02/08/2025
https://www.facebook.com/share/1DQ7xavknd/?mibextid=wwXIfr
| The Supreme Court (SC) has acquitted a man of illegal possession of fi****ms, citing lack of animus possidendi, or criminal intent, after finding that the subject firearm was owned by the Philippine National Police (PNP).
In a 10-page decision written by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier, the SC's Second Division has found Noel Untalan not guilty of illegal possession of fi****ms under Section 1 of Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended by Republic Act No. 8294.
In July 2009, the Philippine National Police (PNP) confiscated an M-16 rifle with 10 pieces of live ammunition and 1 short magazine from Untalan's house following a search warrant. The police required Untalan to present his license to possess the firearm and pieces of ammunition, but he could not produce any, which led to his arrest.
Untalan, on his part, denied the ownership of the firearm, as the same was allegedly owned by the two police officers who have been designated as his security details. He explained that Police Senior Inspector Randy Moratalla issued a Detail Security Assignment with the designation of two police officers in his house to secure his safety pending investigation on the disappearance of his brother.
Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals convicted the accused and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of 4 to 6 years. The CA ruled that since illegal possession of fi****ms is malum prohibitum, the fact that Untalan had no license or permit to possess the subject firearm at the time of his arrest is sufficient to convict him for the offense. This prompted Untalan to elevate the case before the Supreme Court.
In reversing his conviction, the SC cited the case of Del Rosario vs. People, as it held that even though illegal possession of a firearm is a malum prohibitum, which does not necessarily require malice or intent, still the fact of possession coupled with animus possidendi, or intent to possess, must still be proven.
It held that although there is physical or constructive possession on the part of Untalan, the prosecution failed to prove that he had animus possidendi of the subject firearm.
The high court gave credence to the sworn statements of the two police officers who testified that they were appointed as Untalan's security detail as a precautionary measure pending investigation on the disappearance of his brother. They added that the items recovered in the possession of Untalan are issued by the PNP-Regional Intelligence Division as their service firearm.
βAnimus possidendi is a state of mind, the presence or determination of which is largely dependent on attendant events in each case and may be inferred from the prior or contemporaneous acts of the accused, as well as the surrounding circumstances,β the Supreme Court said.
βThe circumstances in this case clearly paint one picture: the firearm, magazine, and pieces of ammunition were never owned or possessed by Untalan; they were the PNP's through PO3 Causaren,β the Supreme Court added.
