People Vs Montilla
People Vs Montilla
People Vs Montilla
DECISION
REGALADO, J.:
[1]
Original Record, 1; Rollo, 3.
[2]
Ibid., 19, 21.
[3]
Ibid., 76; per Presiding Judge Dolores L. Espaol.
[4]
TSN, October 10, 1994, 1-14; October 19, 1994, 2-9.
[5]
Ibid., February 15, 1995, 4-26; March 2, 1995, 1-4.
[6]
The other modes include violations of Sections 3 (Importation of Prohibited Drugs), 5
(Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort for Prohibited Drugs Users), 6 (Employees and Visitors
of Prohibited Drug Den), 7 (Manufacture of Prohibited Drugs), 8 (Possession or Use of
Prohibited Drugs), 9 (Cultivitation of Plants which are Sources of Prohibited Drugs), 11
(Unlawful Prescription of Prohibited Drugs), and 12 (Unnecessary Prescription of Prohibited
Drugs), all under Article II of the Dangerous Drugs Act. Article III of the Act provides for similar
violations in cases involving regulated drugs, namely, Sections 14, 14- A, 15, 15-A, 16, 17, 18,
and 19.
[7]
Jurado, etcc. vs. Suy Yan, L-30714, April 30, 1971, 38 SCRA 663.
[8]
People vs. Trancca, G.R. No. 110357, August 17, 1994, 235 SCRA 435.
[9]
People vs. Gireng G.R. No. 97949, February 21, 1995, 241 SCRA 11.
[10]
People vs. Nicolas, et al., G.R. No. 110116, February 1, 1995, 241 SCRA 67.
[11]
Section 1, Rules of Court.
[12]
People vs. Barros, G.R. No. 90640, Marcch 29, 1994, 231 SCRA 557.
[13]
Chia, et al. vs. Acting Collector of Customs, et al. L-43810, September 26, 1989, 177 SCRA
755; Papa, etc., et al. vs. Mago, et al., L-27360, February 28, 1968, 22 SCRA 857.
[14]
Aniag, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections, et al., G.R. No. 104961, October 7, 1994, 237
SCRA 424; Valmonte, et al. vs. De Villa, et al., G.R. No. 83988, May 24, 1990, 185 SCRA 665.
[15]
People vs. Leangsiri, G.R. No. 112659, January 24, 1996, 252 SCRA 213;
People vs. Figueroa, G.R. No. 97143, October 2, 1995, 248 SCRA 679.
[16]
People vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. 113474, December 13, 1994, 239 SCRA 174;
People vs. Tabar, et al. G.R. No. 101124, May 17, 1993, 222 SCRA 144.
[17]
People vs. Malstedt, G.R. No. 91107, June 19, 1991, 198 SCRA 401.
[18]
Terry vs. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S Ct. 1868, 20 L. Ed. 2d. 889 (1968), adopted in
Posadas vs. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. no. 89139, August 2, 1990, 188 SCRA 288.
[19]
Section 12, Rule 126, Rules of Court.
[20]
People vs. Malmstedt, supra, Fn 17; Lo Ho Wing, et al., G.R. No. 88017, January 21, 1991,
193 SCRA 122; People vs. Maspil, Jr., et al., G.R. No. 85177, August 20, 1990, 188 SCRA
751; People vs.Tangliben, G.R. No. 63630, April 6, 1990, 184 SCRA 220; People vs. Claudio,
L-72564, April 15, 1988, 160 SCRA 646.
[21]
See also People vs. Labarias, G.R. No. 87165, January 25, 1993, 217 SCRA 483;
People vs. Tonog, Jr., etc., at al., G.R. No. 94533, February 4, 1992, 205 SCRA 772.
[22]
See Salonga vs. Pao, etcc., et al., G.R. No. 59524, February 18, 1985, 134 SCRA 438;
Bautista, et al. vs. Sarmiento, etc., at el., L-45137, September 23, 1985, 138 SCRA 592. The
term denotes evidence which, if unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to sustain a
proposition or establish the facts, as to counterbalance the presumption of innocence and
warrant the conviction of the accused.
[23]
Owens vs. Gratezel, 148 Md. 689, 132 A. 265.
[24]
Brand vs. Hincchman, 68 Micch. 590, 36 N.W. 664, 13 Am. St. Rep. 362.
[25]
Section1, Rule 112.
[26]
Section 4, first and fourth paragraphs., id.
[27]
People vs. Fernandez, supra, Fn 16; People vs. Ramos, G.R. Nos. 101804-07, May 25,
1993, 222 SCRA 557; People vs. Tabar, et al., supra, Fn. 16; People vs. Exala, et al., G.R. No.
76005, April 23, 1993, 221 SCRA 494.
[28]
People vs. Barros, supra, Fn 12.
[29]
People vs. Lacerna, G.R. No. 109250, September 5, 1997, and cases therein cited.
[30]
Approved on April 27, 1992 and published in the Official Gazette on June 22, 1992, Vol. 88,
No. 25, 3880.
[31]
People vs. Gatward, et al., G.R. Nos. 118772-73, February 7, 1997.
[32]
See Section 24 of the Act, which likewise imposes the maximum penalties provided for in
Sections 3, 4(1), 5(1), 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13 of Article II, and Sections 14, 14-A, 15(1),
15-A(1), 16, and 19 of Article III, where those found guilty of any of said offenses are
government officials, employees or officers including members of police age