SPECIAL PENAL LAW- RA 8249

MANNY RAMOS et al, v PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. No. 218466, G.R. No. 221425, January 23, 2017, FIRST DIVISION,
(Perlas-Bernabe, J.)

DOCTRINE:
There are two (2) requisites to establish the use of unlicensed firearm,
namely: (a) the existence of the subject firearm; and (b) the fact that the accused
who owned or possessed the gun did not have the corresponding license or permit
to carry it outside his residence. The onus probandi of establishing these
elements lies with the prosecution.

FACTS:
On January 20, 2002, after a drinking spree, the three accused had an
altercation with the victim Rolando Necesito. The eyewitness Reynaldo heard
Ramos yell, "Okinam patayan ka!" (Son of a bitch! I will kill you!) and he saw the
three accused chase and surround Rolando at an area around seven (7) meters
away from where Reynaldo was hiding. He heard four (4) successive gunshots,
making him hide under the trunk of the duhat tree for fear of being hit. He saw
that Rolando fell face on the ground after the fourth gun shot. To ensure
Rolando's demise, Ramos approached Rolando and shot him again. The three
accused was charged of murder qualified by the use of unlincensed firearm,
abuse of superior strength, and existence of implied conspiracy between the three
accused. The RTC rendered a decision convicting the three accused on the crime
of murder and the CA affirmed the decision of the lower court.

ISSUE:
Is the use of unlicensed firearm in the killing of victim Necesito can be appreciated
as a qualifying circumstance on the case of murder against the three accused?

RULING:
NO. Under Section 1 of RA 8294, if homicide or murder is committed with the
use of an unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance. There are two (2) requisites to
establish such circumstance, namely: (a) the existence of the subject firearm;
and (b) the fact that the accused who owned or possessed the gun did not have
the corresponding license or permit to carry it outside his residence. The onus
probandi of establishing these elements lies with the prosecution.

In this case, while it is undisputed that Rolando sustained five (5) gunshot
wounds which led to his demise, it is unclear from the records: (a) whether or not
the police officers were able to recover the firearm used as a murder weapon;
and (b) whether or not such firearm was licensed. The prosecution failed to prove
the existence of the use of unlicensed firearm in the killing of the victim. Thus,
the Court cannot simply appreciate the use of an unlicensed firearm as an
aggravating circumstance.