ERNIE IDANAN, NANLY DEL BARRIO

AND MARLON PLOPENIO

Petitioners,
-versus-

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Respondent.
RTC BRANCH 42,VIRAC
Regional Trial Court CATANDUANES
INFORMATION OF THE CRIMINAL CASE:
October 16, 2005 at Brgy. San Miguel,
Panganiban, Catanduanes

Accused in possession and in control of :

29 pcs of Narra lumber
Gross volume=716.48 board ft./1.69 cubic meter
Php 275,844.80
Loaded in a truck
No permit, license or documents from
PROSECUTION:

Police Officers’ version:

-PNP headquarters of Panganiban received an
information that a group of illegal loggers will
be transporting narra flitches along Kilometer
11, 12 or 13 in Panganiban
P/INSP. CHITO OYARDO, OIC Chief of Police
together with 5 policemen including PO1 Ferdinand
Bobiles, approached an idle Isuzu elf truck loaded with
lumber
Arrested Individuals
Driver: Idanan
Passengers: Del Barrio and Plopenio
Loading lumbers to the truck: Vargas and Tulod
Reason for Arrest:
No authorized document presented to transport
lumber
From the police station, they were brought to Camp
DEFENSE:
CONTENTION OF IDANAN, DEL BARRIO AND
PLOPENIO:
-they were flagged down by the policemen while
traversing Kilometer 12
-One of the policemen borrowed the truck and drove
it for about 100 meters. And they saw policemen
loaded narra flitches into the truck

CONTENTION OF VARGAS AND TULOD:

They hitched a ride with Idanan going to Caramoran

ALL OF THEM were arrested and brought to the police

station.
DEFENSE EVIDENCE:

Certification issued by Punong Barangay Elias D.

Obierna (Elias) and Barangay Tanod Benito P.
Obierna (Benito)

Purpose of the Certification:

• that the police intercepted the truck driven by
Idanan;
• that it was found empty;
• that the Police officers asked the driver of the
truck to deliver the logs to Municipal Office/
Police Station of Panganiban
Testimony of Punong Barangay Elias:
-he was forced by Santiago Idanan to sign the
Certification
-he had no personal knowledge on the said
incident

Testimony of Barangay Tanod Benito:

-He was present during the incident
- He allegedly saw firewood on two (2) trucks
and heard the policemen instructing a certain
son of Agoy to load numbers into the truck
On Feb. 22, 2007, Hon. Genie G. Gapas-Agbada,
judge of the said court, rendered a decision which
dispositive part reads:
“WHEREFORE, the prosecution having proved the guilt of all
the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the Court hereby
sentences accused Ernie Idanan, Nanly del Barrio, Marlon
Plopenio, Roberto Vargas and Elmer Tulod to suffer the
imprisonment ranging from ten (10) years and one (1) day of
prision mayor, as minimum, to sixteen (16) years, five (5)
months and eleven (11) days of reclusion temporal, as
maximum. The 29 pieces of narra lumber subject of this case
are forfeiter in favor of the government.”
 On March 29, 2010, the Court of Appeals
affirmed the challenged decision of the RTC
Thereafter, the case was elevated to the Supreme Court
PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS
1.)Prosecution failed to prove beyond 1. (OSG) The mere possession of timber
reasonable doubt all the elements of the or other forest products without legal
offense charged that to support documents consummates the crime.
conviction, there must be possession
coupled with intent to possess
2.)Testimony of the Chief of Police is far 2. Prosecution witnesses’ statements
from being candid and straightforward are credible and defense of frame-up
3.)Police officers planted evidence against is weak.
them
4.)Corroborative evidence: testimony of
brgy. officials
 SUPREME COURT DECISION:

1. ) Testimonies of the prosecution witnesses are credible. Evidence to be

believed must not only proceed from the mouth of a credible witness
but it must be credible in itself, such as the common experience and
observation of mankind can approve as probable under the
circumstances.

2. ) Petitioners’ statements that they did not complain or put up any

resistance when they were arrested despite their innocence is contrary
to human nature and experience. Petitioners’ should have atleast
protested if they believed they were not committing any crime.

3. ) Allegation of “planted evidence” is unsubstantiated. There is no proof

that the police had ill-motive to falsely accuse and testify against
petitioners, aside from the unsubstantiated and far-fetched allegation
that police wanted to impress their superiors. The presumption of
regularity accorded to police officers is unrebutted.
 Section 68 of PD 705, otherwise known as the Revised Forestry
Code of the Philippines, penalizes three categories of acts:

(1)the cutting, gathering, collecting, or removing of timber or other

forest products from any forest land without any authority;

(2) the cutting, gathering, collecting, or removing of timber from

alienable or disposable public land, or from private land without any
authority; and

(3) the possession of timber or other forest products without the

legal documents as required under existing forest laws and
regulations.
Petitioners were charged under the third category, i.e., of
POSSESSING and in control of 29 pieces of narra lumber without the
legal requirements as required under existing forest laws and
regulations.
PROSECUTION TO PROVE
INTENT TO POSSESS OR
ANIMUS POSSIDENDI
 POSSESSION
Possession, under the law,
includes not only actual possession,
but also constructive possession.
1.)Actual possession exists when
the object of the crime is in the
immediate physical control of the
accused.
2.) Constructive possession exists
when the object of the crime is
under the dominion and control of
the accused or when he has the
right to exercise dominion and
control over the place where it is
found.
THE CASE FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF
CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION OF THE
TIMBER WITHOUT REQUISITE OF LEGAL
DOCUMENTS
1. Idanan admitted to driving the truck
while Del Barrio and Plopenio
accompanied Idanan
it is presumed that he exercised
full control of the vehicle that he is
driving and that he knew what its load
was.
There is no plausible excuse. Petitioners
have Animus Possidendi or intent to
possess of the narra lumber. Even
absence of malice or criminal intent, mere
 VIOLATION OF SECTION 68 OF PD 705, AS AMENDED, IS PUNISHABLE AS
QUALIFIED THEFT UNDER ART. 309 AND 310 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE.

ART. 309 PROVIDED FOR THE PENALTIES

ART. 310 Qualified theft. - The crime of qualified theft shall be punished
by the penalties next higher by two degrees than those respectively
specified in the next preceding article

Had appellant committed SIMPLE THEFT, the penalty should have

been twenty years of reclusion temporal. IN QUALIFIED THEFT,
THE PENALTY IS TWO DEGREES HIGHER. Thus the penalty of
reclusion perpetua should be imposed.
COURT’S RULING:
In this case, the resulting penalty is reclusion perpetua. This penalty will be suffered by
the driver and the helpers. The operator of the illegal logging business has not been
apprehended. While we sympathize with the plight of petitioners who were merely
following orders and were consequently caught in possession of the lumber, we must still
apply the law in full force. Dura lex sed lex. But considering the facts about petitioners'
participation in the crime, and guided by jurisprudence on instances when the facts of the
crime elicited the Court's compassion for the accused, we recommend executive
clemency.

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED. The 29 March 2010 Decision of the Court
of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 30729 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Petitioners ERNIE
IDANAN, NANLY DEL BARRIO and MARLON PLOPENIO are hereby found GUILTY beyond
reasonable doubt for violation of Section 68 of Presidential Decree No. 705, as amended,
and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Pursuant to Article 5 of the
Revised Penal Code, the Court shall TRANSMIT the case to the Chief Executive, through the
Department of Justice, and RECOMMENDS the grant of executive clemency to petitioners.