G.R. No. 163267 Case Digest

G.R. No. 163267, May 5, 2010

Teofilo Evangelista, petitioner

vs People of the Philippines, respondent

Ponente: Del Castillo

Facts:

There was an information saying that on January 30, 1996 at NAIA the accused feloniously have in possession of the firearms without the corresponding permit or license from competent authority.

RTC's ruling: Evangelista guilty beyond reasonable doubt for violation of the illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions.

Petitioner filed a motion for new trial which the RTC granted. RTC then found the petitioner liable still for the offense charged but modified the penalty of imprisonment.

CA's ruling: CA affirmed the findings of the trial court in its decision. It ruled that the stipulations during the trial are binding on petitioner.

Hence, this petition.

Issue: Whether CA gravely erred in not acquitting Evangelista from the charge of the illegal possession of firearms.

Held:

Appeal is devoid of merit.

Contrary to the arguments put forward by petitioner, we entertain no doubt that the crime of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition for which he was charged was committed in the Philippines. The accomplishment by petitioner of the Customs Declaration Form upon his arrival at the NAIA is very clear evidence that he was already in possession of the subject firearms in the Philippines.

In contrast, petitioner failed to establish by sufficient and competent evidence that the present charge happened in Dubai. It may be well to recall that while in Dubai, petitioner, even in a situation between life and death, firmly denied possession and ownership of the firearms. Furthermore, there is no record of any criminal case having been filed against petitioner in Dubai in connection with the discovered firearms. Since there is no pending criminal case when he left Dubai, it stands to reason that there was no crime committed in Dubai. The age-old but familiar rule that he who alleges must prove his allegation applies.

Petition denied.