Case Digest (G.R. No. 139603)
Facts:
Conchita Quinao v. The People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 139603, July 14, 2000, the Supreme Court First Division, Kapunan, J., writing for the Court. This is a petition for review on certiorari seeking reversal of the Court of Appeals' Decision (14 January 1999) in CA-G.R. CR No. 19412 which had affirmed the Regional Trial Court, Eighth Judicial Region, Branch 21, Laoang, Northern Samar's conviction of petitioner for usurpation of real property under Art. 312, Revised Penal Code.The Information charged petitioner and co-accused Salvador Cases with, on or about February 2, 1993, unlawfully usurping and occupying a real property in Sitio Bagacay, Brgy. Potong (also spelled "Petong" in the Information), Lapinig, Northern Samar, and gathering 12,000 coconuts converted into copra sold for P14,580. Both accused pleaded not guilty at arraignment and went to trial before the RTC.
At trial the prosecution produced Tax Declaration No. 1202 in the name of Petre Delmonte, which cancelled Tax Declaration No. 18612, and relied on the prior Civil Case No. 3561 that had adjudicated the disputed land to the predecessors-in-interest of private complainant Francisco Delmonte. Prosecution witness Bienvenido Delmonte testified that on February 2, 1993, petitioner, Cases and relatives suddenly appeared, used force and intimidation to oust the Delmontes, gathered coconuts, converted them to copra, and threatened the complainant; the complainant sought assistance from the PNP.
Petitioner and co-accused presented Tax Declaration No. 1195 in the name of Lorenzo Cases Leoniso dated January 25, 1993, and testified that the property belonged to their grandfather Lorenzo Cases and described different boundaries and area (6 hectares, 34 centares, 28 ares). The RTC appointed Deputy Sheriff A. Anacta as commissioner to determine whether the area claimed by the accused encroached the plaintiffs' award; the commissioner reported that the accused's claimed area did encroach the plaintiffs' award.
The RTC found both accused guilty of usurpation under Art. 312, imposed a fine (computed as P14,580.00 per quarter over almost three years, totaling P174,960.00), enjoined them from entering the property and ordered PNP assistance to protect the private complainant. A notice of death later showed Salvador Cases di...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether the conviction of petitioner for usurpation of real property was supported by evidence or rested on mere speculation, surmise and conjecture.
- Whether the alleged force and intimidation subsequent to entry sufficed to establish the element of violence or intimidation required under usurpation (Art. 312, RPC).
- Whether petitioner, who claimed ownership of the land, could be convicted of usurpa...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)