materials and to go back before dawn to which both employees complied.The same morning, the Police of Ozamis city received a dispatch, informing them of the two trucks who did not stop at the check point. Upon receiving the report, selected police officers boarded their patrol vehicle and went to the terminal in Ozamis City. The trucks were flagged down but the same only sped away, making the police officerschase and block the trucks to stop and interrogated the driver who did not answer, causing the police officers to become suspicious of the truck’s contents.Upon inspection, the police officers discovered piles of sawn lumber beneath the cement bags in both trucks. The drivers were asked for permits but they could not produce any. Thus, they were brought and turned over for investigation while the other truck men, Bertodazo, Arante and Lopez were not investigated. Ong was then informed of the incident while his employees remained detained.The information about the apprehended drivers reached DENR and sent people to investigate. Ong was discovered to be the owner and the investigation showed that there were 229 pieces of lumber with a total volume of 6,232.46board feet in the first Nissan truck; and, in the Isuzu eight-wheeler truck, 333 pieces of lumber with a total volume of 5,095.5 board feet. Consequently, the lumber and the vehicles were seized upon the order of the DENR RegionalExecutive Director.Another information was filed against Nestor Ong, Sumagang, Lolong Bertodazo and petitioner Tigoy for possessionof forest products without legal permit. Ong and petitioner Tigoy entered pleas of not guilty during the arraignment. Sumagang died after the case was filed while the other co-accused, Lolong Bertodazo, was not arrested and has remained at large.RTC:Ong and Tigoy were found guilty beyond reasonable dobut of possession of dipterocarp lumber without legal documents and penalized as qualified theft.CA:Ong was acquitted for insufficiency of evidence. The conviction of Tigoy is upheld and affirmed in all respects.On March 24, 2000, petitioner filed with the Court of Appeals a Motion for Reconsideration praying for his acquittal but the same was denied on August 23, 2000.ISSUE:Whether or not petitioner Tigoy is guilty of conspiracy in possessing or transporting lumber without the necessary permit in violation of the Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines.[YES].RULING:Made by: 카이
5There are two ways of violating Section 68 of the Revised Forestry Code:1)by cutting, gathering and/or collecting timber or other forest products without a license; and,2)by possessing timber or other forest products without the required legal documents.In offenses considered as mala prohibita or when the doing of an act is prohibited by a special law such as in the present case, the commission of the prohibited act is the crime itself. It is sufficient that the offender has the intentto perpetrate the act prohibited by the special law, and that it is done knowingly and consciously.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 9 pages?
- Summer '17
- Law, Supreme Court of the United States, Appellate court, forest products