Title
Merida vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 158182
Decision Date
Jun 12, 2008
Petitioner convicted for cutting narra tree on private land without DENR permit; trial court jurisdiction upheld despite private complainant; penalty modified due to insufficient evidence of lumber value.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 158182)

Petitioner

Sesinando Merida was indicted for violating Section 68 of Presidential Decree No. 705, as amended, by cutting a narra tree on private land without a DENR permit and converting it into lumber.

Respondent

The People of the Philippines, acting through the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Romblon and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

Key Dates

  • December 23–26, 1998: Discovery and initial report of the felled tree
  • January 11 & 26, 1999: DENR investigation and confiscation of lumber
  • January 28, 2000: Information filed in RTC Romblon (Criminal Case No. 2207)
  • November 24, 2000: RTC conviction and sentence
  • June 28, 2002: Court of Appeals Decision affirming conviction
  • May 14, 2003: CA Resolution denying reconsideration
  • June 12, 2008: Supreme Court Decision

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution (as decision postdates 1990)
  • Presidential Decree No. 705, as amended by Executive Order No. 277 and Republic Act No. 7161 (Revised Forestry Code)
  • Section 68, PD 705 (cutting timber without authority)
  • Section 80, PD 705 (institution of criminal actions)
  • Rules of Court and Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
  • Articles 309 and 310, Revised Penal Code (theft and qualified theft)
  • Indeterminate Sentence Law

Facts

Petitioner admitted to Barangay Captain Royo and DENR Forester Hernandez that he cut the narra tree, presenting written authorization from Vicar Calix’s wife. Private complainant Tansiongco reported the cutting first to the barangay, then to the DENR. DENR personnel confiscated six pieces of lumber (111 board feet) and assessed the total value—including remaining felled log—at ₱20,930.40.

Procedural History

  • RTC Romblon convicted petitioner of violating Section 68, PD 705, sentencing him to 14 years, 8 months, 1 day to 20 years of reclusion temporal and ordering forfeiture of the lumber.
  • Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the maximum penalty range to 17 years. It also ordered confiscation in favor of the government.
  • Supreme Court review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the RTC acquired jurisdiction despite the complaint being filed by a private citizen rather than a DENR forest officer.
  2. Whether petitioner is liable for cutting timber on private land without a permit under Section 68, PD 705, as amended.

Ruling on Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court held that:

  • The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure prescribe special complainants only for crimes against chastity and defamation; non-compliance does not oust jurisdiction for forestry offenses.
  • Section 80, PD 705, does not bar private citizens from filing complaints when offenses are not observed by forest officers.
  • The RTC had exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses punishable by more than six years’ imprisonment.

Ruling on Liability

  • Petitioner was bound by his own extrajudicial admissions to Royo and Hernandez that he cut the narra tree with Calix’s authorization, despite later trial testimony denying involvement.
  • Public officers’ testimony enjoys the presumption of regularity; petitioner offered no explanation for their alleged falsehood.
  • The narra tree, measured and converted into sawn lumber of specified dimensions, qualifies as “timber” under Section 68.

Definition of “Timber”

Drawing from Mustang Lumber, Inc. v. CA, timber is wood suitable for building or carpentry. Here, board-foot measurements and log dimensions confirmed the species and size appropriate for such use, thus falling within the statutory term.

Penalty Assessment

  • Violation of Section 68 is penalized under Articles 309 (theft) and 310 (

...continue reading

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