Title
People vs. Dela Rosa y Aviles
Case
G.R. No. 84857
Decision Date
Jan 16, 1998
Rodolfo dela Rosa acquitted of illegal firearm and explosive possession; prosecution failed to prove intent and lack of license beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 84857)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of the Case
    • An information for illegal possession of firearms and explosives was filed on January 27, 1987, charging Rodolfo dela Rosa y Aviles, Antonio dela Rosa y Aviles, Cresencio Reyes y dela Cruz, and Rodolfo Quimson y Nava.
    • The offense alleged that on or about December 9, 1986, the accused, acting in concert, possessed homemade shotguns and dynamite without securing the necessary permits, in violation of Presidential Decree No. 1866.
  • Pleas and Pre-Trial Developments
    • Upon arraignment on February 3, 1987, all accused pleaded not guilty.
    • On March 12, 1987, the four accused subsequently pleaded guilty; however, they later filed a motion to withdraw their plea on March 19, 1987, which was granted by the lower court on March 25, 1987.
    • During trial, Cresencio Reyes later pleaded guilty to a lesser offense under the last paragraph of Section 1 of PD No. 1866 and was sentenced accordingly, serving as a witness for the prosecution.
  • Surrender and Arrest of the Accused
    • On the morning of December 9, 1986, the accused voluntarily surrendered to Kagawad Valeriano Rigor at Sitio Kadampat, Barangay Bolo, Labrador, Pangasinan, claiming a desire to lead a new life and reporting that Benjamin Nano (alias Kumander Tamang) of the New People’s Army (NPA) had been shot.
    • They presented a short shotgun (designated Exhibit A) and a bag containing several sticks of dynamite (Exhibits C to C-7) while surrendering.
    • Kagawad Rigor subsequently reported the surrender to the police, leading to the involvement of Patrolman Fernandez, Cpl. Crispin Cancino, and other law enforcement personnel at the scene and later at the police headquarters in Lingayen.
  • Evidence and Testimonies Relating to Possession
    • Physical evidence included the short shotgun and dynamite surrendered by the accused. Later, two additional long-barreled shotguns (Exhibits B and D) were recovered from a site pointed out by Reyes in Sitio Tebel Patar.
    • The prosecution presented testimonial evidence from Kagawad Rigor, police reports, and the extrajudicial statements from the accused, including an admission by Rodolfo dela Rosa regarding his connection to Kumander Tamang and the possession of the explosive materials.
  • Alleged Involvement with the New People’s Army
    • The accused contended that they were recruited by Kumander Tamang on various dates, with testimonies outlining encounters from October to November 1986 that eventually led to involvement with the NPA.
    • Details of meetings, travel to mountain hideouts, and planning sessions were presented, including the meeting on December 8, 1986, where plans to assassinate Kagawad Rigor were discussed, and subsequent events that led to the surrender.
  • Administrative and Procedural Matters
    • After the surrender, the accused were taken to the Municipal Hall where their picture was taken with Mayor Calixto Pancho and Kagawad Rigor before being processed at the police headquarters.
    • Although the accused requested legal representation while their statements were being taken, the police informed them that counsel was unnecessary because they were surrenderees expected to be released soon.
    • The case eventually proceeded to trial where the lower court convicted the three accused (with Antonio dela Rosa not appealing and Rodolfo Quimson escaping detention) and the conviction of Rodolfo dela Rosa was challenged on appeal.

Issues:

  • Whether the mere physical or constructive possession of firearms and explosives is sufficient to sustain a conviction under PD No. 1866 when such possession occurred in the context of surrendering the items to the authorities.
  • Whether there was sufficient evidence to establish the element of animus possidendi (intention to possess) on the part of Rodolfo dela Rosa, given that his actions indicated a voluntary surrender of the firearms and explosives.
  • Whether the prosecution adequately proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused possessed the firearms without the necessary license or permit, fulfilling the dual essential elements required by PD No. 1866.

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.