Title
People vs. Orobia
Case
G.R. No. L-2966
Decision Date
Nov 21, 1951
Basilio Orobia convicted for illegal firearm possession; claimed amnesty under Proclamation No. 76 but failed to prove membership in subversive groups or meet procedural requirements. Exhibits deemed inadmissible; conviction upheld.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 191723)

Facts of the Case

Basilio Orobia was charged with illegal possession of a Garand rifle. Following a tip-off regarding the firearm’s possession, Sergeant Valdez and Corporal Dado, aided by the local barrio lieutenant, conducted a search of Orobia's residence. Initially, Orobia denied having any firearm but later admitted to having a Garand rifle hidden nearby. The weapon was retrieved from a hole, packaged in a sack, and identified with serial number 3569706. Orobia claimed that an American soldier had given him the rifle in 1945. Importantly, he did not possess a permit for the firearm.

Legal Proceedings and Defense

During the trial, Orobia did not take the stand to testify. His defense counsel presented a sworn statement from Orobia made five months post-seizure and two additional affidavits, one being a circular from the Constabulary and the other an affidavit from Celedonio Bon. However, these were not properly authenticated in court, and thus, the evidence was insufficient.

Appellant's Argument

Orobia's key argument rested on his purported entitlement to benefits under Proclamation No. 76, which provided amnesty to members of the Hukbalahap and the PKM. He also cited Circular No. 27 issued by the Secretary of Justice to enforce the said amnesty proclamation. However, he failed to fulfill the requirements outlined in the circular, particularly concerning the necessary certificate, and did not conclusively demonstrate his membership in the Hukbalahap or similar groups.

Court's Analysis

The court found that Orobia's compliance with the requirements of Circular No. 27 was lacking, primarily due to the absence of a required certificate to validate his claim of amnesty. Furthermore, the evidence presented—specifically his own affidavit and that of Celedonio Bon—was criticized for being hearsay and insufficiently identified. The court noted that Orobia had the opportunity to testify ab

...continue reading

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