Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Violation of Comelec Resolution No. 8714 in Relation to Sec. 32 & 33 of Ra 7166

Good Essays
1777 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Violation of Comelec Resolution No. 8714 in Relation to Sec. 32 & 33 of Ra 7166
Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
5th Judicial Region
Branch 11
Ligao City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff, CRIM CASE No. 6146

For: VIOLATION OF COMELEC -versus- RESOLUTION No. 8714 in relation to Sec. 32 & 33 of RA 7166
MICHAEL DEL ROSARIO, Accused.

x----------------------------------------x

J U D G M E N T

Accused Michael del Rosario was charged by the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Albay for Violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 8714 in relation to Sections 32 & 33 of R.A. No. 7166, in an Information quoted hereunder:

INFORMATION

The undersigned Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Albay hereby accuses MICHAEL DEL ROSARIO of Amtic, Ligao City for VIOLATION OF COMELEC RESOLUTION NO. 8714 in relation to Sections 32 and 33 of RA 7166, committed as follows, to wit:

“That at about 2:50 o’clock in the morning of February 6, 2010, at Barangay Magurang, Municipality of Polangui, Province of Albay, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with intent to violate the law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly bear, carry and possess a deadly weapon (balisong) in a public place, without the necessary permit and authority from the COMELEC to possess and carry the same within the election period, to the damage and prejudice of the public interest.”

ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.

Ligao City, Albay, Philippines, February 28, 2010.

(Sgd.) VIRGILIO N. ORPIADA, JR. Prosecutor 1 MCLE III-0008894

Page 2…
Crim Case No. 6146
People vs. del Rosario x--------------------------x The accused was committed to the Polangui District Jail on April 29, 2010. He was arraigned on May 18, 2010 in the dialect known to him with the assistance of his counsel from the Public Attorney’s Office and he pleaded not guilty to the offense as charged which was entered into the records. During the pre-trial conference on June 28, 2010, the admitted fact of both the prosecution and the defense is only the identity of the accused as arraigned. Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION

The prosecution presented four (4) witnesses, namely: PO3 Russel C. Requeza, Wenceslao P. Reyes, Jeheil Navarez and Rodrigo P. Sapo. Their testimonies may be summarized as follows:

At around 2:50 A.M. on February 6, 2010, Jeheil Navarez (Jeheil for short) was awakened by the presence of a thief inside his house. When he called the attention of the thief, the latter immediately jumped out of the window. Jeheil’s brother woke up and both of them searched for the thief who jumped out of the window. They were able to find the thief who was being chased and mauled by many persons who were also victimized by the said thief at Barangay Magurang, Polangui, Albay. Jeheil saw his cellphone in the possession of the thief who was identified as Michael del Rosario, the herein accused. When Police Officer Russel C. Requeza arrived at the place of the incident because of the request for police assistance from a certain Rodrigo P. Sapo, he pacified the bystanders who mauled herein accused and he directed the latter to lift his shirt. It is at this point in time that Police Oficer Russel C. Requeza saw the fan knife (balisong) tucked on the waist of the accused. The latter did not use the fan knife to defend himself from the bystanders who mauled him. Thereafter, the accused was brought to the Polangui Police Station and a corresponding complaint was filed against him. In support of the complaint for the Violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 8714 in relation to Sections 32 & 33 of RA 7166, the prosecution presented a Certification from COMELEC stating that the accused was not authorized to possess or carry a fan knife or “balisong” and the same was testified to by Election Officer III Wenceslao P. Reyes.

EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENSE

The defense presented its lone witness, the accused himself, as it could not locate a certain Reggie Boy Suarez who appears to be the companion of the accused at the time of the incident. His testimony may be summarized as follows:

Accused Michael del Rosario is a resident of Amtic, Ligao City, Albay. He works as a painter and at the time of the alleged incident, he was contracted to do a painting job for Banco de Oro, Polangui Branch.

Page 3…
Crim Case No. 6146
People vs. del Rosario x--------------------------x In the evening of February 5, 2010, from their barracks at the construction site, the accused and his co-worker, Reggie Boy Suarez, went to Barangay Magurang, Polangui, Albay to watch the scheduled basketball game. After viewing the basketball game and before going back to their barracks, Reggie Boy Suarez told the accused that they would first go to the house of his uncle situated also at Bgy. Magurang, Polangui, Albay. So, the accused went with Reggie Boy Suarez but he was left behind by the latter at the corner of the street. Only Reggie Boy Suarez reached the house of his uncle. The accused waited for Reggie Boy Suarez at the corner of the street for about 30 minutes. Thereafter, while both of them were already walking towards their barracks, several bystanders chased them and shouted that they are thieves. The accused stopped because he did not know why they were being chased by the bystanders, but unfortunately, he was mauled and he suffered injuries. Reggie Boy Suarez was able to escape. Then, two (2) policemen arrived and pacified the bystanders. The accused was brought to the police station. The following day, he was brought to the Provincial Hospital.

The accused claimed that the cell phone recovered from him was being held by Reggie Boy Suarez and he just borrowed it from the latter because he would like to text somebody. He denied having possessed the fan knife because if ever he has a bladed weapon, he could have defended himself when he was mauled by the bystanders. He doesn’t know who owns the fan knife. He admitted that he is serving sentence for the judgment rendered by the MCTC Polangui – Libon – Oas.

I S S U E

The issue to be resolved in the case at bar is whether or not the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged against him.

RULING OF THE COURT

Resolution No. 8714, which was promulgated by the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) on December 16, 2009, provides for rules and regulations on the bearing, carrying or transporting of firearms or other deadly weapons; and the employment, availment or engagement of the services of security personnel or bodyguards, during the election period for the May 10, 2010 national and local elections.

Section 32 of Republic Act No. 7166 provides:

Sec. 32. Who May Bear Firearms. – During the election period, no person shall bear, carry or transport firearms or other deadly weapons in public places, including any building, street, park, private vehicle or public conveyance, even if licensed to possess or carry the same, unless authorized in writing by the Commission. The issuance of firearms licenses shall be suspended during the election period.

x x x

Page 4…
Crim Case No. 6146
People vs. del Rosario x--------------------------x The above provisions clearly include deadly weapons such as bladed instrument. It means that no person is allowed to bear, carry or transport a deadly weapon during the election period, which is from January 10, 2010 to June 9, 2010, in public places such as any building, street, park, private vehicle or public conveyance, unless authorized in writing by the COMELEC.

Section 32 of R.A. No. 7166 is clear and unequivocal that the prohibited act to which this provision refers is made up of the following elements: 1.) the person is bearing, carrying, or transporting firearms or other deadly weapons; 2.) such possession occurs during the election period; and, 3.) the weapon is carried in a public place. x x x The burden is on the accused to show that he has a written authority to possess such firearm issued by no less than the COMELEC.

In the case at bar, all of the abovementioned elements are present. The accused was in possession or was carrying a deadly weapon in a public place during the election period. The COMELEC had issued a Certification stating that the accused was NOT authorized by the said office to possess and/or carry a fan knife locally known as “balisong” measuring 8½ long including the handle when open. The accused failed to present any proof that he has the authority from the COMELEC to possess and/or carry the deadly weapon in a public place.

The prosecution has clearly established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. There is no qualm that the accused has violated COMELEC Resolution No. 8714 in relation to Section 32 & 33 of R.A. No. 7166.

Furthermore, Section 34 of R.A. No. 7166 provides that the subject firearm or other deadly weapon found in the possession of the person prosecuted for the election offense shall be disposed of according to existing laws. Thus, Article 45 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, should also be considered in the disposition of this case.

Art. 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime.- Every penalty imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools with which it was committed.

Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be the property of a third person not liable for the offense, but those articles which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed.

Page 5…
Crim Case No. 6146
People vs. del Rosario x--------------------------x WHEREFORE, in the light of the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered:

1.) FINDING accused MICHAEL DEL ROSARIO GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 8714 in relation to Sections 32 & 33 of R.A. No. 7166 and thereby sentence him to suffer the penalty of ONE YEAR of imprisonment, not subject to probation; and he shall suffer DISQUALIFICATION to hold public office and DEPRIVATION of the right of suffrage.

2.) ORDERING the confiscation and forfeiture of the subject deadly weapon in favor of the government.

SO ORDERED.

Given and promulgated this 28th day of May, 2012 at Ligao City, Albay, Philippines.

Amy Ana L. de Villa-Rosero Presiding Judge

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. Rodolfo Abenes vs. CA, G.R. No. 156320, Feb. 14, 2007
[ 2 ]. Exhibit “C”
[ 3 ]. Exhibit “B”

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    FACTS. Santos was an ambassadress sent to Geneva for a mission. On her trip, she bought a discounted ticket which provided that she could bring someone with her so she brought with her adopted daughter. Some of her co-workers complained because they thought that Santos used government fund to finance her daughter’s fare. It was later found out that the cost of the said ticket is actually 50% less than the amount that was given to Santos to be used for her expenses for the trip. Nevertheless, because of her refusal to appear before the disciplinary board, she was found guilty of misconduct. Upon her appeal to the Office of the President and after review, Cory issued AO 122 which declared Santos guilty of dishonesty. She was then removed from her post and was replaced.…

    • 346 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Facts: President Macapagal-Arroyo declared a State of Rebellion (Proclamation No. 38) on May 1, 2001 as well as General Order No. 1 ordering the AFP and the PNP to suppress the rebellion in the NCR. Warrantless arrests of several alleged leaders and promoters of the “rebellion” were thereafter effected. Petitioner filed for prohibition, injunction, mandamus and habeas corpus with an application for the issuance of temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction. Petitioners assail the declaration of Proc. No. 38 and the warrantless arrests allegedly effected by virtue thereof. Petitioners furthermore pray that the appropriate court, wherein the information against them were filed, would desist arraignment and trial until this instant petition is resolved. They also contend that they are allegedly faced with impending warrantless arrests and unlawful restraint being that hold departure orders were issued against them.…

    • 689 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    R. V. Vaillancourt

    • 618 Words
    • 3 Pages

    This is a formal request for an appeal against the ruling in the case of R . v. Vaillancourt. . Mr. Vaillancourt seeks to appeal the court’s decision based on the inconsistency with s.230(d) of the Criminal Code, and s. 7 and 11 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is present in this case, evident when Vaillancourt’s accomplice does not inform him of his plan to bring weapons to the crime scene, leading Vaillancourt to believe that his lack of knowledge of the presence of weapons should not constitute section 230 (d), as he believes that it imposes a certain degree of absolute criminal liability when it shouldn’t apply, as Vaillancourt had no mens rea present.…

    • 618 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Judicial Review

    • 1626 Words
    • 7 Pages

    R v Bow Street Metropolitan and Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (2000) 1 AC 61…

    • 1626 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Petitioner, Benigno B. Reas files a complaint against Respondent, Carlos M. Relacion with gross dishonesty and grave misconduct. The complainant alleged that the respondent harassed a certain cooperative to a point of violence just to release his own salary check. Relacion did not return the check to the Cooperative despite repetitive demands; that when the COC confronted Relacion, he mauled him when he refused Relacion’s offer to pay his salary checks.…

    • 359 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Case 1033: CISG 14; 15; 16; 74; 75; 77 - Spain: Murcia Provincial High Court…

    • 4396 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Herein respondent Roberto Mabalot filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for preliminary injunction and/or restraining order,[1] against petitioner and LTFRB Chairman Lantin, praying among others that Memorandum Order No. 96-735 be declared “illegal and without effect.” the lower court issued a temporary restraining order enjoining petitioner from implementing Memorandum Order No. 96-735. Secretary Lagdameo issued the assailed Department Order No. 97-1025. Respondent filed a Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Petition assailing the validity of Department Order No. 97-1025.…

    • 529 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Crim Law 1 - Reviewer

    • 4907 Words
    • 20 Pages

    • Body of principles, usages and rules of action which don’t rest for their authority upon any express and positive declaration of the legislature…

    • 4907 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Philippine National Police (PNP) is the citizens’ arm against crime and instability. But in the last three years, PNP has been involved in many issues and controversies: the anomalous purchase of Light Operational Choppers; the controversial Ballot Switching at Batasang Pambansa; and the involvement of different police officials in rape and hazing cases.…

    • 2218 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Gsis vs. Court of Appeals

    • 811 Words
    • 4 Pages

    • On May 9, 1979, at about 7:00 in the evening at Tabon-Tabon, Butuan City, the said truck driven by Guillermo Corbeta collided with a public utility vehicle, a Toyota Tamaraw. The Toyota Tamaraw was owned and operated by Victor Uy, under the name and style of “Victory Line”. The Tamaraw was a total wreck.…

    • 811 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    IBG Chap 1

    • 385 Words
    • 2 Pages

    3. Case 3: Corruption in the Philippines on page 53. Question no.3 on page 80.…

    • 385 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Labor Cases

    • 2584 Words
    • 11 Pages

    This case started from an illegal dismissal complaint filed by Romualdo Navia against 3rd Alert.…

    • 2584 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tiu V. Middleton

    • 574 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Facts: Silvestre Tiu assails two Orders rendered by RTC Oroquieta City in a civil case. The first Order, which was issued in open court, reads: “Considering the written arguments of both parties herein, the Court finds that the witness of defendant Silvestre Tiu, Ms. Antonia Tiu, who is the aunt of the defendant, whose name was not disclosed in the pre-trial brief is ordered excluded pursuant to the provisions of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure wherein it is required that all names of witnesses must be stated in the Pre-Trial Brief.”…

    • 574 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This hostage crisis happened on August 23, 2010 at the Quirino Grandstand, Rizal Park in Manila where former Philippine National Police Senior Inspector Rolando Mendoza which he was dismissed of being police officer due to some cases in relation to drugs in 2008 which the Ombudsman found the said police officer and four others guilty due to misconduct and ordered dismissal from the service and his benefits especially if he will retired from the office, it will be forfeited.…

    • 1810 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Facts: Petitioner Roque Flores was declared by the board of canvassers as having the highest number of votes for kagawad on the March 1989 elections, in Barangay Poblacion, Tayum, Abra, and thus proclaimed punong barangay in accordance with Section 5 of R.A. 6679. However, his election was protested by private respondent Rapisora, who placed secondin the election with one vote less than the petitioner. The Municipal CircuitTrial Court of Tayum sustained Rapisora and installed him as punong barangay in place of the petitioner after deducting two votes as stray from the latter’s total. Flores appealed to the RTC, which affirmed the challenged decision in toto. The judge agreed that the four votes cast for “Flores” only, without any distinguishing first name or initial, should all have been considered invalid instead of being divided equally between the petitioner and Anastacio Flores, another candidate for kagawad. The total credited to the petitioner was correctly reduced by 2, demoting him tosecond place.…

    • 449 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays