This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
April 22, 2008
the police officers constitutes an offense that may $e criminally prosecuted under the (&1 2; <hether or not the $are alle ations for ar$itrary detention and rave threats will prosper without alle in the elements of the crimes in the complaint HELD1 No. %he petition lac's merit. R#&io1
FELICIANO GALVANTE, petitioner, vs.HON. ORLANDO C. CASIMIRO, Omb !"m#$ %or &'( Mili&#r), *IENVENIDO C. *LANCAFLOR, Dir(+&or, DENNIS L. GARCIA, Gr#%& I$,("&i-#&io$ #$! .ro"(+ &io$ O%%i+(r, S.O/ RAMIL AVENIDO, .O1 EDDIE DEGRAN, .O1 VALENTINO R0FANO, #$! .O1 FEDERICO *ALOLOT, respondents. FACTS1 ON May 14, 2001, respondent police officers confiscated from petitioner one colt pistol super .38 automatic with ma a!ine and ammunition. "n his affidavit, complainant #alvante narrated how, on May 14, 2001, private respondents aimed their lon firearms at him, ar$itrarily searched his vehicle and put him in detention. %hat on his way to meet retired police &ercival &la!a, four policemen in uniform $loc'ed his way, namely &O1 (omil )venido &N&, &O1 *alentino (ufano, &O1 +ddie ,e ran &N& and &O1 -ederico .alolot, all pointin their lon firearms. %hat while complainant was raisin his arms, /&O4 .en0amin 1onde, 2r. went to his owner type 0eep, conducted a search and confiscated his pistol. 1omplainant thereafter went to the police station. )fter some 3ueries were made concernin non4apprehension of other persons possessin firearms themselves, he was put to 0ail under the order of &olice 1hief (ocacor$a and was released only at 4500 o6cloc' in the afternoon of May 17, 2001 after postin a $ail$ond. .ROCED0RAL HISTOR21 "nformation for "lle al &ossession of -irearms was filed a ainst petitioner #alvante, in (elation to a 1OM+8+1 un $an $efore the (%1 of ) usan del /ur, from which, #alvante countered $y filin a criminal complaint a ainst &olice Officers 1onde, et.al. for )r$itrary ,etention, "lle al /earch and #rave %hreats. 9is char es were dismissed for lac' of pro$a$le cause $efore the #"/ :#raft "nvesti ation;. Office of the ,eputy Om$udsman affirmed the dismissal and denied his M(, hence this &etition for 1ertiorari and Mandamus. /eparately, #alvante filed a separate administrative case $efore the ,"8# a ainst 1onde, et.al. for #rave Misconduct. ISS0ES1 1; <hether or not an ille al =warrantless arrest> conducted $y
%he complaint for 3#rr#$&l("" "(#r+' char es no criminal offense. The conduct of a warrantless search is not a criminal act for it is not penalized under the Revised Penal Code :(&1; or any other special law. <hat the (&1 punishes are only two forms of searches5
Ar&. 124. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally obtained. 5 I$ #!!i&io$ &o &'( li#bili&) #&&#+'i$- &o &'( o%%($!(r %or &'( +ommi""io$ o% #$) o&'(r o%%($"(, &'( p($#l&) o% arresto mayor i$ i&" m#6im m p(rio! &o prision correccional i$ i&" mi$im m p(rio! #$! # %i$( $o& (6+((!i$.1,000.00 p("o" "'#ll b( impo"(! po$ #$) p bli+ o%%i+(r or (mplo)(( 3'o "'#ll pro+ r( # "(#r+' 3#rr#$& 3i&'o & 7 "& +# "(, or, '#,i$- l(-#ll) pro+ r(! &'( "#m(, "'#ll (6+((! 'i" # &'ori&) or "( $$(+(""#r) "(,(ri&) i$ (6(+ &i$- &'( "#m(. Ar&. 180. Searching domicile without witnesses. 5 T'( p($#l&) o% arresto mayor i$ i&" m(!i m #$! m#6im m p(rio!" "'#ll b( impo"(! po$ # p bli+ o%%i+(r or (mplo)(( 3'o, i$ +#"(" 3'(r( # "(#r+' i" prop(r, "'#ll "(#r+' &'( !omi+il(, p#p(r" or o&'(r b(lo$-i$-" o% #$) p(r"o$, i$ &'( #b"($+( o% &'( l#&&(r, #$) m(mb(r o% 'i" %#mil), or i$ &'(ir !(%# l&, 3i&'o & &'( pr("($+( o% &3o 3i&$(""(" r("i!i$- i$ &'( "#m( lo+#li&). 1; (espondents6 dismissal of the criminal complaint for ille al search filed $efore the Om$udsman was proper. &u$lic respondents completely overloo'ed the fact that the criminal complaint was not co ni!a$le $y the Om$udsman as ille al search is not a criminal offense under the (&1.
%he letters contained results of 1"..eltran was arrested without a warrant and the arrestin officers did not inform . 1:<018 = $( 1. the offender is a pu$lic officer or employee. of the 1ivil 1ode.O2 state prosecutors found pro$a$le cause. VICENTE .y risin pu$licly and ta'in arms a ainst the #overnment for the purpose of removin from the alle iance to said #overnment or its laws. the territory of the (epu$lic of the &hilippines or any part thereof. %he second element was not alle ed $y petitioner in his )ffidavit41omplaint. and detained him in 1amp 1rame. %he complaint for a$itrary detention was li'ewise properly dismissed. who claimed to $e an eyewitness a ainst petitioners. F#llo1 )ll said.eltran opposes the second in3uest findin pro$a$le cause that he committed re$ellion and that such in3uest was void. LADLAD .#Bs investi ation implicatin . 9HEREFORE. EMMAN0EL 2. -inally. . culled from the .ulacan. as petitioner did in a separate administrative case. therefore no le al $asis to sustain the criminal char e for ar$itrary detention a ainst private respondents. the same is $ased merely on petitioner6s $are alle ation that private respondents aimed their firearms at him. . (e$ellion under )rticle 134 of the (evised &enal 1ode is committed D . 9e was also su$0ected to a second in3uest involvin the crime of re$ellion conducted $y . 1:20:05:2. petitioner may file a ainst private respondents a complaint for dama es with the re ular courts or an administrative case with the &N&?.2. 9e was su$0ected to a first in3uest involvin the crime of incitin to sedition. . considerin the political milieu under which petitioners were investi ated. and the manner in which the prosecution panel conducted the preliminary investi ation. or were in any other way involved in it. 2007.> -ollowin that. %hat the purpose of the uprisin or movement is either D :a.)/"/5 0oint affidavit of . later identified as 2aime -uentes.eltran of the crime for which he was arrested. ave copies of the affidavit of -uentes to media mem$ers present durin the proceedin s. 101@ declarin a =/tate of National +mer ency. and :c. 1". or any $ody of land. %here was. . .eltran with re$ellion HELD1 No. 8adlad and Ma!a petitions5 8adlad. %hat there $e a :a. of any of their powers or prero atives. 1:20:/5:6 . police officers arrested 1rispin . %he in3uest was $ased on two letters from 1". the petition is DENIED.# presented a mas'ed man. and not a criminal action with the Om$udsman. 8adlad moved for the inhi$ition of *elasco citin lac' of impartiality and independence.eltran alle edly ave durin a rally in Aue!on 1ity on 24 -e$ruary 2007.O2 and the (%1 of Ma'ati 1ity on the investi ation and prosecution of petitioners6 cases. %he remedy of petitioner a ainst the warrantless search conducted on his vehicle is civil. pu$lic respondents did not act with rave a$use of discretion in dismissin the criminal complaint a ainst private respondents.eltran while he was en route to Marilao. wholly or partially. &#M) si ned &residential &roclamation No.asis of the &"5 results of the 1".R. it must $e shown that :a.urin the &". -urthermore. )s pointed out $y private respondent 1onde in his 1omment. "n3uest prosecutor found pro$a$le cause. %his was $ased on a speech ."8#. . who was the prosecutor. *elasco. II. :$.# investi ation. et al as =leaders and promoters> of an alle ed foiled plot to overthrow the )rroyo overnment.eltran in3uest. No". 3. %he elements of the offense are5 1. ta'in arms a ainst the #overnmentE and 2. the statements that the &resident and the /ecretary of 2ustice made to the media re ardin petitionersB case. the offender detained the complainant.O2 state prosecutors. under )rticle 32. or other armed forces or deprivin the 1hief +Cecutive or the 8e islature. . petitioner himself identified that it was &olice 1hief (ocacor$a who caused his detention.ASTER G. . %o sustain a criminal char e for ar$itrary detention. %o avail of such remedies. 200: FACTS1 %hese are consolidated petitions for the writs of prohi$ition and certiorari to en0oin petitioners6 prosecution for (e$ellion and to set aside the rulin s of the .# eCecutive officer and deputy director.". Ma!a. naval. et al were called for a preliminary investi ation for the crime of re$ellion. they contend that the &" was tainted with irre ularities as not pursuant to (ule 112 /ec3. to remove from the alle iance to said #overnment or its laws5 2 . the detention is without le al rounds.eltran. r( r(b(llio$? "s there pro$a$le cause to char e . on the criminal complaint for rave threats. ISS0E1 >I o$l) %o+ "(! o$ &'( *(l&r#$ p(&i&io$. pu$lic uprisin and :$.eltran &etition5 On -e$ruary 24. /uch $are alle ation stands no chance a ainst the well4 entrenched rule that pu$lic officers en0oy a presumption of re ularity in the performance of their official function. VELASCO 5 . Nowhere in said affidavit did petitioner alle e that private respondents effected his detention.eltranBs arrestin officers who claimed to have $een present at the rally.
Of the ori inal 321 accused. or offended parties which may $e 3 . None of the affidavits stated that . +ven the prosecution ac'nowled ed this.eltran6s alle ed presence durin the 1GG2 1&& &lenum does not automatically ma'e him a leader of a re$ellion. is that . not (e$ellion under )rticle 134.eltranE :2. maintainin . %he $ul' of the documents consists of affidavits. dated 23 -e$ruary 2007. eCecuted $y a certain (uel +scala :+scala. %he evidence $efore the panel of prosecutors who conducted the in3uest of . :c. %hey disarmed the security uards and planted eCplosive devices around the $uildin . wholly or partially. and others conspired to form a Ftactical allianceF to commit (e$ellion. "n his affidavit. the /olicitor #eneral points to -uentes6 affidavit. Ma'ati 1ity an "nformation for coup d’etat a ainst those soldiers. as $asis for the findin of pro$a$le cause a ainst . #eneral Narciso )$aya. +ventually. %hey invo'ed :(. some of which were sworn $efore a notary pu$lic. On )u ust H. or other armed forcesE or :$. violation of )rticle 73 for disrespect toward the &resident. III. or local overnment ordinances re ardless of whether or not civilians are co4accused. 9owever.(.. &adre #arcia. and :e. None of the affidavits alle ed that .ucal. then )-& 1hief of /taff. includin petitioners herein. %hus. he saw . <hat these documents prove. he was present durin the 1GG2 1&& &lenum. the overnment panel succeeded in convincin them to lay down their arms and defuse the eCplosives placed around the premises of the Oa'wood )partments. "n order to avoid a $loody confrontation. No. . the . the territory of the &hilippines or any part thereofE or :2.ucal. violation of )rticle 7@ for mutiny or sedition. &adre #arcia. li'e ..eltran in the criminal case is 1onspiracy to 1ommit (e$ellion and not (e$ellion. ) total of 321 soldiers. o ()@0HH states that5 Mem$ers of the )rmed -orces of the &hilippines and other persons su$0ect to military law. they were met $y another individual. dated 2H -e$ruary 2007. plans to $rin down a overnment is a mere preparatory step to commit the acts constitutin (e$ellion under )rticle 134. what the alle ations in -uentes6 affidavit ma'e out is a case for 1onspiracy to 1ommit (e$ellion. the (%1 Ma'ati erred when it nevertheless found pro$a$le cause to try . more than 300 heavily armed 0unior officers and enlisted men of the )-& J mostly from the elite units of the )rmyBs /cout (an ers and the NavyBs /pecial <arfare #roup J entered the premises of the Oa'wood &remier 8uCury )partments on )yala )venue. 2003. amon others. /an 2uan. :d. 1achuela stated that he was a former mem$er of the 1&& and that :1. "n his 1omment to . +scala recounted that in the afternoon of 20 -e$ruary 2007. -or his part. includin mem$ers of the citi!ens )rmed -orces #eo raphical Knits.eltran6s petition. pursuant to )rticle @0 of the )rticles of <ar. the overnment sent ne otiators to dialo ue with the soldiers.eltran for ta'in part in an armed pu$lic uprisin a ainst the overnment.IAERA #. only 243 filed with the (%1 an Omni$us Motion prayin that the said trial court assume 0urisdiction over all the char es filed with the military tri$unal. %he alle ations in these affidavits are far from the proof needed to indict . )fter several hours of ne otiation.eltran and other individuals on $oard a vehicle which entered a chic'en farm in .. violation of )rticle G7 for conduct un$ecomin an officer and a entleman.). the /ecretary of National . naval. who commit crimes or offenses penali!ed under the (evised &enal 1ode other special penal laws. he attended the 1&&6s F10th &lenumF in 1GG2 where he saw . the arms he and the other 1&& mem$ers used were purchased partly from contri$utions $y 1on ressional mem$ers. Ma'ati 1ity. 2007 -acts5 - - - - - On 2uly 2@. 2003 at around 1500 a. Ab#)# 5 . +Ccept for two affidavits. any $ody of land.eltran. 17400@I)u ust 17.O2 filed with the (%1.O2 (esolution of 2@ -e$ruary 2007.eltran for (e$ellion consisted of the affidavits and other documents. %hus.eltran.efense. :$. at $est.eltran for (e$ellion $ased on the evidence $efore it. to deprive the 1hief +Cecutive or 1on ress. none of the affidavits mentions .eltran committed specific acts of promotin .eltran was in . amon others. of any of their powers and prero atives.. . or headin a re$ellion as found in the .eltran and the other petitioners attended in 200H and 2007 in which plans to overthrow violently the )rroyo overnment were alle edly discussed. Go$@#l(" . and (aul 1achuela :1achuela. . the char es filed a ainst the petitioners in the military tri$unal are5 :a.m.atan as on 20 -e$ruary 2007 and that 14 years earlier. victims. re$ellion is a crime of the masses or multitudes involvin crowd action done in furtherance of a political end. @0HH.:1. they returned to their $arrac's. punisha$le under )rticle 137 of the (evised &enal 1ode.eltran as -uentes provided details in his statement re ardin meetin s with . %he "nformation merely alle ed that . he too' part in criminal activitiesE and :3. dated 20 -e$ruary 2007.atan as and that after the passen ers ali hted. surrendered to the authorities. $y its nature.eltran. who represent party4list roups affiliated with the 1&&. )ttendance in meetin s to discuss. ordered the arrest and detention of the soldiers involved in the Oa'wood incident and directed the )-& to conduct its own separate investi ation. violation of )rticle G@ for conduct pre0udicial to ood order and military discipline. etc.eltran is a leader of a re$ellion. Meanwhile.. since the felony char ed in the "nformation a ainst . violation of )rticle 74 for disrespect toward a superior officer. eCecuted $y mem$ers of the military and some civilians.
that the &resident of the &hilippines may. %he (%1. &'($ &'( o%%($!i$. in which case the offense shall $e tried $y court4martial5 provided. &etitioners maintain that since the (%1 has made a determination in its Order of -e$ruary 11. of the )rticles of <ar is not service4connected. @0HH lays down the -($(r#l r l( that mem$ers of the )-& and other persons su$0ect to military law. or local ordinances "'#ll b( &ri(! b) &'( prop(r +i. where the &resident of the &hilippines. /ection 1 of (. LAD=AALAM 5 RE2ES "ssues5 . %he (%1. 9eld5 N+/. $ut rather a$sor$ed and in furtherance of the alle ed crime of coup d’etat. more than thirty :30. 8astly. includin )rticle G7 of the )rticles of <ar. unli'e here where different statutes are involved.i+(5+o$$(+&(! +rim(" or o%%($"("C as =limi&(! &o &'o"( !(%i$(! i$ Ar&i+l(" </ &o :0. as determined $efore arrai nment $y the civil court.. %he . the doctrine applies only if the trial court has 0urisdiction over $oth offenses. directs $efore arrai nment that #$) " +' +rim(" or o%%($"(" b( &ri(! b) &'( prop(r +i. Ar&i+l(" :2 &o 42. Ladjaalam (kim's past digest) Facts: • "n the afternoon of /eptem$er 24. &etitioners filed with the 2ud e )dvocate #eneralBs Office a motion prayin for the suspension of its proceedin s until after the (%1 shall have resolved their motion to assume 0urisdiction.<hether or not the court martial may assume 0urisdiction over those who have $een criminally char ed of coup dBMtat $efore the re ular courts. /econdly. in the interest of 0ustice."ol!i(r "'#ll b( &ri(! b) # +o r& m#r&i#l. )s he noticed their presence. /ection 1 of (. in ma'in such declaration. the prosecution filed with the (%1 an )mended "nformation. $e prosecuted $efore a eneral court martial for violation of )rticle G7 :conduct un$ecomin an officer and a entleman. $efore arrai nment. 2004. Ma no. NeCt. "t is only the 1onstitution or the law that $estows 0urisdiction on the court. on -e$ruary 11. of the )rticles of <ar. it provides the (6+(p&io$ to the eneral rule.> <hat the law has conferred the court should not ta'e away. #$! Ar&i+l(" 4< &o 4: > of the )rticles of <ar. has determined the offense People vs. shall $e tried $y the proper civil court eCcept when the offense. i. *iolations of these specified )rticles are &ri#bl( b) +o r& m#r&i#l. %his delineates the 0urisdiction $etween the civil courts and the court martial over crimes or offenses committed $y military personnel. other special penal laws. is service4connected.- - - - - natural or 0uridical persons.O2. 9e recommended that 2G of the officers involved in the Oa'wood incident.i+(5+o$$(+&(!. @0HH deprives civil courts of 0urisdiction over service4 connected offenses.. %hus. who commit crimes or offenses penali!ed under the (evised &enal 1ode :li'e coup d’etat. policemen proceeded to the house of <alpan 8ad0aalam and his wife to serve the search warrant when they were met $y a volley of unfire comin from the second floor of the said house. 1GG@. practically amended the law which eCpressly vests in the court martial the 0urisdiction over =service4connected crimes or offenses. after conductin a reinvesti ation. order or direct at any time $efore arrai nment that any such crimes or offenses $e tried $y the proper civil courts.i+(5+o$$(+&(!. includin mem$ers of the 1iti!ens )rmed -orces #eo raphical Knits. %he trial court erred when it 0ustified its rulin $y holdin that the char e of 1onduct Kn$ecomin an Officer and a #entleman is Oa$sor$ed and in furtherance to the alle ed crime of coup d’etat. i. No. the law states an (6+(p&io$ &o &'( (6+(p&io$. the military tri$unal cannot compel them to su$mit to its 0urisdiction. 9ere. $ut is a$sor$ed in the crime of coup d’etat. %he offense for violation of )rticle G7 of the )rticles of <ar is service4connected. found pro$a$le cause a ainst only 31 of the 321 accused in 1riminal 1ase. where the civil court. - - - to $e "(r. %hey saw that it was the appellant who fired the M14 rifle towards them.e. reviewed the findin s of the &re4%rial "nvesti ation &anel. %he second para raph of the same provision further i!($&i%i(" &'( B"(r. the appellant 0umped from the window to the roof of a nei h$orin • 4 . IV. %he two of the police officers proceeded to the second floor where they earlier saw appellant firin the rifle. includin petitioners. in his capacity as officer4 in4char e of the 2)#O. issued an Order statin that =all char es $efore the court martial a ainst the accusedLare here$y declared $o& "(r. the doctrine of a$sorption of crimes is not applica$le to this case.e. 2004 that the offense for violation of )rticle G7 :conduct un$ecomin an officer and a entleman.il +o r&. $ody or officer over the su$0ect matter or nature of an action which can do so. )ccordin ly.<hether the doctrine of a$sorption of crimes is applica$le. in the interest of 0ustice. ..).il +o r&. 1olonel 2ulius ).B -irstly. the doctrine of Oa$sorption of crimesB is peculiar to criminal law and enerally applies to crimes punished $y the same statute. NO. tri$unal.).> %he trial court then proceeded to hear petitionersB applications for $ail.
3 and /ection 1.). "n this case. with violation of /ection 2 :a. . 9e was su$se3uently arrested at the $ac' of his house after a $rief chase. :(. 200:. %he relevant provision of (. 1:0<62.#&i$+ir+ m"&#$+(. such defense cannot $e iven much credence. )lso found was a pencil case with fifty :H0.38 cali$er and G millimeter such as cali$er . . %wo separate informations were filed $efore the (e ional %rial 1ourt of (oCas 1ity char in petitioner )n el 1elino /r. )c3uisition. SR. HON. of 1OM+8+1 (esolution No.. as amended. F%he penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine of %hirty thousand pesos :&30. %he %rial court convicted the accused with the direct assault and multiple counts of attempted homicide. provided that =no other crime was committed $y the person arrested. On May 12.).. the trial court also convicted him of separate offense of ille al possession of firearms. officers coupled with the presumption of re ularity of the performance of the officers.4H and also lesser 5 .. • • • 2. &ara raph 2 of (epu$lic )ct No. No. the defense of frame up is inherently wea'.. . "ssue5 whether or not the accused is lia$le for the separate offense of multiple homicide and ille al possession of firearms. /ale.ecree No.. is clear that the accused can $e convicted of simple crime of ille al possession. CE*0 CIT2.E ANGEL CELINO. 1877.ut as held $y the court. . the appellate court affirmed the trial court6s denial of the Motion to Auash. . Knlawful Manufacture. 200H to 2une G. Neither can such unlawful act $e considered to have a ravated the direct assault.". is here$y further amended to read as follows5 F/+1%"ON 1. = $( 24. . 2004 D without first havin o$tained the proper authority in writin from the 1ommission on +lections. %he law : () 82G4.R. /ection 1 of &residential .isposition or &ossession of -irearms or )mmunition or "nstruments Ksed or "ntended to $e Ksed in the Manufacture of -irearms or )mmunition. %he accused also claims that the items sei!ed from his house were planted and that he was framed up. 3. the accused failed to su$stantiate his claims. .40. 9eld5 No. ) paraffin test was conducted and the casts ta'en $oth hands of the appellant yielded positive for unpowder nitrates.ecem$er 1H. . folded aluminum foils inside. 82G4 reads5 /+1%"ON 1. )s provided in /ection 1 of () 82G4 =if homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm such u$li+($"(! %ir(#rm "'#ll b( +o$"i!(r(! #" #--r#. he cannot $e held uilty of the separate offense of ille al possession of firearms. if he was also char ed of havin committed another crime of PsicQ violatin the 1omelec un $an under the same set of fa.44. F %he trial court denied the Motion to Auash. . &rior to his arrai nment ipetitioner filed a Motion to Auash contendin that he Fcannot $e prosecuted for ille al possession of firearms . . . $or '#" '( b(($ -i. V. . VILLAR0F 5 AG0ILERA F#+&"1 1. • /everal firearms and ammunitions were recovered from appellantBs house. . CO0RT OF A. lon ma a!ines each loaded with thirty :30. 7447 : un $an.($ # &'ori&) &o +#rr) %ir(#rms. 82G4 4 :ille al possession of firearm.000. each containin methamphetamine hydrochloride. shall $e imposed if the firearm is classified as hi h powered firearm which includes those with $ores $i er in diameter than .EALS.house. 2004 said accused carried outside his residence armalite rifle colt M17 with two :2. R(+or!" "'o3 &'#& #pp(ll#$& '#! $o& %il(! #$) #ppli+#&io$ %or li+($"( &o po""("" %ir(#rm #$! #mm $i&io$. D . DG. live ammunitions of the same cali$er durin the election period D .cts . )$sent any showin of an improper motive on the part of the police 4. DELANO F.> 9ere the accused was convicted of direct assault with multiple attempted homicide for firin an unlicensed M14 rifle at several policemen who were a$out to serve a search warrant.41.
2003 was not licensed or its license had eCpired. pointed a un at her chest with his ri ht hand while he continued drivin and proceeded to the %own and 1ountry Motel in /ta Mesa. the accused said that he and ))) had consensual seC and further alle es that ))) was a small time prostitute $ecause she was the one who offered herself to him. "t was $ecause he only paid her 700 instead of 800 pesos that lead ))) to file char es and cry rape. "ssue5 whether or not the court should set aside the char e for ille al possession of unlicensed firearm since he was already char ed with 1OM+8+1 (esolution No. 1onversely. and in li ht of the 1onstitutional presumption of innocence. sedition. drew her nearer to him.). 1877. sedition.. the police was a$le to arrest the accused.. %he accused pic'ed a ara e room and pushed ))) out of the van. provided no other crime was committed $y the person arrested. $(+(""#ril) impli(" # prior !(&(rmi$#&io$ o% . sedition or attempted coup d6etat. 2003.4H cali$er &eter /tahl pistol with serial num$er )414 and five :H. %hat no other crime was committed $y the person arrested. "t is only when there is a final determination of the uilt of an accused in the other crime that the court can set aside the conviction on ille al possession of firearm.3H@ and cali$er . of )pril 17. insurrection. 9eld5 )ccused is uilty of rape. %hey recovered from him a . -acts5 )t around 8500 p.m. 9eld5 No. then the separate case for ille al possession of firearm should continue to $e prosecuted. otherwise.). only the crime of rape is committed since ille al detention is deemed a$sor$ed in rape. ))) immediately reported the incident and the neCt day.. 82G4. such use of an unlicensed firearm shall $e considered as an a ravatin circumstance.” "ssue5 <?N 1) was correct. the penalty shall $e 6 . either considered as an a ravatin circumstance in murder or homicide. %he word FcommittedF ta'en in its ordinary sense. ammunitions with an eCpired license to carry. a $lac' Mitsu$ishi )dventure at the . %he 1) affirmed the lower court6s decision with modification. or a$sor$ed as an element of re$ellion. Knder )rticle 2774. ))) who was a product support representative . 3ualified $y use of deadly weapon. any information for ille al possession of firearm should $e 3uashed $ecause the ille al possession of firearm would have to $e tried to ether with such other offense. %he accused can $e convicted of ille al possession of firearms. $oth violations can prosper separately. or attempted coup d6etat. when the other offense involved is not one of those enumerated under (. 7447 : un $an. &. thus petitioner could only $e lia$le for carryin a licensed firearm outside his residence under the last para raph of /ection 1. "nstead of Ridnappin with (ape and violation of &. or in connection with the crime of re$ellion or insurrection. /he sat at the front passen er seat as it was the only vacant seat at that time.ol $&#r) #!mi""io$. 1877 as amended $y (. "n his defense.ocaue toll ate.. )pplyin 0urisprudence. %he trial court %he (%1 found the accused uilty of Ridnappin with (ape and violation of &. 1877 as amended.%rom " ++(""% l pro"(+ &io$ or . VI. the accused put his ri ht arm over )))6s ri ht shoulder. "t also found that there was no showin that the firearm he carried on )pril 1@. F"f homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm. however. <hen the other offense involved is one of those enumerated under (. it is said that if the offender is only to rape the victim and in the process. " norin )))6s pleas he pinned her to the $ed stripped her na'ed and raped her.il& b) %i$#l +o$. as amended which says5 “the penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall carry any licensed firearm outside his residence without legal authority therefor.). &+O&8+ :2012. of the (evised &enal 1ode. %he law is indeed clear. accused dra ed her upstairs and pushed her into the $ed.$oarded accusedBs passen er van. whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or $y two or more persons. or insurrection. <ith the un pointed at her. F"f the violation of this /ection is in furtherance of or incident to. SISON 5 ALAMEDA /"/ON *. 82G4 "lle al &ossession of -irearms and )mmunitions $ecause it was shown that his license to carry eCpired on 2anuary 2003.i+&io$ r(" l&i$. 82G4. the latter had to $e ille ally detained. 1) ruled that the accused should $e convicted of (ape 3ualified with the use of a deadly weapon. <hen ))) was the only passen er left in the van.22 center4fire ma num and other firearms with firin capa$ility of full automatic and $y $urst of two or three5 &rovided.cali$ered firearms $ut considered powerful such as cali$er .. such violation shall $e a$sor$ed as an element of the crime of re$ellion. or attempted coup d6etat.
e. :. a shot was accidentally fired. VII. he tried to ta'e the firearm away from &O3 Kna0an and.R. the 1) held that he can no lon er $e convicted for ille al possession of firearm. in the process. /amar. the Municipal Mayor of )lma ro. /ince direct assault with multiple attempted homicide was committed in this case. %he two cases were consolidated and 0ointly tried $y the (%1 as the crimes char ed a ainst the petitioner arose from the "#m( i$+i!($&. provided that =no other crime was committed $y the person arrested. "n People v. that )pril 3.aran ay . 1) ruled that under prevailin 0urisprudence there can $e no separate offense of simple ille al possession of firearm if the unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of any crime. the emcee called on the petitioner and "na (e$uya to crown the fiesta 3ueen. %he prosecution was a$le to sufficiently alle e in the "nformation.. the petitioner delivered a speech.EO.$ b#$. 9e then returned the firearm to &O3 Kna0an. 9owever. A" &o &'( +'#r-( o% Ho3(. the petitioner was a$le to ta'e hold of the firearm and.LE OF THE . to ether with &O3 Kna0an.iason that was held on )pril 3. we laid down the correct interpretation of the law and ruled5 C C C A "impl( r(#!i$.. Ladjaalam. went $ac' to his ta$le. that a un was used in the commission of rape. the petitioner admitted the followin facts5 first. )&&+)8/. r#p(. the moc'in continued. F#+&"1 petitioner.urin the pre4trial conference. %he petitionerBs $ody uards immediately too' hold of his hand to prevent him from firin another shot. 1GGH.rendered a judgment finding the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of violation of election gun ban and illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions."*"/"ON and +"#9%++N%9 . %he roup. 1OK(% O. continued to moc' him. )tty. )&&+)8/. 1GGH fell within the election un $an period imposed $y the 1ommission on +lections :1OM+8+1. he ended his speech and went to the roup to as' them not to distur$ the festivities. 2018 RA0L *..". %he petitioner went to fetch "na (e$uya who was seated to ether with )tty. 1onsiderin that the petitioner was convicted of violation of election un $an.4Hcali$er pistol. that he was not issued any license to possess any firearmE and second. %hereafter. 9is version of %he events was that while he was deliverin his speech a roup of people were shoutin insults at him. 3824 for ille al possession of firearms and ammunitions should $e dismissed pursuant to the rulin of this 1ourt in ) ote v. Ma lana noticed that the petitioner had a firearm tuc'ed on his waist. the petitioner. promptin &O3 1onrado Kna0anto draw his firearm from his holster to pacify the unruly crowd. +.aran ay .INES and %9+9ONO(). <hen the petitioner saw this. 9e was disarmed after. went to the ta$le occupied $y his political rivals and fired a shot upwards. i. with the loaded firearm in hand. &'(r( +#$ b( $o "(p#r#&( o%%($"( o% "impl( ill(-#l po""(""io$ o% %ir(#rm".i+&io$ also. %his cau ht the ire of a roup of supporters of the rival political party who then shouted invectives at the petitioner.8+1OK(%O. neither should we.iason in any election. 1) issued a resolution and partly ranted the petitionerBs motion for reconsideration. not a separate offense. 2r.(r. " +' 7 !-m($& m "& b( "(& #"i!(. par. it should have eCpressly said so. the petitioner pleaded not uilty to $oth char es.K 1"%N. . ESCALANTE V . /hamed $y the insults hurled at him.iol#&io$ o% (l(+&io$ ."*"/"ON. 142:2: =#$ #r) 4. O$ r(+o$"i!(r#&io$ petitioner averred that 1riminal 1ase No.. if the =other crime> is murder or homicide.> "f the intention of the law in the second para raph were to refer only to homicide and murder. and esta$lish durin trial. ille al possession of firearms $ecomes merely an a ravatin circumstance. No. 7 . where the law does not distin uish.&'(r(o% "'o3" &'#& i% #$ $li+($"(! %ir(#rm i" "(! i$ &'( +ommi""io$ o% #$) +rim(. causin the crowd to scamper for safety. the 1) affirmed in toto and said that i$ #$ i$!i+&m($& %or ill(-#l po""(""io$ o% %ir(#rm" #$! #mm $i&io$" #$! . -elipe Ma lana.. as it did in the third para raph. :3. of the Omni$us +lection 1ode in modifyin .reclusion perpetua to death. statin that he had never won at . 2ud e 8oren!o which declared that an accused is not lia$le for ille al possession of firearm if the firearm was used in the commission of an offense such as a violation of the election un $an. *erily.i+&io$ %or ill(-#l po""(""io$ o% %ir(#rm". 1+.thus. appellant can no lon er $e held lia$le for ille al possession of firearms. %hereupon. )fter the crownin ceremony.HILI. -O(M+( /&+1")8 %<+N%"+%9 ..LE 5 *AHER G. two (2 separate !nformation charging him !llegal Possession of "irearms and #mmunitions and violation of the election gun ban under during the $lection Period of the %ay &' ())* $lection. %he law is clear5 the accused can $e convicted of simple ille al possession of firearms. dismissin the case for ille al possession of firearms and convicted in *iolation of /ection 271. . went $ac' to his ta$le. &'( pro! +&io$ o% &'( %ir(#rm i&"(l% i" $o& r(I ir(! %or +o$. was the uest of honor durin the fiesta cele$ration in . the petitioner cut short his speech and. it held that there was no necessity on the part of the prosecution to prove that the petitioner had no license or permit to possess a firearm since the same had already $een admitted $y the petitioner durin the trial. thereafter. 9( %i$! &'#& '( +#$ $o lo$-(r b( '(l! li#bl( %or " +' o%%($"( "i$+( #$o&'(r +rim( 3#" +ommi&&(!. ESCALANTE. #" &o p(&i&io$(rG" +o$. sayin that 'i" "#i! po""(""io$ 3#" i$+i!($&#l. 9ence.EO.
lower courts erred in imposin the applica$le penalty a ainst the petitioner./+N% 9+8. the re3uisite elements are5 :a. filed under rule 7H certiorari dismissed since "t should $e 4H which period has already lapsed. 1) is correct and accused already admitted the facts 1. 2. -indin the petitioner uilty of the offense of violation of election un $an.ecem$er 1@. the (%1 and the 1) erred in imposin a strai ht penalty of one :1.(. he shall $e sentenced to deportation which shall $e enforced after the prison term has $een served. year imprisonment a ainst the petitioner. 1OM+8+1 #KN .)N "/ ). %9+ O--+N/+ O. C C )pplyin the "ndeterminate /entence 8aw. 9e averred that the firearm. 9is possession of the firearm is merely incidental and would not suffice to convict him for violation of election un $an. . )ccordin ly. was in fact in the possession of &O3 Kna0an and that it was only when he wrestled the firearm away from the latter that he was a$le to possess it. . %he petitioner claimed that the 1) ravely a$used its discretion when it affirmed his conviction for violation of election un $an considerin that the fact of his possession of the firearm was not sufficiently esta$lished. )s to penalties. years. J )ny person found uilty of any election offense under this 1ode shall $e punished with imprisonment of not less than one year $ut not more than siC years and shall not $e su$0ect to pro$ation. No. and a minimum period which shall not $e less than one :1. the uilty party shall $e sentenced to suffer dis3ualification to hold pu$lic office and deprivation of the ri ht of suffra e.5 %he petition is dismissed. &enalties. &+O&8+ vs. )dditional5 SSSS"n cases involvin ille al possession of firearm. which shall not eCceed siC :7. the fact that the accused who owned or possessed the firearm does not have the correspondin license or permit to possess. in part. the (%1 imposed upon him the strai ht penalty of one :1. 1GGG.O("MON. thus such findin is $indin . /ection 274 of .& 881. 3. the imposa$le penalty for violation of the election un $an should have a maCimum period. reads5 /ec. 8 . *"O8)%"ON O. "n merits . "n addition.)ppeal to /1 I"" (5 <ON 1) is correct <ON one of the +//+N%")8 +8+M+N%/ O. 11427@. year.u since "t was already final $ecause of improper remedy the penalty 0ud ed $y the 1) stays. alle ed to $e possessed $y him durin the incident. the petitioner was in possession of a firearm with live ammunition outside of his residence within the period of the election un $an imposed $y the 1OM+8+1 sans authority therefor is a findin of fact $y the (%1 and the 1) which cannot $e distur$ed $y this 1ourt in this ori inal action for certiorari. :#. 274. "f he is a forei ner. . the eCistence of the su$0ect firearm and :$. %he penalty imposed $y the (%1 was affirmed $y the 1). year imprisonment.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?