Case Digest (G.R. No. 207175)
Facts:
Eduardo Magsumbol v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 207175, November 26, 2014, Supreme Court Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court (Carpio, Del Castillo, Reyes, and Leonen, JJ., concurring). Petitioner Eduardo Magsumbol and three co-accused — Erasmo Magsino, Apolonio Inanoria, and Bonifacio Ramirez — were charged in an Information dated August 30, 2002 with having, on February 1, 2002, conspired to cut and carry away 33 coconut trees from the coconut plantation of private complainant Menandro Avanzado in Barangay Kinatihan I, Candelaria, Quezon.
Prosecution witnesses — overseer Ernesto Caringal, private complainant Menandro Avanzado, and SPO1 Florentino Manalo — testified that Caringal saw the accused and seven others cutting trees at about 11:00 a.m.; by the time Menandro and Caringal, accompanied by SPO1 Manalo, returned to the site, the 33 coconut trees had been felled and converted into coco lumber and the lumber were gone, leaving only stumps and photographs of them. The defense presented Atanacio Avanzado, accused Ramirez, petitioner Magsumbol, Barangay Captain Pedro Arguelles, and accused Inanoria to prove that the felled trees were on Atanacio’s adjacent property and that Atanacio had authorized Magsino and Magsumbol to cut his trees and sell them to Ramirez.
On March 15, 2011, the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 55, Lucena City, found all four accused guilty of simple theft, applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law and imposed imprisonment and joint and several civil liability of P13,200.00. The accused appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) arguing insufficiency of evidence, lack of criminal intent, and that the felled trees were on Atanacio’s land. In a Decision dated December 14, 2012, the CA affirmed the RTC’s findings but characterized the offense as theft of damaged property under paragraph (2) of Article 308, Revised Penal Code, adjusted the maximum term, and affirmed the P13,200.00 civil award; its denial of the accused’s motion for reconsideration was penned in a Resolution dated May 6, 2013.
Petitioner filed a petition for revi...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was there competent evidence proving that the 33 felled coconut trees were beyond the property owned by Atanacio Avanzado and thus belonged to Menandro Avanzado?
- Did the prosecution establish malice and intent to gain, as required for conviction under paragraph (2) of Article 308...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)