FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 238336. April 10, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.ZAINAL KADIL y LIDASAN, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated April 10, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 238336 (PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ZAINAL KADIL y LIDASAN, Accused-Appellant.) — After a judicious review of the records, We resolve to DISMISS the appeal by the accused-appellant challenging the decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) promulgated on October 27, 2017, 1 whereby the CA affirmed his conviction for illegal possession of explosives punished under Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended, handed down on January 27, 2016 by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 12, in the City of Manila, for his failure to sufficiently show that the CA thereby committed reversible error in affirming the decision of the RTC.
The CA affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant by stating that the State had established the presence of the essential elements constituting the crime of illegal possession of explosives, viz.: (1) the existence of the subject firearm or explosive, which may be proved by the presentation of the subject firearm or explosive or by the testimony of witnesses who saw accused in possession of the same; and (2) the negative fact that the accused-appellant had no license or permit to own or possess the firearm or explosive, which fact may be established by the testimony or certification of a representative of the FEO that the accused-appellant has no license or permit to possess the subject firearm or explosive.
We find no error on the part of the CA.
It is settled rule that the findings of fact by the RTC are accorded the highest degree of respect. When adopted and confirmed by the CA, such findings become final and conclusive and may not be reviewed on appeal unless there was a clear misapprehension of facts. 2 Absent any showing that the courts a quo had misappreciated the evidence presented, We will not disturb their findings. cSaATC
At any rate, the CA and the RTC correctly held that the prosecution had successfully established the elements of the crime of illegal possession of explosives. PO2 Reyes, one of the witnesses of the State, marked and identified the hand grenade in open court. The Certification from the FEO stating that accused-appellant was not authorized to carry or possess explosives or firearms was duly marked, and hence, incorporated and made part of the records of the case. Hence, we find no reversible error on the part of the CA in affirming the conviction of the accused-appellant.
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08101 promulgated on October 27, 2017 in toto.
SO ORDERED." Del Castillo, J., on official business. Jardeleza, J., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 2-15; penned by Associate Justice Elihu A. Ybañez, with Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta and Associate Justice Carmelita Salandanan Manahan concurring.
2.People v. Bensig, G.R. No. 138989, September 17, 2002, 389 SCRA 182, 190.