Case Digest (G.R. No. 233209) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In People of the Philippines v. Herofil N. Olarte, G.R. No. 233209 decided on March 11, 2019 under the 1987 Constitution, the accused-appellant was charged with two separate offenses arising from events on July 19, 2014 in Cagayan de Oro City. In Criminal Case No. 2014-830, he was accused of unlawfully possessing one M61 fragmentation grenade with an M204A2 fuse assembly without a license, in violation of R.A. 9516 (amending P.D. 1866). In Criminal Case No. 2014-831, he was charged with illegal possession of a .25-caliber pistol replica without the required permit under Section 35, Article V of R.A. 10591. Police Officers Intud and Monilar, conducting surveillance against a suspected robber known as “Boy Solo,” saw a man resembling the suspect draw a weapon while approaching an LBC branch at about 1:30 P.M. They pursued and arrested the appellant near Ororama Superstore after he fled with three companions. A search incident to arrest produced the grenade, the replica pistol, and Case Digest (G.R. No. 233209) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background
- This case involves Crim. Case Nos. 2014-830 and 2014-831 before the RTC of Cagayan de Oro City, Branch 21. Accused-appellant Herofil N. Olarte was charged under RA 9516 (amending PD 1866) with illegal possession of an M61 fragmentation grenade and under RA 10591 with carrying an unlicensed .25-caliber pistol replica.
- The RTC dismissed the pistol charge for a defective information but convicted Olarte for unlawful possession of a hand grenade, sentencing him to Reclusion Perpetua and ordering confiscation of the grenade and pistol replica.
- Prosecution Version
- On July 19, 2014 at about 1:30 PM, PO2 Reggie M. Intud and PO2 Pablo B. Monilar of Task Force “Boy Solo” observed a man matching CCTV images of a robbery suspect (“Boy Solo”) draw a firearm as he entered an LBC branch in Cagayan de Oro City. The officers gave chase and arrested the suspect near Ororama Superstore.
- A search of his person yielded a fragmentation grenade with M204A2 fuse, marked “RMI2,” a .25-caliber pistol replica, a screwdriver, and a sachet of suspected methamphetamine. He had no licenses or permits. The grenade was turned over to the PNP Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Team, which certified it as an M61 hand grenade with M204A2 fuse.
- Defense Version
- Appellant claimed he was traveling by jeepney when plainclothes men falsely identified him, handcuffed and brought him to the police station. His bag was searched and the grenade and pistol replica allegedly planted; he was coerced to admit possession.
- No motion to quash the arrest or search was filed before trial.
- Procedural History
- RTC (Jan. 27, 2016): After a fire destroyed initial records, the RTC allowed re-arraignment and amendment of the grenade’s fuse marking in the information (from “M204 x 2” to “M204 A 2”), then convicted appellant for illegal grenade possession (Reclusion Perpetua), dismissing the pistol case.
- CA (Apr. 6, 2017): Affirmed the RTC ruling, holding the warrantless arrest lawful (in flagrante delicto), the amendment formal, the chain of custody intact, and trial court credibility findings binding.
Issues:
- Whether the warrantless arrest was valid and the hand grenade admissible in evidence
- Whether the amendment of the information to correct the grenade’s fuse marking was proper
- Whether the identity and integrity of the grenade (corpus delicti) were compromised, raising reasonable doubt
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)