GR 95523; (August, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 95523 August 18, 1997
REYNALDO GONZALES y RIVERA, petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
FACTS
Two separate informations were filed against petitioner Reynaldo Gonzales y Rivera for Attempted Homicide and violation of Presidential Decree No. 1866 (Illegal Possession of Firearms). The charges stemmed from an incident on May 20, 1984, in San Ildefonso, Bulacan. The prosecution’s version was that petitioner, without provocation, hurled invectives at Zenaida Verde and pushed her. When Jaime Verde tried to restrain him, petitioner pulled out a .22 caliber “paltik” revolver and fired at Jaime but missed. A paraffin test showed gunpowder residue on petitioner’s right hand. The defense claimed petitioner grabbed the gun after it was dropped by an unidentified person being chased by the Verdes; during a scuffle, the gun accidentally discharged. The trial court acquitted petitioner of Attempted Homicide but convicted him of Illegal Possession of Firearm under P.D. No. 1866, sentencing him to 17 years, 4 months, 1 day to 18 years, 8 months of reclusion temporal. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Petitioner raised issues regarding conflicts in testimony, lack of motive, absence of preliminary investigation, and failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
ISSUE
Whether the penalty imposed on petitioner for illegal possession of firearm should be reduced in light of the retroactive application of Republic Act No. 8294, which lowered the penalty for the offense.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the factual findings of guilt but reduced the penalty. The Court applied Republic Act No. 8294, which took effect on June 6, 1997, retroactively because it is favorable to the accused. Under the new law, the penalty for simple illegal possession of a low-powered firearm (like the .22 caliber “paltik” in this case) is prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than P15,000.00, provided no other crime was committed. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the penalty was reduced to an indeterminate sentence of four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day as minimum, to six (6) years as maximum. Since petitioner had already served nine (9) years, nine (9) months and twenty-three (23) days, which exceeded the maximum penalty under the new law, he was ordered to be immediately released from confinement, unless held for other lawful cause. The Court also held that petitioner waived his right to preliminary investigation by entering a plea, and that the prosecution proved the elements of illegal possession—the existence of the firearm and the lack of license or permit—beyond reasonable doubt.