Petitioner
People
Respondent
Dimalanta
Citation
G.R. No. L-5196
Court
Supreme Court
Division
Second Division
Ponente
Jugo, J.
Decided
November 13, 1952

Whether defendant should be allowed to change his plea from guilty to not guilty, proper indemnity amount, and application of Indeterminate Sentence…

Summary

This 1952 criminal case involved Plaridel Dimalanta who was charged with theft of electric current worth P333 from Manila Electric Company using a 'jumper' device. After pleading guilty, he was sentenced to six months and one day imprisonment plus indemnity. He subsequently attempted to withdraw his guilty plea claiming he was misled, but his counsel later withdrew this motion. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, ruling that the withdrawal of the motion to change plea eliminated any basis for review of that issue. The Court also held that defendant was not entitled to Indeterminate Sentence Law benefits since his sentence was under one year, and found no error in the proceedings below.

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Featured in research

In-depth Intellegal research that discusses this case.

Common questions

Plain-language Q&A on the issues in this case.

By Intellegal Editorial Board · November 13, 1952

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →
AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.