Prohibited Punishment Issue:

Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or WoN the 5-10 years penalty for the illegal possession of firearms is
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, excessive.
unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced Held:
to reclusion perpetua. It is of the court’s opinion that confinement from 5 to 10 years for
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment possessing or carrying firearm is not cruel or unusual, having due regard to
against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate the prevalent conditions which the law proposes to suppress or curb. The
penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. rampant lawlessness against property, person, and even the very security of
the Government, directly traceable in large measure to promiscuous carrying
People v. Estoista and use of powerful weapons, justify imprisonment which in normal
circumstances might appear excessive. If imprisonment from 5 to 10 years is
G.R. No. L-5793 | August 27, 1953 |Art.19 – Cruel, Degrading or Inhuman out of proportion to the present case in view of certain circumstances, the
Punishment law is not to be declared unconstitutional for this reason. The
constitutionality of an act of the legislature is not to be judged in the light of
Facts:
exceptional cases. Small transgressors for which the heavy net was not
Estoista was for acquitted for homicide through reckless imprudence
spread are, like small fishes, bound to be caught, and it is to meet such a
and convicted for illegal possession of firearm under one information by the
situation as this that courts are advised to make a recommendation to the
CFI of Lanao. The firearm with which the appellant was charged with having in
Chief Executive for clemency or reduction of the penalty.
his possession was a rifle and belonged to his father, Bruno Estoista, who held
a legal permit for it. Father and son live & in the same house, a little distance
from a 27-hectare estate belonging to the family which was partly covered
with cogon grass, tall weeds and second growth trees. From a spot in the
plantation 100 to 120 meters from the house, the defendant took a shot at a
wild rooster and hit Diragon Dima, a la- borer of the family who was setting a
trap for wild chickens and whose presence was not perceived by the accused.
Estoista is assailing his conviction saying that the 5-10 years penalty for the
illegal possession of firearms is cruel and excessive.