You are on page 1of 8

UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

Definition of Terms: Total Wreck - refers to the state or status of a motor


vehicle after a vehicular accident or other incident, so that
Carnapping - the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor it is rendered inoperational and beyond economic repair
vehicle belonging to another without the latter's consent, or due to the extent of damage in its body, chassis and
by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, or engine.
by using force upon things.
Unlawful transfer or use of vehicle plates - refers to the
Motor Vehicle - any vehicle propelled by any power other use or transfer of a vehicle plate issued by the LTO to a
than muscular power using the public highways, but certain vehicle to another vehicle. It is presumed illegally
excepting road rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers, transferred when the motor vehicle plate does not
sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders, fork-lifts, correspond with that as appearing in the certificate of
amphibian trucks, and cranes if not used on public registration of the motor vehicle to which it was issued.
highways, vehicles, which run only on rails or tracks, and
tractors, trailers and traction engines of all kinds used Penalties for Carnapping (Section 3)
exclusively for agricultural purposes. Trailers having any
number of wheels, when propelled or intended to be Imprisonment of (20) years and one (1) day but not more
propelled by attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be than thirty (30) years - when the carnapping is committed
classified as separate motor vehicle with no power rating without violence against or intimidation of persons, or
force upon things .
Defacing or tampering with serial number - the altering,
changing, erasing, replacing or scratching of the original Imprisonment for not less than thirty (30) years and one
factory inscribed serial number on the motor vehicle (1) day but not more than forty (40) years - when the
engine, engine block or chassis of any motor vehicle. carnapping is committed by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or force upon things
Dismantling - refers to the tearing apart, piece-by-piece or
part-by-part, of a motor vehicle. Life imprisonment- when the owner, driver, or occupant of
the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the
Overhauling - refers to the cleaning or repairing of the commission of the carnapping.
whole engine of a motor vehicle by separating the motor
engine and its parts from the body of the motor vehicle.

Repainting- refers to changing the color of a motor vehicle


by means of painting. There is painting whenever the new
color of a motor vehicle is different from its color
registered in the Land Transportation Office.

Remodeling- refers to the introduction of some changes in


the shape or form of the body of the motor vehicle.

Second Hand Spare Parts - refer to the parts taken from a


carnapped vehicle used in assembling another vehicle.

1
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

Other Acts Punishable When may Bail be Denied ?

Concealment of Carnapping - Any person who Any person charged with carnapping or when the crime of
conceals carnapping shall be punished with carnapping is committed by criminal groups, gangs or
imprisonment of six (6) years up to twelve (12) years syndicates or by means of violence or intimidation of any
and a fine equal to the amount of the acquisition cost person or persons or forced upon things; or when the
of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or any owner, driver, passenger or occupant of the carnapped
other part involved in the violation: Provided, That if vehicle is killed or raped in the course of the carnapping
the person violating any provision of this Act is a shall be denied bail when the evidence of guilt is strong.
juridical person, the penalty herein provided shall be
imposed on its president, secretary, and/or members of Cases:
the board of directors or any of its officers and
PEOPLE vs MEJIA
employees who may have directly participated in the [G.R. Nos. 118940-41 & 119407. July 7, 1997.]
violation.
Facts:
Any public official or employee who directly commits the In the evening of March 10, 1994, along the expressway at
unlawful acts defined in this Act or is guilty of gross Barangay Ventinilla, Sta. Barbara, Pangasinan, several
negligence of duty or connives with or permits the persons on board a passenger jeepney driven by Teofilo
commission of any of the said unlawful acts shall, in Landingin attacked the latter and a passenger, Vergilio
addition to the penalty prescribed in the preceding Catugas, thereby inflicting upon them multiple stab
paragraph, be dismissed from the service, and his/her wounds. Landingin died while Catugas survived. Nine (9)
benefits forfeited and shall be permanently disqualified persons were held to account for the crime but only four
from holding public office. (4) were taken into police custody, namely, Gregorio
Mejia, Edwin Benito, Pedro Paraan, and Joseph Febito
Defacing or Tampering with Serial Numbers of Motor
Romulo. Three (3) separate criminal complaints for
Vehicle Engines, Engine Blocks and Chassis. — It shall be
murder, frustrated murder and violation of R.A. No. 6539
unlawful for any person to deface or otherwise tamper
(Anti Carnapping Act of 1992, as amended) were filed
with the original or registered serial number of motor
against the accused.
vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis|.
The first two cases were assigned to the RTC of Dagupan
Transfer of Vehicle Plate. — It shall be unlawful for any
City, Branch 44, presided by Judge Crispin Laron, while
person, office or entity to transfer or use a vehicle plate
the third case was assigned to Judge Silverio Castillo of
from one vehicle to another without securing the proper
Branch 43 of the same court.
authority from the LTO.
At the arraignment, the four accused entered a plea of
Sale of Second Hand Spare Parts. — It shall be unlawful
innocence in each case. After trial, the Laron court
for any person, office or entity to buy and/or sell any
convicted the accused of murder and frustrated murder,
second hand spare parts taken from a carnapped vehicle.
while the Castillo court convicted them of violation of the
Anti-Carnapping Act.

2
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

Issues: In short, considering the phraseology of the amended


Section 14, the carnapping and the killing (or the rape)
a. Whether or not the crimes of murder in Criminal may be considered as a single or indivisible crime or a
Case No. 94-00617-D and frustrated murder in special complex crime which, however, is not covered by
Criminal Case No. 94-00619-D are absorbed in the Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. Since Section 14 of
violation of the Anti-Carnapping Act in Criminal R.A. No. 6539 uses the words "IS KILLED," no
Case No. 94-00620-D. distinction must be made between homicide and murder.
Whether it is one or the other which is committed "in the
course of carnapping or on the occasion thereof" makes no
b. Whether or not the words "IS KILLED" in the last difference insofar as the penalty is concerned.
clause of Section 14 of R.A. No. 6539, as
amended include the crime of frustrated murder or It follows then that the killing of the driver,
homicide. Teofilo Landingin — whether it be homicide or murder —
c. Whether or not prosecution established with moral cannot be treated as a separate offense, but should only be
certainty the guilt of the appellants. considered to qualify the crime of carnapping.
Nonetheless, although there could only be one single
Ruling: offense of qualified carnapping or carnapping in an
A. aggravated form, the prosecution had still to prove the
essential requisites of the homicide or murder of Landingin
R.A. No. 7659 which took effect on 31 December and that of carnapping.
1993 50 is applicable to these cases because the crimes
were committed on 10 March 1994. Section 14 of the B.
Anti-Carnapping Act was amended by Section 20 of R.A. No. The answer must be in the negative in light of
No. 7659 and now imposes the penalty of reclusion the use in said Section 14 of the words "IS KILLED." The
perpetua to death when the owner, driver, or occupant of unmistakable import thereof is that it refers only to the
the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the course consummated felony of either murder or homicide. If
of the commission of the carnapping or on the occasion attempted or frustrated murder or homicide is committed
thereof. Three amendments have thus been made, viz: (1) "in the course of the commission of the carnapping or on
the change of the penalty of life imprisonment to reclusion the occasion thereof," then it must be deemed to fall under
perpetua, (2) the inclusion of rape, and (3) the change of the clause (of Section 14) "when the carnapping is
the phrase "in the commission of the carnapping" to "in the committed by means of violence against or intimidation of
course of the commission of the carnapping or on the any person."
occasion thereof." The latter makes clear the intention of
the law to make the offense a special complex crime, by C.
way of analogy vis-a-vis paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 294
of the Revised Penal Code on robbery with violence No. The appellants and the five others happened to be
against or intimidation of persons. As such, the killing (or passengers of Landingin's jeepney by accident, not by
the rape) merely qualifies the crime of carnapping which design. If the appellants were with the five others until
for lack of specific nomenclature may be known as Sual, Pangasinan, it was because they were intimidated
qualified carnapping or carnapping in an aggravated form. and made to lie down on their bellies inside the jeepney.

3
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

Upon arrival in the mountains of Sual, they fled from the should not have employed as bases for his conviction the
Calimquim group when the first opportunity to do so basic principles in theft.
came. they voluntarily informed the police authorities of
the Sual Police Station of what had happened. It was this Issue:
information that brought the policemen to where the WON the basic principles in theft (and robbery) are
subject jeepney was located. Benito even accompanied the
applicable in the crime of carnapping penalized under RA
policemen. This resulted in the recovery of the jeepney by 6539.
the policemen. Appellant Paraan also presented himself
later to the Police Station of Sta. Barbara. Appellant Held:
Fabito, although apprehended by concerned citizens of the
place to where he had fled, voluntarily reported what he Yes.
knew to the police authorities of Sual and Sta. Barbara.
There is no arguing that the anti-carnapping law is a
The testimony of Catugas fails to convince us that the
special law, different from the crimes of robbery and theft
appellants indeed participated in the commission of the
included in the Revised Penal Code. But a careful
crimes. On cross-examination in the LARON court,
comparison of this special law with the crimes of robbery
Catugas categorically admitted that he did not know the
and theft readily reveals their common features and
names of the appellants and that he could recognize only
characteristics, to wit: unlawful taking, intent to gain, and
three of the nine accused. Catugas was not entirely free
that personal property belonging to another is taken
from any ulterior motive in implicating the appellants.He
without the latter’s consent. However, the anti-carnapping
admitted that he demanded P80,000 from the parents of the
law particularly deals with the theft and robbery of motor
appellants, but before they could give the money on the
vehicles.Hence, a motor vehicle is said to have been
agreed date, he testified against the appellants in the
carnapped when it has been taken, with intent to gain,
LARON court.
without the owner’s consent, whether the taking was done
People vs. Tan with or without violence or intimidation of persons or with
GR No. 135904 Jan. 21, 2000 or without the use of force upon things. Without the anti-
carnapping law, such unlawful taking of a motor vehicle
Facts: would fall within the purview of either theft or robbery
Tan was charged by See, his friend, for violation of RA which was certainly the case before the enactment of said
6539 (Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972). See alleged that he statute.
turned over the possession of a car to Tan for test driving
but Tan never returned the same. After several months, Thus, as an element common to theft, robbery and
See formally filed a complaint for carnapping alleging that carnapping, unlawful taking — its import, intention and
See had withdrawn the consent initially given by him to concept — should be considered as also common to these
Tan when the latter went beyond test driving and crimes.
appropriated the car to his own use and benefit. The Trial
Court, affirmed by the CA, ruled against Tan on the It is therefore the finding of the SC that there was no
ground that Tan’s failure to return the car and his unlawful taking in the case at bar. An unlawful taking
consequent appropriation thereof constituted unlawful takes place when the owner or juridical possessor does not
taking – the gravamen of the crime charged. Tan asserts, give his consent to the taking; or, if the consent was given,
however, that the CA in affirming the decision of the RTC, it was vitiated. See neither withheld his consent nor
4
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

withdrew the same during the seven month period the car Held:
was with Tan. At the very least, See tolerated TAN’s
possession of the car. Hence, Tan cannot be convicted Yes. When they were apprehended, they were riding the
under RA 6539. motorcycle of the deceased George Lozano, and to make
things worse, they fled when they were asked by the police
to stop. Possession of a stolen property creates the
People vs Sirad presumption that the possessor stole it. Adding the fact that
GR.No 130594 July 5, 2000 they fled when asked by the police to stop, it is just normal
and more likely that they would be considered primary
Facts: suspects, The accused-appellants Orlie Sultan and Salik
Amino is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of carnapping
George Lozano, the victim in this case, made a living by defined and penalized under R. A. No. 6539, Section 14
delivering bread around General Santos City using a red which states ―when the carnapping is committed by means
Kawasaki motorcycle owned by his employer Aniceto of violence against or intimidation of any person, or force
Dela. Martillano Lozano saw his cousin George Lozano upon things; and the penalty of life imprisonment to death
pass by riding his red Kawasaki motorcycle with the bread shall be imposed when the owner, driver or occupant of
box attached at its side. At around 12:00 noon he again the carnapped motor vehicle is killed in the commission of
saw the red motorcycle pass by, but this time it was not the carnapping and sentence each of them to reclusion
George who was riding the motorcycle but three men and perpetua.‖
the bread box was no longer attached to the
motorcycle. The body of George Lozano was lying on its People vs Ellasos Gr 139323
side with lacerations on the stomach and the intestines
Miguel de Belen, who is the registered owner of the
spilled out. His face and body bore contusions and the
tricycle subject of this carnapping case, was last seen by
motorcycle he was driving was missing.
his brother Fernando at the Caltex station at 9:00 p.m. on
The PNP Theft and Robbery section investigated the death April 2, 1992, he (Miguel) was seated beside the accused
and disappearance of the motorcycle of George Lozano. Sonny Obillo inside the sidecar of his tricycle which was
An operation was organized and Police Officer Domantay being driven by the other accused Carlo Ellasos. -
and other police operatives posted themselves along the
Three (3) hours later, Fernando again saw the two accused
roadside in Barangay Klinan, a motorcycle with two men
with the tricycle, but this time without his brother. When
on board approached the police road block. The
Fernando finally asked the accused about the whereabouts
motorcycle sped up when its driver Akmad Sirad
of his brother, Ellasos answered that Miguel was in a
recognized police officer Domantay. The police officers
drinking session with his (Ellasos') father in Malasin. -
gave chase on board their motorcycles and were able to
overtake and apprehend Akmad Sirad and his companion The following morning, the lifeless body of Miguel de
Orlie Sultan. Belen, with a gunshot wound on the head, was found in
Tayabo. In the same morning, the two accused were found
Issue: sleeping at the gate of the Iglesia ni Cristo chapel in
WON the accused is guilty of crime of carnapping Muñoz, and in possession of a gun and the wheel of

5
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

Miguel's tricycle. The rest of the tricycle was later afterthought, and if indeed a crime has been
recovered in a culve. committed it can only be theft of the wheel of
the tricycle.
These circumstances led to the conclusion that the tricycle
was unlawfully taken in conspiracy of the two accused
from the owner who was killed on the occasion thereof and The contentions are unmeritorious.
both the accused were pronounced guilty. Accused Sonny
Republic Act No. 6539, otherwise known as "An Act
Obillo was the only one who filed this instant appeal.
Preventing and Penalizing Carnapping", defines
carnapping, thus:
"Carnapping" is the taking, with intent
Issues: to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to
another without the latter's consent, or
1. WON THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED by means of violence against or
IN HOLDING THAT THE CRIME OF intimidation of persons, or by using
CARNAPPING WITH HOMICIDE WAS force upon things."
COMMITTED. Intent to gain, or animus lucrandi, as an element of the
crime of carnapping, is an internal act and hence presumed
2. WON THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED from the unlawful taking of the vehicle. Unlawful taking,
IN HOLDING THAT ACCUSED-APPELLANT orapoderamiento, is the taking of the vehicle without the
SONNY OBILLO CONSPIRED WITH CARLO consent of the owner, or by means of violence against or
ELLASOS ALIAS ROMMEL REYES. intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things; it is
deemed complete from the moment the offender gains
3. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN possession of the thing, even if he has no opportunity to
dispose of the same.
CONVICTING ACCUSED-APPELLANT
SONNY OBILLO DESPITE INSUFFICIENCY In the case before us, when the victim, Miguel de Belen,
OF EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM. who is the registered owner of the tricycle subject of this
carnapping case, was last seen by his brother Fernando at
the Caltex station at 9:00 p.m. on April 2, 1992, he
(Miguel) was seated beside the accused Sonny Obillo
inside the sidecar of his tricycle which was being driven by
Held: the other accused Carlo Ellasos. Three (3) hours later,
Fernando again saw the two accused with the tricycle, but
1. Upon the first assignment of error, accused- this time without his brother. When Fernando finally asked
appellant contends that the essential element of the accused about the whereabouts of his
intent to gain was not proven by the brother, Ellasos answered that Miguel was in a drinking
session with his (Ellasos') father in Malasin. The following
prosecution; that had the purpose of the accused
morning, the lifeless body of Miguel de Belen, with a
been to appropriate the tricycle, they could have gunshot wound on the head, was found in Tayabo. In the
taken the said vehicle to a place where it could same morning, the two accused were found sleeping at the
not be easily found; that the taking of the wheel gate of the Iglesia ni Cristo chapel in Muñoz, and in
of the tricycle can, under the circumstances, be possession of a gun and the wheel of Miguel's tricycle. The
conclusively presumed to be a mere rest of the tricycle was later recovered in a culvert.

6
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

The chain of proven circumstances leads to the logical entire car; and the fact that the thieves
conclusion that the tricycle was unlawfully taken by the thought it wise promptly to abandon the
two accused from its owner, Miguel de Belen, and the machine in no wise limits their criminal
latter was killed on the occasion thereof. Miguel was last responsibility to the particular parts of
seen with the two accused; three hours later, the two were the car that were appropriated and
again spotted riding the tricycle without Miguel. The subsequently used by the appellant upon
following morning, the two accused were found in his own car
possession of a wheel of the tricycle. Such possession,
which remained without any satisfactory explanation, 2. He also stresses that there is no evidence on
raises the presumption that the two accused authored the record to prove that he (Obillo) performed an
carnapping. This presumption remains unrebutted. In fact, overt act in furtherance of the alleged
the possession of the wheel of the tricycle subject of this conspiracy. The contention is devoid of merit.
carnapping case is not denied by the accused-appellant Conspiracy exists when two or more persons
who, in his Brief, even argued thus: "The fact that part of come to an agreement concerning the
the tricycle was found in possession of Sonny Obillo commission of a felony and decide to commit
would not alter our theory [that the element of intent to it. Conspiracy need not be proved by direct
gain is wanting] because considering all the circumstances, evidence and may be inferred from the conduct
it could be conclusively presumed that the taking of the of the accused before, during and after the
wheel was merely an afterthought. . . . If indeed a crime commission of the crime, which are indicative
has been committed, it can only be theft of the wheel of of a joint purpose, concerted action and
the tricycle." That only the wheel was found in possession concurrence of sentiments.
of the accused and was intended to be appropriated by the
latter is of no moment. The unlawful taking of the tricycle The testimony of the accused-appellant that he
from the owner was already completed. Besides, the fell asleep while waiting for Ellasos and Miguel
accused may be held liable for the unlawful taking of the inside the tricycle and that when he woke up he
whole vehicle even if only a part thereof is ultimately was already in front of the guards at the Iglesia
taken and/or appropriated while the rest of it is abandoned. ni Cristo chapel deserves scant attention in light
In the case of People vs. Carpio, this Court convicted the of the positive testimonies of two witnesses,
accused Carpio of theft of a car which was found namely: Fernando de Belen testified that he saw
abandoned one day after it was stolen but without three (3) Ellasos and Obillo riding the tricycle of his
of its tires, holding thus: brother Miguel at about midnight of April 2,
1992, and even asked them regarding the
". . . The act of asportation in this case whereabouts of his brother, to which Ellasos
was undoubtedly committed with intent answered that Miguel was still in Malasin
on the part of the thief to profit by the having a drinking session with his (Ellasos')
act, and since he effectively deprived the father; 26 and Edgardo Galletes testified that at
true owner of the possession of the about 3:00 in the morning of April 3, 1992, he
entire automobile, the offense of larceny saw Ellasos and Obillo arrive by foot at the
comprised the whole car. The fact that Iglesia ni Cristo compound; when he asked the
the accused stripped the car of its tires two where they came from, they answered
and abandoned the machine in a distant "Muñoz". 27 Between the self-serving
part of the city did not make the testimony of the accused-appellant and the
appellant any less liable for the larceny positive testimonies of the two witnesses
of that automobile. The deprivation of negating the former, we have no cogent reason
the owner and the trespass upon his right to disturb the trial court's finding giving more
of possession were complete as to the credence to the latter.
7
UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS
COLLEGE OF LAW
Reporters: Dianelle Sembrero, Mark Solaña, Reyar Seno, Angelika Vega

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10883


An Act Providing for a New Anti-Carnapping Law of the Philippines
(Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, [July 17, 2016])

3. On the matter of conviction of the accused


based on circumstantial evidence, the following
requisites need to be satisfied: (1) there must be
more than one circumstance; (2) the facts from
which the inferences are derived are proven; and
(3) the combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond a
reasonable doubt. Or, as jurisprudentially
formulated, a judgment of conviction based on
circumstantial evidence can be upheld only if
the circumstances proven constitute "an
unbroken chain which leads to one fair and
reasonable conclusion which points to the
defendant, to the exclusion of all others, as the
guilty person, i.e. the circumstances proved
must be consistent with each other, consistent
with the hypothesis that the accused is guilty,
and at the same time inconsistent with any other
hypothesis except that of guilty."
A careful perusal of the transcript of the testimonies of
witnesses for both the prosecution and the defense shows
adequate evidentiary bases to establish the aforementioned
circumstances. The unbroken chain of these proven
circumstances inevitably point to only one conclusion —
that the accused Obillo and Ellasos are guilty of
unlawfully taking the tricycle from its owner, Miguel de
Belen, and of killing the latter. This Court has held that
"[i]n the absence of an explanation of how one has come
into the possession of stolen effects belonging to a person
wounded and treacherously killed, he must necessarily be
considered the author of the aggression and death of the
said person and of the robbery committed on him." The
court a quo, thus, committed no error in convicting the
accused beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of
circumstantial evidence.

You might also like