolees and
pardonees.
The Board and the Administration shall
jointly determine the staff complement of
the Technical Service.
Xxx

Adscollections2022
 3 RULES AND LIMITATIONS IN THE GRANT OF PROBATION

Section 4 of PD 968 - Subject to the provisions of this Decree, the court may, after it shall have convicted and
sentenced a defendant and upon application at any time of said defendant, suspend the execution of said
sentence and place the defendant on probation for such period and upon such terms and conditions as it may
deem best. Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. An
application for probation shall be filed with the trial court, with notice to the appellate court if an appeal has
been taken from the sentence of conviction. The filing of the application shall be deemed a waiver of the right
to appeal, or the automatic withdrawal of a pending appeal. (As amended by PD 1990).

I. CRITERIA FOR PLACING AN OFFENDER ON PROBATION (SECTION 8 OF PD NO. 968)

QUESTION
Will probation be automatically granted to one
whose sentence is six (6) years or less? No, the
offender must fit the criteria under Section 8 of PD
968.
Under Section 8 of PD No. 968, in determining whether an offender may be placed on probation, the court
shall consider all information relative, to the character, antecedents, environment, mental and physical
condition of the offender, and available institutional and community resources. Probation shall be denied if the
court finds that:
1. The offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided most effectively by his
commitment to an institution; or
2. There is undue risk that during the period of probation the offender will commit another crime; or
3. Probation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense committed.

However, under Sec. 70 of Republic Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, the
first-time minor offender who upon promulgation of the sentence, the court may, in its discretion, placed the
accused under probation, even if the sentence provided under Sec. 11 of the Act is higher than that provided
under Probation Law.

SECTION 70 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165. Probation or Community Service for a First-Time Minor
Offender in Lieu of Imprisonment. – Upon promulgation of the sentence, the court may, in its discretion,
place the accused under probation, even if the sentence provided under this Act is higher than that provided
under existing law on probation, or impose community service in lieu of imprisonment. In case of probation,
the supervision and rehabilitative surveillance shall be undertaken by the Board through the DOH in
coordination with the Board of Pardons and Parole and the Probation Administration. Upon compliance
with the conditions of the probation, the Board shall submit a written report to the court recommending
termination of probation and a final discharge of the probationer, whereupon the court shall issue such an
order.

Activity #2. Digest and analyze the case (TOLENTINO VS. JUDGE ALCONCEL
121 SCRA 92; G.R. No. L-63400; March 18, 1983)
Application for Probation can be denies on the ground that it will depreciate the seriousness of the offense
committed.

Activity #3. Digest and analyze the case (DELA CRUZ VS. CALLEJO)
Basis of Granting Probation

Activity #4. Digest and analyze the case (Baclayon vs. Mutia, 129 SCRA 148 (April 30, 1984))
Probation is neither a sentence nor a judgment

Adscollections2022
 Activity #5. Digest and analyze the case

(LOURDES A. SABLE vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No. 17796: April 7, 2009)

(COLINARES VS. PEOPLE G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011)

(WILLY TAN y CHUA vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No. 148194: April 12, 2002)

(DANIEL G. FAJARDO vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 128508: February 1, 1999)

(PATERNO DE LOS SANTOS, JR. vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 181306: March 21, 2011)

Probation and Appeal are separate and exclusive remedies

Qualified and Disqualified Offenders for Probation

I. WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO PROBATION?
Any first time convicted offender, 18 years of age and above not otherwise disqualified under PD 968 as
amended can apply for probation before serving the sentence which may either be imprisonment of fine with
subsidiary imprisonment, or both imprisonment and fine.
The age of offender qualified for probation is 18 years and above. PD 1179 which amended PD 603 lowered
the age of youthful offenders under 18 years old.
AS GENERAL RULE probation applies to all sentenced or convicted offenders - All first-time offenders
convicted of crimes punished by imprisonment of not more than 6 years (maximum of 6 years). Except the
following:
1. Those entitled to the benefits of PD 603 as amended otherwise known as the Child and Youth Welfare
Code. Hence, an offender who is under 18 years of age must be dealt with in accordance with the more
liberal and beneficent provisions of PD 603.
Incidentally, Art 192 PD 603 as amended gives the youthful offender a choice as to whether he will
be dealt with as a youthful offender under PD603 or as Adult offender under PD 968 as amended. If he
does not apply under PD603 as amended, he treated as an adult offender. In such a case, two options are
open to him, namely:
a. To simply serve his sentence
b. To apply of probation under PD 968 as amended
2. Those that are found Guilty in violation of R.A 6425, otherwise known as the Dangerous Drug Act of
1972 as amended by Republic Act No. 9165. Hence, its beneficiaries, drug dependents, must be
subjected to the confinement, treatment and rehabilitation measures provided therein. Even those who
are below twenty one years of age who are found guilty of possessing or using prohibited or regulated
drugs must be treated under the provisions of R.A 6425.
3. Those offenders who has not been convicted and sentenced.
4. Those that are found guilty in violation of BP 881 as amended by BP 882,883 and 884 otherwise known
as the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines.
5. Those who are found guilty in violation of PD 1987 (an act creating the Video gram Regulatory) 6.
Those that are found guilty in violation of RA 6727 otherwise known as the Wage Rationalization Act.

QUESTION
Are all convicted persons who are not disqualified
entitled to probation automatically?
No. Under PD 968; the court will not grant
probation if after investigation conducted by the
probation officer, it finds that:
1. The offender can be treated better in an
institution or other places for correction;
2. The offender is a risk to the community;
3. Probation will depreciate the gravity of the
offense.
Adscollections2022
 ANSELMO DE LEON CUYO vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 192164: October 12, 2011

FACTS: On August , 25, 2009, Branch 1 of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) in San Fernando City,
La Union, found petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of perjury under Article 183 of the
Revised Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment of four (4) months and one (1) day to one (1) year. He
was likewise ordered to pay private complainant Alejo Cuyo the amount of P10, 000 for attorney’s fees and
litigation expenses.

Petitioner was not present during the promulgation of the judgment and was represented by his counsel
instead. His motion for reconsideration was denied on October 23, 2009. He subsequently filed a Motion for
Probation on November, 5, 2009 but is denied on the ground that it had been filed beyond the reglementary
period of fifteen days as provided in Sec. 4 of P.D. 968.

ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of probation.

HELD: This court held that the RTC that the Motion for Probation was filed out of time. Sec. 6 of Rule 120 of
the Rules of Court provides: Promulgation of judgment - The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the
presence of the accused and any judge of the Court in which it was rendered. However, if the conviction is for
alight offense, the judgment may be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or representative. When the
judge is absent or outside the province or city, the judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court. In case
the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of promulgation of judgment despite notice, the promulgation
shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal docket and serving him a copy thereof at his last
known address or thru his counsel. If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear
was without justifiable cause, he shall lose the remedies available in these Rules against the judgment and the
court shall order his arrest. Within fifteen (15) days from promulgation of judgment, however, the accused may
surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He shall state the reasons for his
absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a justifiable cause, he shall be
allowed to avail of said remedies within fifteen (15) days from notice. (Emphasissupplied.)
Petitioner was charged with and found guilty of perjury. He was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of 4
months and 1 day to 1 year, a period which is considered as a correctional penalty. Under Article 9 of the
Revised Penal Code, light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of
arresto menor (one to thirty days of imprisonment) or a fine not exceeding two hundred pesos (P200), or both
are imposable. Thus, perjury is not a light felony or offense contemplated by Rule 120, Sec. 6. It was therefore
mandatory for petitioner to be present at the promulgation of the judgment.
To recall, despite notice, petitioner was absent when the MTCC promulgated its judgment on 25 August
2009. Pursuant to Rule 120, Sec. 6, it is only when the accused is convicted of a light offense that a
promulgation may be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or representative. In case the accused failed to
appear on the scheduled date of promulgation despite notice, and the failure to appear was without justifiable
cause, the accused shall lose all the remedies available in the Rules against the judgment.

Disqualified Offenders for Probation (Sec. 9, PD 968)

Under Section 9 of PD 968, the benefits of probation shall not be extended to:
1. Those sentenced to serve a MAXIMUM TERM of imprisonment of MORE THAN SIX (6) YEARS;
Note: the six years maximum refers to the sentence actually imposed, and not that prescribed by law for
the offense committed.
2. Those convicted of subversion or any crime against the national security or public order;

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

1. Treason 1. Rebellion or insurrection
2. conspiracy and proposal to commit treason 2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion
3. misprision of treason 3. Sedition
4. espionage 4. Conspiracy to commit sedition
5. inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals 5. Inciting to sedition
6. violation of neutrality 6. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of assembly
7. correspondence with hostile country and similar bodies
Adscollections2022
 8. flight to enemy’s country 7. Disturbance of proceedings
9. piracy 8. Direct assault
10. qualified piracy 9. Indirect assault
10. Coup d’etat

3. Those who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment
of not less than one month and one day and/or a fine of not less than Two Hundred Pesos;

PREVIOUS CONVICTION FINE:

▪if one month - qualified for probation ▪less than two hundred pesos - qualified for probation
▪if one month and one day or more - disqualified ▪two hundred pesos or more - disqualified for
for probation probation

3. Those who have been ONCE on probation under the provisions of PD No. 968, as amended;
Accordingly, one who has been on probation only under the child and Youth Welfare Code as
amended and the Dangerous Drugs Code of 1972 as amended will not be disqualified. The reason form
this is that the treatment given under those latter laws is of a different kind from that under PD 968 as
amended.
4. Those who are already serving sentence at the time substantive provisions of the decree became
applicable pursuant to section 33 of PD 968. (As amended by BP Blg. 76, and PD 1990, October 5,
1985)

Technically speaking probation cannot cover the following, non-offenders; offenders not yet convicted and
convicted offenders but with a sentenced exceed 6 years.

ALEJANDRA PABLO [Link]. SILVERIO Q. CASTILLO

G.R. No. 12510: August 3, 2000

FACTS: Alejandra Pablo was convicted of a violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22. She applied for probation
and was later denied.

ISSUE: Whether or not the he should be denied probation on the ground of disqualification from probation
under Section 9 of P.D. 968.

HELD: The Court ruled that under Section 9 of the Probation Law, P.D. 968, the following offenders cannot
avail of the benefits of probation:
a) Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years;
b) Those convicted of subversion or any crime against the national security or the public order;
c) Those who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment
of not less than one month and one day and/or fine of not less than two hundred pesos;
d) Those who have been once on probation under the provisions of this decree; and
e) Those who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of this decree became
applicable pursuant to section 33 hereof.

The National Probation Office denied petitioners application for probation under Section 9 paragraph (c)
P.D. 968 because a prior conviction was entered against the petitioner on June 21, 1995 in Criminal Case No.
94-0199, penalizing her with a fine of P4,648.00; there by placing her within the ambit of disqualification from
probation under Section 9 paragraph (c) of P.D. [Link] is a basic rule of statutory construction that if a statute is
clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and applied without any interpretation.
Not only that; in the matter of
interpretation of laws on probation, the Court has pronounced that "the policy of liberality of probation statutes
cannot prevail against the categorical provisions of the law."Section 9 paragraph (c) is in clear and plain
language, to the effect that a person who was previously convicted by final judgment of an offense punishable
by imprisonment of not less than one month and one day and/or a fine of not less than two hundred pesos, is
disqualified from applying for probation. This provision of law is definitive and unqualified. There is nothing in
Section 9, paragraph (c) which qualifies "previous conviction" as referring to a conviction for a crime which is
entirely different from that for which the offender is applying for probation or a crime which arose out of a
Adscollections2022
single act or transaction as petitioner would have the court to understand. It is well-settled that the probation law
is not a penal statute; and therefore, the principle of liberal interpretation is inapplicable. And when the meaning
is clearly discernible from the language of the statute, there is no room for construction or interpretation.

Requirements and Procedure in the Application of Probation

QUESTION
Is there a need to apply for probation to avail of its benefits?
Yes, it will not be granted except upon the application by the accused. The necessity for such application is
indicated in Sec. 4, PD 968, which states that “the trial court may, after it shall have convicted and
sentenced a defendant and upon application by said defendant within the period of perfecting an appeal.

NOTA BENE: Under Presidential Decree No. 1990, no application for probation shall be entertained of granted
if the defendant has perfected an appeal from judgment of conviction. The filing of the application shall be
deemed a waiver of a right to appeal.

QUESTIONS
Is there a form prescribed for the application for probation?
Yes, it shall be in the form approved be the Secretary of justice as recommended by the Administrator or as
may be prescribed by the SC
What is the effect of filing an application for probation?
The court may, upon receipt of the application suspend the execution of sentence imposed in judgment.

I. WHERE AND WHEN TO FILE THE PETITION FOR PROBATION?

The application for probation shall be filed by sentenced or convicted offender whose sentence is not more
than 6 years imprisonment. It shall be filed with the court that tried and sentenced the offender.

WHERE: A petition for probation shall be filed by the applicant for probation or the petitioner with the
courts that tried and sentenced the offender at any time before the imprisonment starts.

WHEN: Anytime before the offender starts serving his sentence but within period for perfecting an appeal or
fifteen (15) days from the promulgation or notice of the judgment of conviction.

However, under Section 42 of R.A. 9344, the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, the court may, after
it shall have sentenced a Child In Conflict with the Law and upon application at anytime placed the child on
probation in lieu of service of his sentence.

II. PROCEDURE UNDER PD NO. 968 – Probation and Parole Flow Chart – See Appendix The
following are the procedure in the application for probation:

1. The defendant must file a petition before the trial court which exercise jurisdiction over his case; an
application for probation after he has been sentenced but before he begins to serve the sentence. There are
two forms of petition: WRITTEN and ORAL.
NOTA BENE: But for purposes of recording, application made orally should be reduced into writing.

2. If the defendant has been convicted and has appealed the sentence of conviction, an application for
probation cannot be entertained. As a general rule, No application for probation shall be entertained or
granted if the defendant has perfected an appeal from the judgment or conviction.
NOTA BENE: Filing an application shall be deemed a waiver of the right to appeal.

QUESTION
What then is the duty of the court after Receipt of the application? The trial court may notify the concerned
prosecuting officer of the application at a reasonable time before the scheduled hearing thereof.

3. Notice to the prosecuting officer: The prosecuting officer concerned shall be notified by the court of the
filing of such application. The prosecuting officer must submit his comment on such application within 10
days from receipt of the notification
Adscollections2022
4. Referral to probation office: If the court finds that the petition is in due form and that the petitioner
appears not to be disqualified for the grant of probation. The probation should be entertained by the court by
ordering the probation officer to conduct an investigation (PSI) of the offender provided he is not
disqualified under the decree.
While it is discretionary with the court to grant or deny an applicant for probation, the Probation Law
requires that an investigation be first conducted by the probation officer who shall submit his report within
60 days from receipt of the court’s order. However, the court may in its discretion extend the 60 days
period. Only thereafter shall the court resolve the application, an outright denial by the court is a nullity
correctable by certiorari. (De Luna vs. Hon. Medina, CA 78 D.G. 599; Del Rosario vs. Hon. Rosero, GR
65004, Nov. 29, 1983)

To summarize, the following are the procedures in Applying for Probation:

1 The offender or his counsel files a petition with the convicting court within 15 days from
promulgation of judgment.

2 The court determines convict qualifications and notifies the prosecutor of the filing of the petition

3 The prosecutor submits his comments on such application within 10 days from receipt of the
notification.

4 If petitioner is qualified, his application is referred to the probation officer for post-sentence
investigation

5 The post-sentence investigation report (PSIR) is submitted by the probation officer to the court
within
60 days

6 Pending investigation and resolution, accused may be temporarily released (if there is already a bail,
then on same bail)

7 The court grants or denies the petition for probation within 15 days upon receipt of the PSIR.

NOTA BENE:
• If the accused is convicted and sentenced to
multiple penalties, the periods are not added up.
Only the maximum shall be considered.
• Once probation period is terminated, the accused
is restored to all his civil rights lost or
suspended.
III. REQUISITES BEFORE AN OFFENDER CAN BE PLACED ON PROBATION
1. A post sentence investigation by the officer;
2. A determination by the court that the end of justice will be served and the best interest of the public and
that of the offender will be served thereby.
The probation officer shall submit to the court within 60 days from receipt of the order the investigation
report on the offender, the petition for probation shall be resolved by the court within 15 days from receipt of
report. Probation order unless otherwise provided takes effects upon its issuance, the order granting or denying
the probation is not appealable.

Adscollections2022
 Midterm Examination
References:
Delizo, D. (2015). Correctional Administration. Wiseman’s Books Trading, Inc.
Esmeralda, R. (2016). Non-Institutional Correction. (Unpublished)
Manwong, R. K. (2021). Institutional Correction. E-book from RKM files.
Manwong, R. K. (2021). Non-Institutional Correction. E-book from RKM files.
Manwong, R. K. (2021). Related Laws on Correctional Administration. E-book from RKM files.
Manwong, R. K. (2021). A-z in Criminology; terms to know. E-book from RKM files.
Manwong, R. K. (2011). My quizzer in criminology: a reviewer. Fourth edition. Wiseman’s Books
Trading, Inc.
Manwong, R. K. (2012). My quizzer in criminology: a reviewer. Fifth edition. Wiseman’s Books
Trading, Inc.
Presidential Decree (1976). PD 968 or also known as Probation Law of 1976. Retrieved on February 7,
2022 from [Link]
Republic of the Philippines (2015) RA 10707 An act amending PD 968. Retrieved on February 7, 2022
from [Link]
Siegel, L. R. (2004). Criminology theories, patterns & typologies. Thompson Learning Asia.

Cases (Still updating):

Bernardo v Balagot, GR No. 86561
Lagrosa and Baguin v People of the Philippines, GR No. 152044

Llamado vs Court of Appeals

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS VERA (G.R. NO. L-45685, NOVEMBER 16 1937)

TOLENTINO VS. JUDGE ALCONCEL 121 SCRA 92; G.R. No. L-63400; March 18, 1983

Sable v. People, G.R. No. 177961, April 7, 2009, 584 SCRA 619, 625

Colinares vs. People, G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011

WILLY TAN y CHUA vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No. 148194: April 12, 2002

DANIEL G. FAJARDO vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 128508: February 1, 1999

PATERNO DE LOS SANTOS, JR. vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 181306: March 21, 2011

ANSELMO DE LEON CUYO vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No. 192164: October 12, 2011

ALEJANDRA PABLO [Link]. SILVERIO Q. CASTILLO G.R. No. 12510: August 3, 2000

De Luna vs. Hon. Medina, CA 78 D.G. 599

Del Rosario vs. Hon. Rosero, GR 65004, Nov. 29, 1983

Adscollections2022