Case: eop|e v. Iab|na| (SS SCkA 607), Iebruary 27, 1974 (G.k No.

L-30061)
IAC1S LAln1lll-ALLLLLS: 1he eople of Lhe hlllpplnes

uLlLnuAn1-ALLLAn1: !ose !ablnal ? Carmen

Appeal from Lhe Munlclpal CourL of 8aLangas ln Crlmlnal Case no. 889
whlch found Lhe uefendanL gullLy of lllegal ossesslon of llrearm and
AmmunlLlon and senLenced hlm Lo lmprlsonmenL.

lalnLlff clalmed LhaL Lhe verdlcL from Lhe Munlclpal CourL of 8aLangas
should be susLalned based on Sec. 878 and Sec. 879 as amended by AcL
no. 4, 8evlsed AdmlnlsLraLlve enal Code). lL was menLloned LhaL 1he
law cannoL be any clearer. no provlslon ls made for a secreL agenL. As
such, he ls noL exempL."

1he uefendanL's sLand was LhaL such rullng was unconsLlLuLlonal and
he was enLlLled Lo an exoneraLlon as alLhough he had no permlL, Pe
clalmed LhaL on Lhe uecember 10Lh, 1962 and March 13, 1964,
respecLlvely, he was appolnLed by Cov. lellclano LevlsLe as a SecreL
AgenL (rovlnclal Covernor of 8aLangas) and a ConfldenLlal AgenL (C
rovlnclal Commander) and Lhe sald appolnLmenLs expressly carrled
wlLh Lhem Lhe auLhorlLy Lo possess and carry Lhe flrearm ln quesLlon

ISSULS 1he valldlLy of !ablnal's convlcLlon based on a reLroacLlve appllcaLlon of
Cur rullng ln eople v. Mapa (1967). Cr wlll !ablnal be acqulLLed on Lhe
basls of Cur rullngs ln eople v. Macarandang (1939) and eople v.
Lucero (1938)
LAWS Sec. 878, as amended by 8epubllc AcL no. 4, 8evlsed AdmlnlsLraLlve
Code: lL shall be unlawful for any person Lo.possess any flrearm,
deLached parLs of flrearms or ammunlLlon Lherefor, or any lnsLrumenL
of lmplemenL used or lnLended Lo be used ln Lhe manufacLure of
flrearms, or ammunlLlon."

nexL secLlon: flrearms and ammunlLlon regularly and lawfully lssued
Lo offlcers, soldlers, sallors, or marlnes (of Lhe Al), Lhe hlllpplne
ConsLabulary, guards ln Lhe employmenL of 8ureau of rlsons,
munlclpal pollce, provlnclal Covernors, lleuLenanL governors, provlnclal
Lreasurers, munlclpal Lreasurers, munlclpal mayors, and guards of
provlnclal prlsoners and [alls" are noL covered when such flrearms are
ln possesslon of such offlclals and publlc servanLs for use ln
performance of Lhelr offlclal duLles" (Sec. 879, 8evlsed AdmlnlsLraLlve
enal Code.) (eople v. Mapa)

Clvll Code of Lhe hlllpplnes, ArL.8 of Lhe new Clvll Code: !udlclal
declslons applylng or lnLerpreLlng Lhe laws of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon shall
form parL of Lhe legal sysLem of Lhe hlllpplnes.


nCLDINGS 1he defendanL was appolnLed as SecreL AgenL (by Lhe rovlnclal
CovernmenL) and ConfldenLlal AgenL (by Lhe rovlnclal Commander) ln
1962 and 1964 respecLlvely. 1he prevalllng docLrlne or rullng was
followed ln eople v. Macarandang (1939) and eople v. Lucero (1938).
1he declslon ln reverslng Lhe menLloned docLrlne for eople v. Mapa
came only ln 1967.

ueclslons of Lhe CourL may noL be laws, buL Lhey are lnLerpreLaLlons or
evldence of whaL Lhe laws mean. 1hls ls ln llne wlLh ArL. 8 of Lhe new
Clvll Code. 1hls basls of [udgemenL as supporLed by numerous
auLhorlLles ls a resLaLemenL of Lhe legal maxlm legls lnLerpreLaLlo legls
vlm obLlneL" or Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon placed upon wrlLLen law by a
compeLenL courL has Lhe force of law.

1he Llme LhaL Lhe defendanL was found ln possesslon of Lhe flrearm ln
quesLlon and when he was arralgned by Lhe Lrlal courL, colncldes wlLh
Lhe prevalllng docLrlne (aL LhaL Llme) whlch was lald on Lucero and
Macarandang as parL of Lhe [urlsprudence even lf Lhls docLrlne was
overruled ln Lhe Mapa case ln 1967. 1he defendanL or appellanL may
noL be punlshed for an acL whlch aL Lhe Llme lL was done was held noL L
be punlshable.