Case Digest (G.R. No. 111343)
Facts:
Ernestino P. Dunlao, Sr. v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, The People of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, and Lourdes Du, G.R. No. 111343, August 22, 1996, the Supreme Court Second Division, Romero, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Ernestino P. Dunlao, Sr. is a licensed retail and wholesale scrap-metal dealer doing business as Dunlao Enterprise in Davao City. He was accused by the City Fiscal by information dated January 19, 1987 of violating Presidential Decree No. 1612 (the Anti‑Fencing Law) for allegedly purchasing and receiving dismantled farrowing crates and galvanized iron (G.I.) pipes worth P20,000, knowing them to be the products of thievery and thereby committing fencing.
On October 25, 1986 employees of Lourdes Farms, Inc. (represented by Lourdes Du) accompanied by police officers went to petitioner’s premises after receiving information the stolen farrowing crates and G.I. pipes were there. The group found the items displayed inside petitioner’s compound and in cabinets; upon being told the items belonged to Lourdes Farms petitioner voluntarily surrendered them and the police took them to the station.
A criminal complaint was filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Davao City, Branch 9 (Criminal Case No. 14655) on February 16, 1987. Petitioner was arraigned on March 13, 1987 and pleaded not guilty. After trial, the RTC, on May 30, 1989, convicted petitioner of violating PD 1612 and imposed imprisonment. Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals, which on May 10, 1993 affirmed the conviction. Petitioner then brought the present petition to the Supreme Court seeking relief from the appellate court’s decision, arguing that the pr...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the prosecution prove the elements of the offense of fencing under P.D. No. 1612, specifically purchase/receipt and knowledge or intent to gain?
- Did petitioner successfully rebut the prima facie presumption of fencing arising from mere possession under Section 5 of P.D. No. 1612?
- Was the valuation of the recovered farrowing crates and G.I. pipes properly fixed at P20,000 and should petitioner be ordered to pay that ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)