Title
Spouses Igdalino vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 233033
Decision Date
Jul 23, 2018
Disputed land ownership; Igdalinos harvested coconuts, claiming honest belief of ownership. SC acquitted, citing lack of intent to steal.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 233033)

Charges and Background

The Igdalinos, along with their son, were charged with qualified theft under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code for allegedly harvesting 2,500 pieces of coconuts valued at Php 4,000. The prosecution asserted that the Igdalinos committed this act without the consent of the property owner, Avertino Jaboli. During the proceedings, their son, Romeo Igdalino Jr., was acquitted due to being underage at the time of the incident.

Evidence Presented

The prosecution’s case established that the land where the coconuts were harvested (Lot No. 1609) was registered under Francisco Jaboli, Avertino's father. After Francisco’s death, his children, including Avertino, inherited the property. Felicisimo Bacarra, Avertino's caretaker since 1985, testified that he witnessed the Igdalinos picking the nuts on the morning of June 29, 2000. Conversely, the defense presented testimonies claiming that Rosita inherited the land from her father, Narciso Gabejan, and that the Igdalinos had cultivated coconuts there since their marriage in 1981.

The Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found the Igdalinos guilty of qualified theft, sentencing them to imprisonment and ordering them to pay damages to Avertino. The court's decision rested profoundly on the interpretation that the Igdalinos lacked a legally justified belief in owning the land, which negated the defense of an honest claim of right.

Appeal and Court of Appeals Decision

On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's ruling, supporting the rationale that the Igdalinos' belief in their ownership was not sincere or reasonable. The CA’s decision highlighted a prior adjudication that established the property’s title was granted to Avertino, thereby influencing the perception of intent to gain or an honest belief in ownership.

Supreme Court Analysis

Upon review, the Supreme Court found substantial merit in the Igdalinos' appeal, reversing the decisions of the lower courts. The Court emphasized that the prosecution failed to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt the essential elements of qualified theft, particularly regarding the intent to gain unlawfully and without the consent of the property owner. The

...continue reading

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