Case Digest (G.R. No. 114823)
Facts:
In Norma Dizon-Pamintuan v. People of the Philippines (G.R. No. 111426, July 11, 1994), the petitioner was charged under the Anti-Fencing Law (P.D. No. 1612) for buying and possessing jewelries stolen in a February 12, 1988 robbery at the Better Living Subdivision residence of Teodoro and Luzviminda Encarnacion. On February 24, 1988, the Encarnacions, with operatives of the Western Police District, allegedly identified earrings, a diamond-studded ring, a diamond-studded crucifix, and other pieces displayed by the petitioner at a Sta. Cruz, Manila stall. The trial court of Branch 20, RTC Manila, after hearing witnesses including Teodoro Encarnacion, Cpl. Ignacio Jao Jr., and Pfc. Emmanuel Sánchez, found the petitioner guilty on November 16, 1990, sentencing her to 14 years of prisión mayor to 19 years of reclusión temporal and ordering no civil liability in view of recovery of the items. The petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals, which on March 29, 1993 affirmed the convictCase Digest (G.R. No. 114823)
Facts:
- Robbery Incident and Recovery Operation
- On February 12, 1988 at Better Living Subdivision, Paranaque, five armed men robbed Teodoro and Luzviminda Encarnacion of jewelry and other valuables; the victims immediately reported to the Paranaque Police and the Western Police District (WPD).
- Encarnacion prepared a list and sketches of the stolen items (Exhs. C, C-1 to C-4, D). On February 24, 1988 an entrapment operation led the Encarnacions to recognize Exhibits C-2 (earring & ring, P75,000), C-3 (earring set, P15,000), and C-4 (crucifix chain, P3,000) displayed at Norma Dizon-Pamintuan’s stall on Florentino Torres Street, Sta. Cruz, Manila.
- Trial Court Proceedings (RTC Br. 20, Manila; Crim. Case No. 88-64954)
- Information charged Pamintuan with violation of the Anti-Fencing Law (P.D. No. 1612) for buying, possessing, and selling jewelry valued at P105,000 derived from the robbery.
- Prosecution evidence:
- Teodoro Encarnacion testified on the robbery, the list/sketches, and identification of Exhibits C-2, C-3, C-4 at petitioner’s stall.
- Cpl. Ignacio Jao Jr. and Pfc. Emmanuel Sanchez corroborated the recovery, seizure, and custody of the items.
- Defense evidence:
- Rosito Dizon-Pamintuan (petitioner’s brother) claimed the stall was owned by “Fredo,” that petitioner was awaiting the owner, and that police forced entry without the owner’s presence.
- RTC Decision (November 16, 1990): found petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt, applied the Section 5 presumption of fencing, valued the items at P93,000, and sentenced her to 14 years prision mayor to 19 years reclusion temporal; no civil liability was imposed.
- Court of Appeals Proceedings (CA-G.R. CR No. 11024)
- Petitioner appealed alleging (a) conviction rested on a mere presumption, and (b) insufficient proof of the P93,000 valuation.
- CA Decision (March 29, 1993): affirmed the conviction—finding all elements of fencing proven and Section 5 presumption properly applied—but set aside the penalty and remanded to the RTC solely to receive evidence on correct valuation under Section 3 of P.D. 1612.
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the conviction based on the disputable presumption of fencing under Section 5 of P.D. No. 1612?
- Did the CA properly remand the case for further evidence on valuation, or does such remand violate the prohibition against double jeopardy?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)