Title
People vs. Lazaro y Servania
Case
G.R. No. 112090
Decision Date
Oct 26, 1999
Accused acquitted of illegal firearm possession after retroactive application of R.A. 8294, treating it as an aggravating circumstance in homicide, not a separate offense.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 112090)

Factual Background

The case originates from an incident that occurred on May 5, 1991, in Naga City, where the accused was charged with illegal possession of firearms under Presidential Decree No. 1866. The information alleged that Lazaro possessed a .38 caliber revolver without the necessary license, and that the firearm had been used in a shooting incident that resulted in one death and one serious injury. In a separate but related matter, a homicide charge was filed against Lazaro.

Proceedings and Evidence

During the trial, the prosecution presented testimony from four witnesses who described the events leading up to the discovery of the firearm. On the incident date, Police Sergeant Bonnet and Major Tuazon were informed about a shooting. Upon arriving at the Bicol Regional Hospital, they commandeered the man responsible for driving a vehicle associated with the incident. They found a handgun tucked in the driver's waist, which was subsequently dropped into the vehicle.

The accused provided a defense narrative where he claimed he had been engaging in a struggle over the weapon with another individual, Ricardo Ronquillo, during which shots were fired, leading to his nephew being injured. Lazaro asserted that he did not recall the specifics of the gun's possession or its use.

Court Findings

In its decision dated March 1, 1993, the trial court found Lazaro guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of illegal possession of firearms. The court noted that the prosecution had successfully established (1) the existence of the firearm and (2) the absence of a license to possess it. Notably, a certification from the Firearms and Explosives Office indicated that Lazaro had no license for the firearm, and this certification was admitted as evidence despite the accused’s objection that the signatory was not present for cross-examination.

Legal Analysis of Evidence

The trial court acknowledged the defense arguments but found that Lazaro's possession of the firearm met the statutory criteria for illegal possession. The second element—absence of a license—was substantiated by procedural exceptions to the hearsay rule as the certification constituted an official public record.

Appellate Contentions

Lazaro appealed the conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in finding him guilty due to insufficient evidence regarding the homicide that occurred in conjunction with the illegal possession charge. He posited that being charged separately for homicide and illegal possession violated principles of double jeopardy.

Enactments and Legislative Changes

The discussion also touched upon the implications of the enactment of Republic Act No. 8294, which amended

...continue reading

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