Title
Pedro J. Amarille vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 256022
Decision Date
Aug 7, 2023
Pedro Amarille acquitted of qualified theft due to lack of intent to gain, despite harvesting coconuts from disputed land; ordered to repay proceeds under solutio indebiti.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 256022)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Information and Arraignment
    • On November 4, 2011, in Maribojoc, Bohol, Pedro J. Amarille (“Pedro”) requested Daniel Albaran to climb and harvest mature coconuts from a plantation registered under OCT No. 25102 in the names of the heirs of Macario Jabines.
    • Albaran initially hesitated, knowing the property was cared for by the late Hospicio Almonte, but Pedro assured he would answer any complaint; Albaran then climbed 18 trees and gathered 200 coconuts.
  • Barangay Conference and Agreement
    • On November 7, Noel Jabines, Macario’s son, learned of the harvest and reported it to the barangay and police; a barangay conference was held on November 9, 2011.
    • Pedro admitted gathering and converting the fruits into copra but insisted his grandfather, Eufemio Amarille, owned the land. The parties agreed he would cease harvesting and deposit the copra; instead, Pedro sold the copra and used the proceeds personally.
  • Lower Court Decisions
    • RTC, Criminal Case No. 15822 (Dec. 19, 2016): Found Pedro guilty of qualified theft under Art. 310 RPC; sentenced him to 8 years 1 day prision mayor (medium) to 14 years 8 months 1 day reclusion temporal (medium).
    • CA, CA-G.R. CR No. 03080 (Dec. 13, 2019; Resolution Nov. 23, 2020): Affirmed with modification; imposed 2 years 4 months 1 day prision correccional (minimum) to 6 years 1 day prision mayor (maximum). Reconsideration denied.
    • Pedro moved for relief via Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court.

Issues:

  • Guilt of Qualified Theft
    • Whether Pedro was proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified theft of coconuts under Art. 310, RPC.
  • Scope of Rule 45 Review
    • Whether the Supreme Court may reexamine factual findings under exceptions to the prohibition on reviewing questions of fact in a Rule 45 petition.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.