G.R. Nos. 136149-51; September 19, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. WALPAN LADJAALAM y MIHAJIL alias “WARPAN,” appellant.

FACTS

Walpan Ladjaalam was charged with four offenses arising from a single incident on September 24, 1997. Police officers attempted to serve a search warrant at his residence in Zamboanga City for alleged drug-related activities. During the service, Ladjaalam fired an M-14 rifle at the officers, who were identified as agents of a person in authority. The officers sought cover and were not hit, and Ladjaalam was subsequently subdued and arrested. The charges included maintaining a drug den, illegal possession of firearms and ammunition, multiple attempted murder with direct assault, and illegal possession of drugs.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Ladjaalam on three counts: maintaining a drug den, illegal possession of firearms, and direct assault with multiple attempted homicide (modified from the charged multiple attempted murder with direct assault). He was acquitted of illegal possession of drugs. Ladjaalam appealed, contesting the convictions.

ISSUE

Whether the appellant can be separately convicted for illegal possession of firearms in addition to his conviction for direct assault with multiple attempted homicide, which was committed using the same unlicensed firearm.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision, ruling that Ladjaalam cannot be separately convicted for illegal possession of firearms under Republic Act No. 8294 . The legal logic is anchored on the explicit provision of R.A. 8294, which amended the law on illegal possession of firearms. The law penalizes simple illegal possession only if the person arrested committed “no other crime.” Furthermore, if an unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of murder or homicide, it is considered merely as an aggravating circumstance and not a separate offense.
In this case, the appellant was validly convicted of direct assault with multiple attempted homicide for firing at the police officers. Since this is a crime distinct from murder or homicide, the use of the unlicensed firearm cannot be used to aggravate that penalty. However, the more specific rule under R.A. 8294 applies: where another crime is committed, simple illegal possession is not a separate offense. Therefore, the conviction for illegal possession of firearms must be set aside. The Court affirmed the convictions for maintaining a drug den and for direct assault with multiple attempted homicide, imposing the proper penalties for these crimes.