Case Digest (G.R. No. 189833)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Javier Morilla y Avellano, G.R. No. 189833, February 05, 2014, Supreme Court Second Division, Perez, J., writing for the Court. The criminal case arose from the October 13, 2001 apprehension of sacks containing methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) with an approximate aggregate weight of 503.68 kilos found in two vehicles — a Starex van (plate RWT‑888) and a municipal ambulance (plate SFK‑372). The Department of Justice requested transfer of venue to a Regional Trial Court in Metro Manila; this Court granted the request and the case was tried in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City.The information, filed October 15, 2001, charged Javier Morilla y Avellano (accused‑appellant), Ronnie Mitra y Tena (Mayor Mitra, co‑accused), Willie Yang y Yao, and Ruel Dequilla y Regodan with unlawful transport of regulated drugs (around 503.68 kilos of methamphetamine hydrochloride) in violation of R.A. No. 6425, Sec. 15. At trial the police testimony described a convoy from Infanta to Manila in which the Starex driven by Mayor Mitra passed a checkpoint while the ambulance driven by Morilla was stopped, revealing white crystalline granules and sacks that, upon opening, contained methamphetamine hydrochloride. The police then overtook and stopped the Starex and found similar sacks therein.
On August 1, 2007, the RTC convicted Morilla and Mayor Mitra of illegal transport and sentenced them to life imprisonment and a P10,000,000.00 fine each, while acquitting Yang and Dequilla for insufficient evidence. The RTC found the searches valid, sustained that Morilla and Mitra were caught in flagrante delicto transporting the drugs, and inferred conspiracy from the circumstances (convoy, parallel loading, Morilla’s statement identifying his association with the mayor, and the visible drugs). The RTC ordered a representative sample turned over to PDEA.
On July 13, 2009, the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, agreeing that the totality of circumstances established a conspiracy and that defenses of lack of knowledge were implausible. Morilla filed a petition for review with this Court (Rule 45) challenging, among other things in a supplemental brief, (1) conviction for conspiracy despite th...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was Morilla’s failure to have the word “conspiracy” alleged in the Information a jurisdictional defect that precludes his conviction for conspiracy?
- Did the prosecution present sufficient evidence to prove Morilla’s guilt of illegal transport (and conspiracy) beyond reasonable doubt?
- Should the penalty imposed be modified from life imprisonment to reclusion per...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)