G.R. No. L-29570 October 29, 1971
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ENRIQUE SOLLANO JR., defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Enrique Sollano Jr., was charged, along with others, with the crime of Illegal Manufacture of Firearms and Spare Parts. The information alleged that they conspired to manufacture and sell firearms without the requisite permit. The prosecution’s evidence stemmed from an operation by the Philippine Constabulary. An agent, Nicanor Baring, acting undercover, purchased three revolvers from Sollano on March 15, 1962. Based on this, a raid was conducted on March 30, 1962, leading to the seizure of paraphernalia and two more revolvers being tested by Baring. The five revolvers were presented in court.
The trial court acquitted all of Sollano’s co-accused on grounds of reasonable doubt. However, it convicted Sollano himself, not of the crime of illegal manufacture as charged, but of the separate offense of illegal possession of firearms. The court based this conviction on the evidence that Sollano had sold the five firearms to the undercover agent. Sollano appealed directly, raising pure questions of law regarding the propriety of his conviction.

ISSUE

The central issue is whether an accused can be validly convicted of the crime of illegal possession of firearms under an information that specifically charges only the crime of illegal manufacture of firearms.

RULING

Yes, the conviction for illegal possession is valid. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The legal logic rests on the application of the rules on variance between allegation and proof under the Rules of Court. The Court agreed with the Solicitor General’s analysis that while illegal possession of firearms does not necessarily include illegal manufacture, the reverse is true: the crime of illegal manufacture necessarily includes the element of illegal possession. This is because one cannot manufacture a firearm without necessarily possessing it in the process.
Therefore, illegal possession is a lesser offense included in the greater offense of illegal manufacture as charged. Under the rules, when the offense proved (illegal possession) is included in the offense charged (illegal manufacture), the accused may be convicted of the lesser offense. The evidence presented—the sale and thus the possession of the five firearms—sufficiently established the elements of illegal possession. The Court also addressed Sollano’s claim of a separate case for the same illegal possession, ruling that the pendency of another case is not a bar to the conviction in the present appeal. Finally, the Court declined the prosecution’s invitation to review factual findings to convict for the original charge of manufacture, as its appellate jurisdiction in this direct appeal is limited to questions of law.