G.R. No. 253090. March 01, 2023.
Bobby Carbonel y Dreza a.k.a. “Edgar”, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

An Information was filed charging petitioner Bobby Carbonel with Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition under RA 10591. The prosecution alleged that on December 8, 2015, police officers on patrol saw petitioner at a barangay fiesta carnival rushing towards a group of children while drawing something from his waist. The officers approached and saw a revolver tucked in his waist. When asked, petitioner could not present a license or permit. He was arrested, and a Smith and Wesson .38 caliber revolver (without serial number) loaded with five live ammunition and a holster were confiscated. A certification from the Firearms and Explosives Office (FEO-PNP) later confirmed petitioner was not a licensed firearm holder. Petitioner denied ownership, claiming he was watching a contest when a commotion occurred; he was blocked by police, searched, and his bag containing a DVD was taken. He alleged the firearm was not recovered from him. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found him guilty. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed petitioner’s conviction for Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition.

RULING

Yes, the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction. The petition is without merit.
The Supreme Court held that petitioner’s warrantless arrest was valid under the in flagrante delicto exception. The police officers personally witnessed petitioner’s overt act of drawing something from his waist while rushing towards children during a crowded fiesta, which constituted suspicious behavior sufficient to create a reasonable belief that a crime was being committed. Upon approach, they immediately saw the firearm tucked in his waist, confirming their suspicion. The subsequent search and seizure were valid as incidental to a lawful arrest. Petitioner’s failure to timely question the legality of his arrest before arraignment constituted a waiver.
All elements of Illegal Possession of Firearms were proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) the existence of the firearm and ammunition, and (2) the lack of license or permit to possess them. The police officer positively identified the seized items in court. The FEO-PNP certification conclusively established petitioner’s lack of license. Petitioner’s denial, being self-serving, could not prevail over the positive and credible testimony of the police witnesses. The delay in submitting the firearm for ballistic examination and the date of the FEO certification did not undermine the evidence of guilt, as the chain of custody was not compromised and the core fact of possession without license was established. The penalty imposed by the CA, pursuant to Section 28(e)(1) of RA 10591 for possession of a loaded firearm, was correct.