G.R. No. 255668 - JEREMY REYES Y COLLANO, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, sentenced him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor , as minimum, to nine (9) years and four (4) months of prision mayor , as maximum. However, it acquitted Reyes and Alano for Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs and Alano for Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs and Illegal Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus, and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs for the prosecution's failure to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. [18] As to the crime of Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition, the RTC ruled that the prosecution was able to prove all the elements of the crime charged since it was established that Reyes was found in possession of an improvised gun loaded with ammunition, and that based on the Certification [19] dated June 19, 2017 issued by the Firearms and Explosive Office, he was not a licensed or registered firearm holder of any kind or caliber. The RTC further ruled that the inconsistencies in the testimony of PO1 Tolentino as to the kind of gun that was recovered from Reyes does not negate Reyes' conviction as the former was able to successfully identify the subject firearm in court. Finally, it gave credence to the positive testimony of PO1 Tolentino, which must prevail over Reyes' defense of denial. [20] As to the other charges, the RTC acquitted Reyes of the crimes charged for failure of the prosecution to prove the fourth link in the chain of custody over the seized items. [21] Aggrieved, Reyes moved for reconsideration, [22] which was denied in an Order [23] dated November 14, 2018; thus, he appealed to the CA. The CA Ruling In a Decision [24] dated July 10, 2020, the CA affirmed in toto the RTC ruling. It held that there was a valid search incidental to a lawful arrest as it was made following a buy-bust operation and that the police officers were justified in searching Reyes of any concealed weapon that he may use to facilitate his escape. It likewise found that the inconsistencies in PO1 Tolentino's testimony as to the name of the gun was immaterial as it was established that an improvised firearm was recovered from Reyes, which was corroborated by photographs taken at the time of the commission of the crime. Finally, it ruled that the prosecution was able to prove all the elements of Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition as it was established that Reyes was in possession of a pistol loaded with ammunition without a license under his name. [25] Dissatisfied, Reyes moved for reconsideration, [26] which was denied in a Resolution [27] dated February 4, 2021; hence, the instant petition. The Issue Before the Court The Core issue in this case is whether or not the CA erred in finding Reyes guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition, as defined and penalized under Section 28 (a) in relation to Section 28 (e)(l) of RA 10591. The Court's Ruling The petition is unmeritorious. Se