People v. Catchero
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The People of the Philippines filed an information against Ricardo Catchero for illegal possession of firearm and ammunition. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Pangasinan dismissed the information upon a motion to quash, finding it insufficient to constitute an offense. The lower court relied on the rulings in People vs. Santos Lopez y Jacinto and People vs. Ricardo y Abalos. The Petition: The People of the Philippines appealed the dismissal order.
Issue(s)
Whether the information for illegal possession of firearm and ammunition was sufficient in stating facts constituting an offense. Whether the ruling in People vs. Santos Lopez and People vs. Ricardo y Abalos applies to the present case.
Ruling
The order of dismissal is revoked, and the case is ordered remanded to the court below for further proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
On Whether the information for illegal possession of firearm and ammunition was sufficient in stating facts constituting an offense: The information alleged that the defendant had possession, custody, and control of the prohibited articles without the required license. The lower court found this insufficient because it did not allege that the defendant made use of the firearm except for self-defense or carried it on his person except for the purpose of surrendering it to the authorities. This interpretation, however, is predicated on a specific period defined by Proclamation No. 1. On Whether the ruling in People vs. Santos Lopez and People vs. Ricardo y Abalos applies to the present case: The Supreme Court held that the cited rulings are applicable only to violations of the firearm law committed before the expiration of the period fixed in Proclamation No. 1, dated July 20, 1946, for surrendering unlicensed firearms and ammunition. During that period, mere possession of such articles did not make the possessor criminally liable unless he was found making use of them except in self-defense or carrying them on his person except for the purpose of surrendering them. This was the holding in People vs. Morpus Felinggon. However, the suspension of criminal liability for mere possession of firearms and ammunition terminated on August 31, 1946. Thereafter, the general rule making it unlawful to possess firearms and ammunition again prevailed. Since the violation charged in the present case was alleged to have been committed on or about August 16, 1949, which was after the deadline for the surrender of unlicensed firearms and ammunition, the ruling in People vs. Morpus Felinggon is the applicable one, not the Santos-Lopez case. Therefore, the information was sufficient.
Main Doctrine
The ruling in People vs. Santos Lopez and People vs. Ricardo y Abalos, which requires allegations of use of firearm except for self-defense or carrying on person except for surrender to authorities for criminal liability, applies only to violations committed before the expiration of the period fixed in Proclamation No. 1 for surrendering unlicensed firearms. After the deadline, mere possession of unlicensed firearms and ammunition is punishable.