G.R. No. 139603 - Quinao vs. People

Case Summary (G.R. No. 139603)

Factual Background

Petitioner Conchita Quinao and accused Salvador Cases were arraigned and pleaded not guilty. The People, through private complainant Francisco F. Del Monte, offered Tax Declaration No. 1202 (Exh. “D”) in the name of Petre Delmonte, predecessor-in-interest of the complainant, and introduced the judgment in Civil Case No. 3561 which adjudicated the land to the complainant’s predecessors-in-interest. The accused produced Tax Declaration No. 1195 (Exh. “1”) in the name of Lorenzo Cases Leoniso, dated January 25, 1993, claiming the land as their inheritance. Witnesses for both sides testified about possession, boundaries, and the events of February 2, 1993.

Prosecution Evidence and Claim of Violent Entry

Prosecution witness Bienvenido Delmonte testified that on February 2, 1993 at about 9:00 a.m. while working on the agricultural land he owned in common with Francisco F. Del Monte, Salvador Cases and Conchita Quinao, together with other relatives, suddenly appeared and, by use of force, violence and intimidation, usurped and took possession of the land, gathered coconuts and made them into copra, and forcibly drove the complainant out while threatening him. The witness declared that the primitive owner had been Angel Pelison and that the land had been purchased by Petre Delmonte, describing the land’s situation and boundaries.

Defense Evidence and Claim of Ownership

Conchita Quinao and Salvador Cases testified that they were grandchildren of Lorenzo Cases, that Lorenzo had acquired and declared the property under Tax Declaration No. 1195, that the land measured 6 hectares, 34 centares and 28 ares, that they were in actual possession, and that they had paid realty taxes. They asserted title and possession and described boundaries placing the complainant’s property adjacent on the east.

Trial Court Proceedings and Disposition

The Regional Trial Court found both accused guilty of usurpation of real property under Art. 312, Revised Penal Code, beyond reasonable doubt. The court computed a fine in the amount of P174,960 as equivalent to the gain obtained over almost three years at the rate of P14,580 per quarter, ordered the accused not to enter or intrude upon the property adjudged to belong to Francisco F. Del Monte, and directed the Chief of Police of Lapinig to assist the private offended party in maintaining possession. No costs were imposed. A commissioner appointed pursuant to the court’s order reported that the area claimed by the accused encroached upon the area of the plaintiffs.

Commissioner’s Report and Ownership Findings

Deputy Sheriff A. Anacta, as commissioner, reported that, pursuant to the court’s February 1, 1994 order, the area claimed by the accused indeed encroached upon the plaintiffs’ area and submitted sketch maps. The trial court adopted these findings and concluded that the disputed area was within the boundaries previously awarded to the complainant’s predecessors in Civil Case No. 3561.

Appellate Review and Affirmation

The Court of Appeals, in CA-G.R. CR No. 19412 dated January 14, 1999, affirmed the trial court’s conviction and findings, holding that the disputed land, as shown in the sketch maps, fell within the boundaries of the land adjudicated to the complainant in Civil Case No. 3561 and that the issue of ownership had been long settled in favor of the complainant and would not be disturbed. A motion for reconsideration before the CA was denied. A notice of death filed on September 25, 1997 established that accused Salvador Cases died on April 9, 1995.

Issues Raised in the Petition

Petitioner Conchita Quinao presented three principal grounds to the Supreme Court: first, that as a woman of advanced age she could not be held liable on the basis of bare allegations of conspiracy and on findings said to be speculative; second, that the alleged force and intimidation subsequent to entry were insufficient to sustain conviction; and third, that one who claims to own the land cannot be convicted of usurpation of her own property.

Elements of the Offense and Governing Doctrine

The Court articulated the elements of usurpation under Art. 312, Revised Penal Code: (1) occupation of another’s real property or usurpation of a real right belonging to another; (2) use of violence or intimidation in executing the occupation or usurpation; and (3) that the accused acted with animo lucrandi. The Court cited Castrodes vs. Cubelo, 83 SCRA 670 (1978), for the settled formulation of these requisites.

Court’s Analysis on Ownership and Possession

The Supreme Court agreed with the trial court and the CA that the ownership question had been resolved against the accused by the earlier judgment in Civil Case No. 3561 and by the evidence, including Tax Declaration No. 1202 and the commissioner’s report and sketch maps. The Court held that petitioner’s claim of ownership was sufficiently refuted by the record and that she was required to respect the prior adjudication in favor of the complainant.

Court’s Analysis on Violence, Intimidation, and Intent to Gain

The Court found that the prosecution prov

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 139603)

Parties and Procedural Posture

Conchita Quinao filed a petition for review on certiorari from the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 19412.
The People of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, and Francisco Del Monte were the respondents in the criminal prosecution.
The Information charged the accused with usurpation of real property for an alleged forcible entry on February 2, 1993 at Sitio Bagacay, Brgy. Potong, Lapinig, Northern Samar.
Both accused pleaded not guilty at arraignment and trial on the merits proceeded in the Regional Trial Court, Eighth Judicial Region, Branch 21, Laoang, Northern Samar.
The RTC convicted both accused of usurpation of real property under Art. 312, Revised Penal Code, sentenced them to a fine computed at P174,960, and ordered injunctive relief and police assistance.
Accused Salvador Cases died on April 9, 1995, as later established by a notice of death filed on September 25, 1997.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision and denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, after which Conchita Quinao sought review before this Court.

Key Factual Allegations

The Information alleged that the accused, conspiring and using force and intimidation, usurped and occupied a real property owned by Francisco F. Del Monte and gathered 12,000 coconuts which were converted into copra and sold for P14,580.
Prosecution witnesses testified that on February 2, 1993, at about 9:00 a.m., the accused and their relatives suddenly appeared, used force and intimidation, drove the complainant from the land, gathered coconuts, and threatened further harm should the complainant return.
Complainant’s evidence included Tax Declaration No. 1202 in the name of Petre Delmonte, which canceled Tax Declaration No. 18612, and the decision in Civil Case No. 3561 awarding the disputed land to complainant’s predecessors-in-interest.
Accused relied on Tax Declaration No. 1195 in the name of Lorenzo Cases Leoniso dated January 25, 1993 and claimed ancestral ownership and continuous possession with payment of realty taxes.
A commissioner appointed by the trial court inspected the property and reported that the area claimed by the accused encroached upon the area awarded to the plaintiffs in the prior civil action.

Evidence Presented

The prosecution offered Tax Declaration No. 1202 as evidence of title in the predecessor-in-interest of the complainant.
The defense offered Tax Declaration No. 1195 and testimony asserting ancestral acquisition, actual possession, and tax payments by the accused’s predecessors.
Eyewitness testimony by Bienvenido Delmonte described forcible ouster, collection of coconuts, threats, and the invol