Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Facts:
On Dec. 29, 1992, the court rendered judgment finding the accused guilty beyond
reasonable doubt and sentencing them to pay a fine of P200. Nevertheless, the court
recommended that they be pardoned on the basis that they acted in good faith. They
appealed to RTC, however, Vicento Yco withdraws his appeal and the case proceeded
only with petitioner. On Mat 21, 1993, respondent judge affirmed the decision of the
lower court but modified the penalty, allegedly because of the perversity of the act
committed which caused damage and prejudice to the complainant by sentencing the
petitioner to suffer an imprisonment of 6 months and a fine of P1000.
Issue:
WON the phrase “charitable purposes” should be construed in its broadest sense
so as to include a religious purpose
Held:
Facts:
Appellant Ladjaalam was charged and convicted by the Regional trial Court of
Zamboanga City of the crime of Direct Assault with Multiple Attempted Homicide for
firing on unlicensed M-14 rifle at several policemen who were about to enter his house to
serve a search warrant. Under the same circumstance, he was likewise charged and
convicted for the crime Illegal Possession of Firearm and Ammunition penalized under PD
1866, as amended by Republic Act No. 8294.
Issue:
WON appellant can be convicted of Illegal Possession of Firearm under RA 8294
when he used said firearm in the commission in the crime.
Held:
RA 8294 shows that if an unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of any
crime, there can be no separate offense of simple illegal possession of firearms. Hence, if
the “other crime” is murder or homicide, illegal possession of firearms becomes merely
an aggravating circumstance, not a separate offense. Since the direct assault with
multiple attempted homicide was committed in this case, appellant can no longer be held
liable for illegal possession of firearms.
The law is clear: the accused can be convicted of simple illegal possession of
firearms, provided that “no other crime was committed by the person arrested.” If the
intention of the law were to refer only to homicide and murder, it should have expressly
said so. Verily, where the law does not distinguish, neither should we.
RA No. 8294 penalizes simple illegal possession of firearms, provided that the
person arrested committed “no other crime”. Furthermore, if the person is held liable for
murder or homicide, illegal possession of firearms is an aggravating circumstance, but
not a separate offense. Hence, where an accused was convicted of direct assault with
multiple attempted homicide for firing an unlicensed M-14 rifle at several policemen who
were about to serve a search warrant, he cannot be held guilty of the separate offense of
illegal possession of firearms. Neither can such unlawful act be considered to have
aggravated the direct assault.