G.R. No. 63971 . May 9, 1989.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RICARDO ELESTERIO y CARPENTERS, defendant-appellant. FE CRUZ, petitioner, vs. EX-JUDGE ENRIQUE AGANA, et al., respondents.

FACTS

In the early morning of June 8, 1981, police officers in Pasay City investigated a group on Libertad Street. During the encounter, Ricardo Elesterio attempted to flee but was apprehended. A search yielded a .32 caliber revolver and ammunition from his person, and he admitted to having no permit for the firearm. He was charged with violating General Order No. 6 in relation to Presidential Decree No. 9, which prescribed a penalty of life imprisonment. At his trial, Elesterio claimed the firearm was merely passed to him by a companion. The trial concluded in a single hearing, with the judge barring additional defense witnesses as cumulative. Elesterio was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Elesterio escaped custody but was later recaptured. His aunt, Fe Cruz, filed a petition for habeas corpus, arguing the sentence was excessive, the single-day trial denied due process, and his counsel was not a lawyer. The Supreme Court dismissed the habeas corpus petition but treated it as a timely appeal, ordering the elevation of the trial records for review.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court correctly convicted Elesterio of violating P.D. No. 9 in relation to G.O. No. 6, warranting a penalty of life imprisonment, based on the allegations in the information and the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the conviction. It held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its conduct of the trial. The judge’s control over proceedings to exclude cumulative testimony did not deprive Elesterio of a substantial right. However, the Court ruled that the information, while citing P.D. No. 9 , did not allege the essential element that the illegal possession of the firearm was committed in furtherance of or in connection with subversion, rebellion, insurrection, or lawless violence. The recitals in the information only established the simple, unauthorized possession and carrying of a firearm outside one’s residence.
Consequently, the facts proven constituted the offense of Illegal Possession of Firearms under Section 2692 of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended, and not the graver offense under P.D. No. 9 . The penalty for the former is an indeterminate prison term of one to five years and a fine. The Court adopted the Solicitor General’s recommendation but noted Elesterio had already been detained since 1983, exceeding the maximum imposable sentence. Therefore, the Court convicted him under the Revised Administrative Code and ordered his immediate release upon payment of a reduced fine of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00).