(14)

GR 164815
Valeroso v People
REYES, R.T., J, Feb. 22, 2008

DOCTRINE:

ART. 4 of Civil Code. The law looks forward, never backward. Lex prospicit, non respicit. A new
law has a prospective, not retroactive, effect. However, penal laws that favor a guilty person,
who is not a habitual criminal, shall be given retroactive effect

As a general rule, penal laws should not have retroactive application, lest they acquire the
character of an ex post facto law. An exception to this rule, however, is when the law is
advantageous to the accused. Thus, RA 8294 was used for determining the sentence, instead of
PD 1866, because the former is favorable to the accused and so may be applied retroactively

FACTS:

Sr. Inp. Jerry Valeroso, petitioner, was charged with the crime of illegal possession of firearms under
Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1866 by the Regional Trial Court and Court of Appeals due to carrying a
gun that was not issued to him by the Firearms and Explosives Division of Camp Crame

According to the testimony of the policemen who captured Valeroso, on July 10, 1996, SPO2 Antonio
Disuanco received a warrant of arrest for the capture of petitioner from a judge and, with a team of
policemen, proceeded to track him down to the Integral National Police Central Station where petitioner
was found about to ride a tricycle but was immediately detained by the team and after a search on his
person, the gun with serial number 52315 was confiscated. The gun was loaded with 5 live rounds.

In illegal possession of firearm and ammunition, the prosecution has the burden of
proving the twin elements of (1) the existence of the subject firearm and ammunition, and (2) the
fact that the accused who possessed or owned the same does not have the corresponding
license for it.

During the trial, Petitioner raised his own side of the incident where he recalls that on the day, July 10,
1996, petitioner was sleeping in his home when he was suddenly attacked by the four policemen who
handcuffed and threatened him and brought him outside his home in his underwear, and then afterwards,
said policemen searched his home while he was not present and claimed to have found the gun in
question. His testimony is supprted by SPO3 Agustin Timbol and his neighbor Adrian Yuson.
Furthermore, Petitioner claims that the gun was planted, that he was a target of conspiracy among the
police officials and challenges the claim by prosecution witness regarding the certification of the
Firearms Divisions as hearsay

The Court has consistently ruled that when the question arises as to which of the conflicting versions of
the prosecution and the defense is worthy of belief, the assessment of the trial courts are generally
viewed as correct and entitled to great weight.

WHEREFORE, the Court hereby finds the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Violation of Section
1 of Presidential Decree No. 1866 as amended by Republic Act No. 8294 and hereby sentences him to
suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period or from 4 years, 2 months and 1 day as
minimum to 6 years as maximum and to pay the fine in the amount of Fifteen Thousand Pesos
(P15,000.00). SUPREME COURT. WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated May 4,
2004 is AFFIRMED in full.

ISSUES
● (As related to the Civil Law) Because How will the retroactive effect of laws affect Valeroso’
sentence

RULING:

Petitioner was charged with the crime of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition under the first
paragraph of Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866, which imposes a penalty of prison temporal in its maximum
period to reclusion perpetua.

However during the pendency of the trial, P.D. No. 1866 was amended by R.A. No. 8294 on July 6,
1997. The present law now states that the penalty of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition would
be prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than P15,000 instead.

Although an additional fine of P15,000.00 is imposed by R.A. No. 8294, the same is still advantageous to
the accused, considering that the imprisonment is lowered to prision correccional in its maximum period
from reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua under P.D. No. 1866.