PP VS Enriquez DG

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.
ADRIAN ENRIQUEZ y attention of an elder brother, but a gun was pointed at his mouth. He was told
GARCES, accused-appellant.A to accompany them otherwise he will be killed.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee. He was then brought to the Narcom Headquarters in Lahug. On the jeep was
the person who went up the house carrying the plastic bag. At the Narcom
FACTS: Office he inquired about the identity of the person who was carrying the plastic
bag but no answer was given him.
PNP VERSION
Accused insisted that the 10 sticks of marijuana cigarettes were planted and
On April 17 & 18 1991 Sgt Inding, a member of 7th Narcotics Unit of the that he saw the 47 and 59 sticks for the first time in court during the trial.
Philippine National Police (PNP) in Lahug, Cebu City received from a
concerned citizen that there are drug pushers in the area. He conducted a
surveillance and observed the illegal activity of the accused selling thinly rolled
cigarette to teenagers. They conducted a buy bust operation with some other On April 23, 1991, the Assistant Provincial Prosecutor filed an information
agents. Sgt Inding disguised as an addict and proceeded to accused residence charging the accused with violation of Article II, Section 4 of the Dangerous
while other agents stayed 10 meters from his position. After having received Drugs Act committed as follows:
10 stick of marijuana, his companion immediately effected the arrest and
recovered 47 & 59 sticks of marijuana which was confirmed in chemistry report "That on or about the 19th day of April, 1991 at around 7:00 o'clock in the
to be marijuana evening, more or less, in Barangay Perrelos, Municipality of Carcar, Province
of Cebu, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court the
above-named accused with deliberate intent and without any permit or license
issued by any government agency, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
ACCUSED VERSION feloniously sell, deliver, distribute and give away ten (10) sticks of handrolled
Indian hemp cigarette, commonly known as "Marijuana" to an informant, and
He testified that for the last 20 years, he has been engaged in poultry raising, the latter gave to the accused the buy money of TWENTY PESOS (P20.00)
piggery and so forth, and during market days he goes to Sibonga, San with Serial No. LU716642 and likewise recovered were 47 sticks of Marijuana
Fernando, Carcar proper, Montalongon to sell dog chains, tawas, hair puller, cigarette and 59 stick (sic) surrendered by the accused, classified and in
hammer, saw, chisel, carborundum (grinding stone) etcetera in these places. violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972.
In the evening of April 19, 1991 he was in his house. Wilfredo Da-an and
Franco Garces were also there. Da-an introduced Garces to him because the On May 21, 1991, the accused, assisted by his counsel, pleaded not guilty to
latter wanted to borrow money. That was the only occasion that Garces was the information.
there.
After due trial, the trial court rendered its decision finding the accused guilty
While talking with Garces, somebody arrived with a plastic bag and said he beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged, the dispositive portion of which
wanted to buy "tawas" or alum. He invited him inside the house. As soon as reads:
the visitor entered, accused suddenly heard a loud banging of the door from
outside. "The Foregoing Considered, this Court finds the accused ADRIAN ENRIQUEZ
Y GARCES, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of selling marijuana
Thereafter, persons with drawn guns rushed inside the house and he heard cigarettes as defined and penalized in accordance with Sec. 4 Art. II RA 6425
the cocking of firearms. He protested. As a matter of fact, he called the as amended by BP Blg. 179, and hereby imposes upon him the penalty of
LIFE IMPRISONMENT, and a fine of P20,000.00 with costs against him. The
10, 47, and 59 sticks of marijuana cigarettes are hereby FORFEITED in favor
of the government.
ISSUE
WON the name of Genonsalao,(as identified to be the person who handed the
accused some marijuana and the escaped) must be included and charged in
the information filed by the prosecutor.
RULING
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; PROSECUTION OF ACTION; ALL PERSON WHO

APPEAR RESPONSIBLE SHALL BE CHARGED IN THE INFORMATION. —
Going to the contention of the Solicitor General that it is highly suspect for the
prosecution to charge only the accused in the information and not include a
certain Bienvenido Genonsalao whom the members of the buy-bust operation
team identified in their joint affidavit as the person who handed the accused
some sticks of marijuana and who had escaped. Section 1, Rule 110 of the
Rules on Criminal Procedure provides that "(a)ll criminal actions must be
commenced either by complaint or information in the name of the People of
the Philippines against all persons who appear to be responsible therefore."
The law makes it a legal duty for prosecuting officers to file the charges
against whomsoever the evidence may show to be responsible for an offense.
This does not mean, however, that they shall have no discretion at all; their
discretion lies in determining whether the evidence submitted justify a
reasonable belief that a person has committed an offense. What the rule
demands is that all persons who appear responsible shall be charged in the
information, which implies that those against whom no sufficient evidence of
guilt exists are not required to be included. Hence, it is discretionary on the
part of the fiscal whether to include Bienvenido Genonsalao depending on the
evidence available to him

PP VS Enriquez DG

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PP VS Enriquez DG

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PP VS Enriquez DG

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; PROSECUTION OF ACTION; ALL PERSON WHO

You might also like