G.R. No. 181111 , August 17, 2015
Jackson Padiernos y Quejada, Jackie Roxas y German and Rolando Mesina y Javate, Petitioners, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioners Jackson Padiernos, Jackie Roxas, and Rolando Mesina were charged as accessories to the crime of illegal possession of lumber under Presidential Decree No. 705 (Forestry Reform Code). The Information alleged that on November 16, 2002, they conspired to take and carry away a ten-wheeler truck (Plate No. TFZ-747) that had been used to transport 818 pieces of undocumented lumber seized on November 15, 2002, to prevent its use as evidence and avoid its confiscation. The principals (Santiago Castillo, Frederico Castillo, Roger Mostera) remained at large, while accused Eddie Gatdula pleaded not guilty as a principal.
The prosecution evidence established that DENR Officer Felimon Balico apprehended the truck loaded with lumber on November 15, 2002, for lack of documents. The lumber was unloaded and transferred to the police station, but the truck remained parked at the national highway under guard. On November 16, truck owner Santiago Castillo arrived with the petitioners. Santiago gave the keys to Mesina, who volunteered to drive. After petitioners and the DENR guards boarded, Mesina suddenly sped the truck towards Nueva Ecija instead of the police station, ignoring shouts from the guards and warning shots from pursuing policemen. The truck was intercepted by the Philippine Army in Gabaldon, Nueva Ecija. Padiernos then berated the apprehending officers.
The defense claimed Mesina and Roxas were reluctant but were persuaded by Santiago’s assurances that the truck’s problems were settled. Padiernos hitched a ride, claiming he was unaware of the truck’s status. They denied hearing any shouts or warning shots.
The Regional Trial Court convicted the petitioners as accessories. The Court of Appeals affirmed but modified the penalty.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioners are liable as accessories under Article 19 of the Revised Penal Code for taking the truck to prevent its discovery as evidence of the crime of illegal possession of lumber.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court acquitted the petitioners of the charge as accessories under the Revised Penal Code but found them guilty under Section 1(b) of Presidential Decree No. 1829 (Obstruction of Justice).
The Court held that the crime of illegal possession of lumber had already been discovered by authorities on November 15, 2002, when the truck was apprehended and the lumber confiscated. Under Article 19 of the Revised Penal Code, an accessory liability requires acts performed to prevent the discovery of the crime. Since the crime was already discovered, the subsequent taking of the truck could not make them accessories under the Revised Penal Code.
However, the Court found that the petitioners’ acts constituted obstruction of justice under P.D. 1829, which penalizes any person who knowingly or willfully obstructs, impedes, or frustrates the apprehension of suspects and the investigation or prosecution of criminal cases. The truck was an instrument of the crime, and its removal impeded the investigation. The petitioners’ own admissions showed they were aware of the truck’s involvement in illegal activity. Their defense of denial was untenable.
The Court modified the CA decision and convicted petitioners under P.D. 1829, sentencing them to prision correccional for 4 years, 9 months, and 11 days to 5 years, 4 months, and 20 days.