REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Third Judicial Region
Branch 79, Malolos, Bulacan

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

-versus- Crim. Case No. 3204-M-2003

For: Violation of PD 1866 as
Amended by RA 8294

JOSE MERCED Y MANILA,

Accused.
x-----------------------------------------x

JUDGMENT
Accused Jose Merced Y Manila stands charged before this court for
violation of Presidential Decree No. 1866 as amended by Republic Act No. 8294
under an Information that reads:

“That on or about the 8th day of August 2003, in the City of

Malolos, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, the above named accused, did then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession and under
his custody and control one (1) improvised M14 rifle with four (4) live
ammunitions without first having obtained a proper license from the
government.

CONTRARY TO LAW.”

Upon arraignment on Ocotber 13, 2003, accused Jose M. Merced,

assisted by Atty. Jeffrey Cruz, pleaded NOT GUILTY to the offense charged.

Pre-trial having been closed and terminated, trial on the merits ensued.

Evidence for the Prosecution

1. PO2 DALE ALLAN BATLE, 24 years old, single, a policeman assigned

at Camp Alejo Santos, Malolos, Bulacan..

He is a member of the 305 th Provincial Mobile Group tasked to conduct

internal security operation. He reported for work on August 8, 2003. While he
was at the barracks, their group received a call regarding an armed person who
was sighted somewhere in Sitio Kalamansian, Barangay Panasahan, Malolos,
Bulacan. Together with their team leader, Police Supt. Fernando S. Villanueva
and the members of the 305 th Provincial Mobile Group, they immediately
proceeded to the said place to verify the report. When they arrived thereat, they
slowly approached the accused who attempted to pull out his gun. Because there
were many policemen at that time, the accused was not able to pull out his cal.
22 gun but instead, immediately surrendered the same.

They first inquired from the accused if the necessary license was issued
for the gun but the latter failed to present one. After the voluntary surrender of the
M14 improvised rifle, the accused was brought to the 305 th Mobile Group Office
at Camp Alejo Santos in Malolos where he was investigated upon by PO1
Emmanuel Parejan. The accused surrendered to him the cal. 22 firearm while
the M-14 rifle was turned over to his companion, Raul Mirador. These two guns
were thereafter, turned over to the duty investigator.

While they were at 305th Mobile Group Office, the chief investigator placed
the markings “TMG” on the rifle. The subject gun has four (4) ammunitions. In
connection with the incident, he prepared a report and submitted the same to the
PIID Intelligence Officer.

On cross examination, witness testified that on August 8, 2003, at around

6:30 in the morning, his commanding officer summoned him for operation in
response to a report they that was received at around 6:00 in the morning of the
same date. There were 16 uniformed personnel of the Philippine National Police
(PNP) who boarded two (2) vehicles that proceeded to Sitio Kalamansian,
Panasahan, Malolos, Bulacan. Every police operation has to be reported to the
Deputy Provincial Director for Operation. During that time, the Deputy Provincial
Director for Operation was Sr. Supt. Alfredo Caballes. Before conducting the
operation, they were briefed by Col. Villanueva for about five (5) to ten (10)
minutes regarding accused Jose Merced of Sitio Kalamansian who was allegedly
in possession of a gun. Upon reaching the place, they immediately alighted from
their vehicles which were parked fifty (50) meters away from the house of the
accused. Four (4) members of the team who were around twenty (20) to thirty
(30) meters away approached the right side portion of the house. They vividly
saw the accused standing at that time. They were not armed with a warrant of
arrest or a search warrant when they proceeded to the place because the call
was urgent. The information was only relayed through a telephone call but they
are sure about their target because they were informed of his name. Col.
Villanueva was the one who told them that the person standing at the main door
of the house was Jose Merced. When they were approaching the accused, the
latter attempted to pull out a 22 caliber gun. The accused was arrested outside
his house. After his arrest, the accused pointed to them an M-14 rifle which was
turned over to Raul Mirador. The M-14 rifle with four (4) live bullets was placed
near the door of the house of the accused.

2. PO1 RAUL MIRADOR, 27 years old, married and presently assigned at

the Zambales Provincial Police, Brgy. Lipay, Iba, Zambales.

He joined the police force in 2002. On August 8, 2003, he was assigned

at the 305th Provincial Mobile Group, Camp Alejo Santos, Malolos, Bulacan. On
said date, they conducted an internal security operation in Sitio Kalamansian,
Brgy. Panasahan, Malolos, Bulacan after receiving information about an armed
person who was sighted therein. Before proceeding to the place of target, they
were provided with a sketch and were briefed about the house where the
suspected armed person was stays. They divided themselves into two (2)
groups. At that time, he was with PO1 Dale Allan Batle and team leader, Pol.
Insp. Aliling. When they reached the place, they saw a male person standing
near the door of a house with a gun tucked on his waist. They surrounded the
accused who voluntarily surrendered his firearm. When Insp. Aliling asked for the
papers of the firearm, the latter failed to produce one. The accused also pointed
to his other firearm, an improvised M-14 rifle. He placed the markings 305 th TMG
on the said firearm. Aside from the firearms, they also recovered four (4) live
ammunitions for the M-14 rifle.

On cross examination, he testified that before August 8, 2003 operation,

he has been in the service for nine (9) months. On said date, they conducted an
internal security operation based on an information that was relayed by
concerned citizens regarding a group of armed men. It was Col. Villanueva who
summoned the members of the PMG to conduct an internal security operation at
around 6:30 in the said place. There were two (2) teams created, each was
composed of fifteen (15) members, with Insp. Aliling as the commanding officer.
Two (2) vehicles were used in proceeding to Brgy. Panasahan, Malolos City.
They were not accompanied by a civilian. They stopped fifty (50) meters away
from the house of the accused. The road leading to Brgy. Kalamansian is slightly
elevated in relation to the house of the accused. When they alighted from the
vehicle, the accused was seen standing near the door of his house with a gun
tucked in his waist. PO1 Batle and Insp. Aliling arrested the accused and
recovered from the latter a cal. 22 firearm. The accused pointed to another gun,
an M-14 rifle, placed at the back of the door and surrendered the same to Insp.
Aliling.The accused likewise surrendered to Insp. Aliling the four (4) live
ammunitions for the M-14 rifle. The magazine was tucked on the M-14 rifle when
it was seen. Insp. Aliling handed to him the improvised M-14 rifle.

On March 6, 2008, the prosecution and the defense agreed to stipulate

that accused Jose Merced is not a license firearm holder of any kind and caliber
as of August 8, 2003 per Certification dated February 27, 2008.

With the completion of its testimonial evidence, the prosecution formally

offered its evidence on October 15, 2008 consisting of Exhibits “A” to “D”
inclusive of their sub-markings. On November 13, 2008, the court resolved to
admit the aforesaid evidence.

Evidence for the Defense

The prosecution presented as lone witness, JOSE MERCED Y MANILA,

the accused in this case. He is 53 years old, married, a driver and a resident of
Brgy. Panasahan, Malolos City, Bulacan.

Accused has been a resident of Brgy. Panasahan, Malolos City, for more
than twenty (20) years. He was sleeping with his wife inside their house on
August 8, 2003, at around 6:00 o’clock in the morning. He noticed someone
removing one of the blades of the jalousie. He also heard cocking of guns. He
and his wife got nervous when uniformed policemen suddenly barged inside his
house. The policemen informed him that they were looking for the two (2)
“Spique Brothers.” He was directed to sit down in one corner of his house. When
he inquired from the police officers if they were in possession of a warrant of
arrest, the latter cannot produce one. More or less ten (10) policemen entered his
house. Since he is a member of the Lupong Tagapamayapa, he instructed his
wife to call a barangay official. However, the policemen did not allow her to go
outside their house. These policemen stayed in their house for around ten (10) to
fifteen (15) minutes. The police officers found a 22 caliber gun inside the cabinet.
This gun is the same firearm subject matter of the criminal case filed before MTC
Malolos which was eventually dismissed.

After the recovery of the cal. 22 gun, accused was handcuffed and then
brought before Col. Aco. There, he saw for the first time the M-14 firearm
together with the bullets on top of the table. They got the bullets from one of the
firearms of the policemen. Around twenty (20) police officers conducted the
operation at Sitio Kalamansian, Panasahan, Malolos City. They surrounded his
place and some of the policemen were positioned on the road. He came to know
that the commanding officer is Col. Villanueva when an investigation was
conducted on his person.
 He described his place as clean. He has a neighbor who cried for fear of
the policemen who entered his house. From his house, the road can easily be
seen.

On cross-examination, he testified that maybe two (2) of the policemen

were responsible for removing the jalousie of their windows. Thereafter, he heard
someone pointing a gun at him. He did not know the police officers who testified
against him and who unlawfully entered their house and neither did he know the
police officers who positioned themselves outside their house. He can no longer
remember the identity of the police officer who recovered the caliber 22 inside
their house. There were no bullets recovered from him. The case for illegal
possession of firearm filed against him before the Municipal Trial Court of
Malolos City was dismissed because the policemen did not attend the hearing.
He admitted that he has no license or permit to possess or carry the caliber 22.
He came to know of the Spique Brothers lately that they have a case. He did not
file a complaint against the police officers who unlawfully entered their house but
he asked his wife to blotter the incident the following day after the policemen
arrived in their house.

During the re-direct examination, he insisted that the police officers

entered his house looking for two (2) persons. His wife had the incident blottered
in their Barangay.

With no documentary evidence to offer, the defense rested its case. Both
parties were given a period of thirty (30) days to submit their respective
Memorandum. They did not avail of this opportunity. Hence, the case was
considered submitted for decision.

Disquisition

Herein accused is being charged for illegal possession of firearm and

ammunitions defined and penalized under Section 1, Presidential Decree No.
1866, as amended by Republic Act No. 8294. Aforesaid provision reads:
“SEC. 1. Unlawful Manufacture, Sale, Acquisition, Disposition or
Possession of Firearms or Ammunition or Instruments Used or
Intended to be Used in the Manufacture of Firearms or Ammunition. –
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine of
not less than Fifteen Thousand Pesos (P15,000.00) shall be imposed
upon any person who shall unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire,
dispose, or possess, any low powered firearm, such as rimfire
handgun, .380 or .32 and other firearm of similar firepower, part of
firearm, ammunition, or machinery, tool or instrument used or intended
to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition: Provided,
That no other crime was committed.

The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine of

Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) shall be imposed if the firearm is
classified as high powered firearm which includes those with bores
bigger in diameter than .38 caliber and 9 millimeter such as caliber .40,
.41, .44, .45 and also lesser calibered firearms but considered powerful
such as caliber .357 and caliber .22 center-fire magnum and other
firearms with firing capability of full automatic and by burst of two or
three: Provided, however, That no other crime was committed by the
person arrested.”
 In the prosecution of the offense for illegal possesion of firearm and
ammunitions, the prosecution has the burden of proving the presence of the
following elements, to wit:
a) the existence of the subject firearm and ammunitions; and
b) the fact that the accused who owned or possessed the
firearm/ammunitions does not have the corresponding license or
permit to possess or carry the same.1
The corpus delicti therefore, in the crime of illegal possession of firearms
is the accused’ lack of license or permit to possess or carry the firearm, as
possession itself is not prohibited by law. 2
After an in-depth determination of the evidence presented, the court finds
and so holds that the prosecution has more than sufficiently established all the
elements required to obtain the conviction of the accused for illegal possession of
firearm. In making this pronouncement, the court considered the following
matters:
First, the existence of the subject firearms, a cal. 22 gun and an
improvised M-14 rifle with four (4) live ammunitions, is beyond dispute, the same
having been presented and identified in the course of the trial by the witness of
the prosecution. Their existence has not been questioned by the accused
himself.
Second, the accused was unable to present the required license or permit
to possess the subject firearms and ammunitions.
Third, the prosecution was able to establish through the presentation of
the Certification dated August 30, 2007 coming from the Firearms and Explosives
Division (FED), Philippine National Police, that accused Jose Merced y Manila is
not a licensed/registered firearm holder of any kind and caliber on August 8,
2003. In fact, the defense agreed to stipulate with the prosecution on the “would
be” testimony of the representative of the FED that as of August 28, 2003,
accused is not a license holder of firearm of any caliber and kind.
The Hon. Supreme Court held in the case of People of the Philippines vs.
Narvasa3 that a certification is required to prove that the accused is not a
licensee of the subject firearm. Thus:
“The testimony of a representative of, or a certification from, the
Philippine National Police (PNP) Firearms and Explosives Unit that
appellant was not a license of the said firearm would suffice to prove
beyond reasonable doubt the second element of the crime of illegal
possession.”

Finally, the defense of the accused of denial and alibi in his attempt to be
exculpated from the charge cannot prevail over the positive identificaiton of the
prosecution witnesses.
As held in the case of People vs. Bromo,4 “credibility, denial and alibi
cannot prevail over positive identification. It is a settled doctrine that the positive
identification by an eyewitness, who has been shown to have no ill motive to
testify falsely prevails over the bare denials. 5

1
People of the Philippines vs. Nilo Solayao, G.R. No. 11920, September 20, 1996
2
Capangpangan vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 150251, November 23, 2007
3
G.R. No. 128618, November 16, 1998

4
G.R. No. 97914, November 22, 1999
 In the present case, there was no showing that the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses were fabricated nor was there any ulterior motive on their
part to testify falsely against the accused. Further, no evidence was introduced
by the defense to impeach their credibility nor evidence to discredit their persons.
PERFORCE, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused JOSE
MERCED y MANILA, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for violation of
Presidential Decree No. 1866 as amended by Republic Act No. 8294.
Accordingly, he is hereby sentenced to serve an indeterminate penalty of
Four (4) years, Two (2) months and One (1) day of prision correccional as
Minimum to Five (5) years, Four (4) months and Twenty One (21) days of prision
correccional as Maximum.
SO ORDERED.
Promulgated this 13th day of April, 2011, Malolos City.

OLIVIA V. ESCUBIO-SAMAR
Presiding Judge

5
People of the Philippines vs. Antonio Barcelon, Jr. Y Rendura, G. R. No. 144308, September 24, 2002,
citing the case of People vs. Leal, G.R. No. 139313, June 19, 2001