You are on page 1of 11

R e p u b l i c o f th e P h i l i p p i n e s

R e g i o n a l Tr i a l C o ur t
S i x t h J u d i c i a l Re g i o n
B r a n c h 1 , I lo i l o C i t y

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,

CRIMINAL CASE NO.
_________
For:

­versus­
ROGER GONZALES Y PENACHOS,
Accused.

Violation of P.D. No. 1866
as Amended by R. A.
No. 8294

CRIMINAL CASE NO. most respectfully submit APPELLEE’S BRIEF SUBJECT INDEX Table of Authorities Preliminary Statement of the Case Statement of Issues Presented Statement of Facts Counter-Arguments Arguments Conclusion Prayer 4 5 6 6 9 9 11 12 . 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 2 of 11 Pursuant to the Notice of this Honorable Court. Plaintiff-Appellee PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES through the Iloilo City Prosecution Office. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17.

 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 3 of 11 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Jurisprudence__________________ ________________________________ Malacat vs.R.R. 2003 Terry vs Ohio. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17. CA.S. 1968 Laws and Statutes_______________ __________________________Page_ P. No. G. 392 U. June 10. 1866 as amended by R. February 4. 1997 People vs Chua. No. D. December 12. No. 8294 Revised Penal COde R e p u b l i c o f th e P h i l i p p i n e s R e g i o n a l Tr i a l C o ur t .CRIMINAL CASE NO. A. G. No. 136066-67. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. 123595.

assails the judgment dated May 30.CRIMINAL CASE NO. Plaintiff. disposition or possession of firearms or ammunition or instruments used or intended to be used in the manufacture of firearms or ammunition. Trespeces of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities. or machinery. part of firearm. Sec. or possess any low powered firearm.D.32 and other firearm of similar firepower. finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Illegal possession of firearms punishable 1 Section 1. I lo i l o C i t y PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. _________ For: ­versus­ Violation of P. Accused. 1866 as Amended by R. No. Through this appeal. Branch 10.1 Presidential Decree No. A. the plaintiff in the lower court represented by the Iloilo City Prosecutor charged herein defendant-appellant with illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions 1. sale. x-------------------------------------------------x PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF THE CASE Plaintiff-appellee. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.A. .380 or . (As amended by R. 1. 2011 rendered by Judge Enrique Z. acquire. Iloilo City. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. — The penalty of prisioncorreccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than Fifteen thousand pesos (P15. such as rimfire handgun. acquisition. is hereby further amended to read as follows: Sec. deal in. That no other crime was committed. accused-appellant. CRIMINAL CASE NO. tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition: Provided. No. 1866 . 8294 ROGER GONZALES Y PENACHOS. ammunition. No. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 4 of 11 S i x t h J u d i c i a l Re g i o n B r a n c h 1 .000) shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully manufacture. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17. Roger Gonzales y Penachos. as amended. dispose. 8294) . Unlawful manufacture.

527-07. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED First Issue: Whether or not the lower court erred in convicting Defendant-appellee Roger P.D. and one (1) live ammunition. did then and there willfully. The case was docketed as Criminal Case No. without having the necessary permit or authority to possess the same. Second Issue: Whether or not the lower court correctly apply in imposing the penalty of 2years 4 months and 1 day of prisioncorreccional as maximum and in imposing a fine of Php 15. No.A. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 5 of 11 under Section 1 Paragraph 1 of P. said accused with deliberate intent and without any justifiable motive.D. No. 8294. 1886 as amended by R. .A.000. No. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17. 8294. No. No. CONTRARY TO LAW.00 STATEMENT OF FACTS The lower court convicted accused-appellant Gonzales of Illegal possession of firearms punishable under Section 1 Paragraph 1 of P.D. the City of Iloilo.”2 2 Record.1. unlawfully and criminally have in his possession and control one (1) single shot homemade 12 gauge shotgun (hand gun) a low powered firearm. 1886 as amended by R. Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. Gonzales for illegal possession of firearms and ammunition punishable under Section 1 Paragraph 1 of P. p. 8294. No.CRIMINAL CASE NO. 2007. 1886 as amended by R. The accusatory portion reads: “That on or about December 14.A.

12 Id. 3 However. 7 TSN.12SPO1 Gaddi checked the gun if it was loaded. April 29. SPO1 Gaddi approached the accused-appellant8 and stopped him. he informed him the accused of his constitutional right. 8.Then SPO1 Gaddiasked“What was bulging?”11And the accusedappellant brought a short-barreled shotgun and voluntarily gave it to SPO1 Gaddi. they were able to receive a phone call from Helie D. assisted by Atty. who was carrying a knapsack. Jaro. officer on duty. Cataluña. 6.16 3 Record. Helie pinpointed him to the policemen. 13SPO1 Gaddi then queried about his license to possess and carry a firearm.. Jr. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17.14 When SPO1 Gaddi arrested the accusedappellant. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 6 of 11 Upon being arraigned. they proceeded to the place of incident. p. Counsel of Record for the accused. 15 Id. 2009. 6. 8 Id. 6. 14 Id. Gualberto V. August 6. 5. p. July 1.9 Then he asked the accused to open his knapsack 10 and the accused opened it. live-in partner of the accused-appellant. the accused-appellant Gonzales pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. July 1. 2010.CRIMINAL CASE NO. 9 TSN. 2009 5 TSN dated July 1. 2009. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. 2009. When they arrived at M. 16 Exhibit “D-1”. Helie instantly complained to the responding policemen that accused-appellant is armed with a gun and always threatening her. 2007 at around 9:00 o’clock in the morning. Hechanova. testified that on December 14. 2009 6 TSN. Magante. April 29. p. 47.V. p. Iloilo City. 6. at the Jaro Police Station. TSN. p. 2009. p. but the accused failed to show any papers. was coming out of the gate. 2009. 5. 10 TSN.6 Immediately. p. p.7As the accused-appellant Gonzales.15HelieMaganteturned over one live ammunition. p. April 29. 4 . SPO1 Alex Gaddi and PO3 Rex Tabuada. the prosecution established the guilt of accused-appellant Gonzales beyond reasonable doubt by presenting as evidence the testimonies of SPO1 Alex Gaddi4 and PO3 Rex Tabuada5. 6. 11 TSN. TSN dated April29. asking for police assistance. Exhibit “D” 13 Id.

000. 2011. Record. as maximum. to four (4) years. Philippine National Police. Letter Order No. to testify.” COUNTER-ARGUMENTS Plaintiff-appellee raises the following counter-arguments to the assignment of errors raised by the accused-appellant: 17 Record. p.CRIMINAL CASE NO. and one (1) day of prisioncorreccional. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17. and one (1) day of prisioncorreccional. the Court finds accused Roger Penachos Gonzales GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of illegal possession of firearms punished under Section 1.9. p. four (4) months. 265. No. Paragraph 1 of P. on the strength of prosecution’s evidence as against the weak evidence of the defense. A. The dispositive portion of the decision reads:19 “WHEREFORE. The firearm and one live ammunition are confiscated in favor of the State. 2008. 17 identified the Certification dated September 24. Record Section.00. Chief. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 7 of 11 SPO4 Vicente. 1886 as amended by R. Exhibit “E”. p. 264. 18 . Firearms and Explosives Division. the lower court promulgated its decision. and sentences him to an indeterminate penalty of. two (2) years. as minimum. 09-26-08-006. 19 Decision. 8294. absent any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. p. and impose a fine of P15. Exhibit “F” TSN. 8. SO ORDERED. who was authorized by Police Superintendent EdithaHinlo. September 29. No. 4. two (2) months.D. 2008 issued by P/Superintendent Hinlo that the accused is not a licensed/registered firearm holder of any kind and caliber.18 On May 30.

to warrant the belief that the person has weapons concealed. The call of Helie suffice the first element of the a valid stop and frisk which moved the police officers to investigate the knapsack of accusedappellant who is coming out of the residence. It is a valid “stop and frisk”. mere suspicion or hunch will not validate a stop and frisk.00. and one (1) day of prisioncorreccional. The testimonies of the prosecution witness satisfied the crucible test of reasonable doubt to overthrow the Constitutional guaranty of presumption of innocence and clearly established the accused-appellants guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In order that the stop and frisk be valid there must be a reason given the police officers experience and surrounding conditions. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. as maximum. to four (4) years. It is not controverted that the search and seizure conducted by the police officers in the present case was not authorized by a search warrant. two (2) months. and impose a fine of P15. as minimum.000.CRIMINAL CASE NO. four (4) months. and one (1) day of prisioncorreccional. The constitutional prescription against warrantless searches and seizure is not absolute and admits certain exceptions and one of those is stop and frisk situations as in the case of Terry v Ohio. ARGUMENTS 1. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 8 of 11 1. . The testimonies of the prosecution witness and pieces of evidence established all the essential elements of the crime andsatisfied the crucible test of reasonable doubt to overthrow the Constitutional guaranty of presumption of innocence and clearly established the accused-appellants guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court correctly appreciated the genuine reason to warrant the search and to impose the penalty of two (2) years. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17. 2.

the accused-appelllant was asked for a license to possess and carry firearm but the accused failed to show.(a) the general interest of effective crime prevention and detection. When asked what was bulging. 2009. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. 136066267. 24 Exhibit “D” 25 Exhibit “D-1”. The last element. February 4. R. Although. 21 . December 12. No. he voluntarily surrendered the short-barreled gun.21 Upon surrendering the short-barreled gun. No. 2009. 2003 22 TSN. the testimony of SPO1Gaddi22 is enough to warrant conviction. Hence.CRIMINAL CASE NO.25 20 See Malacat v. and (b) the more pressing interest of safety and self-preservation which permit the police officer to take steps to assure himself that the person with whom he deals is not armed with a deadly weapon that could unexpectedly and fatally be used against the police officer. July 1. G. 23 They even presented the short-barreled shotgun24 and one live ammunition.20 The police officers have sufficient genuine reason to stop the accused to investigate if he was actually possessed a firearm when Helie complained to them that accused-appellant was armed and threatening her. G. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 9 of 11 The second element states that it must serve a two-fold interest. R. it was corroborated by the testimony of PO1 Tabuada. April 29. under appropriate circumstances and in an appropriate manner. 23 TSN. CA. approach a person for purposes of investigating possible criminal behavior even without probable cause. the police officers arrested the accused-appellant. 123595. the seizure must precede the arrest. 1997 People vs Chua. accused-appellant was asked to open his knapsack then something bulging was eyed by the police officer. which underlies the recognition that a police officer may. Afterwards. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17.

1866 as amended by R. as maximum. CONCLUSION Therefore the Municipal Trial Court Branch 10 of Iloilo City did not err in convicting the accused for Illegal possession of firearms and imposed the correct penalty.00. two (2) months. and one (1) day of prisioncorreccional. D. A. Branch 10 be affirmed in toto. and impose a fine of P15. to four (4) years. The Revised Penal Code provides that a penalty was correctly applied as it is if it is within the provision of penalties provided by the Special Law. Mere fact that the accused-appellant possessed the unlicensed firearm without license to possess or carry the same constitute a violation of P.000. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 10 of 11 The applicable laws and jurisprudence clearly established that testimonies of the prosecution witness are credible enough to establish the accused-appellant’s commission of the crime. and one (1) day of prisioncorreccional. . were not prompted by some sinister motive in accusing the accused for illegal possession of firearms. four (4) months. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17. No. 2. as minimum. PRAYER VIEWED IN THE FOREGOING LIGHT. 8294. The Court correctly appreciated the genuine reason to warrant the search and to impose the penalty of two (2) years. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. it is respectfully prayed for that the instant appeal be DENIED for lack of merit and the decision of the Municipal Trial Court. especially SPO1 Gaddi and PO3 Tabuada. The police officers.CRIMINAL CASE NO.

January 17. Iloilo City. Philippines By Prosecutor Arnulfo Francisco Public Prosecutor .CRIMINAL CASE NO. Bonifacio Street. 2014 x-------------------------------------------------x Page 11 of 11 Other relief and remedies as are just and equitable. 2014 Iloilo City. are likewise prayed for. 527-07 PEOPLE VS ROGER P. Philippines ILOILO CITY PROSECUTION OFFICE Ramon Avancena Building. GONZALES APPELLEE’S BRIEF Dated January 17.