3/16/2017 G.R.No.

193833

SECONDDIVISION

PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES, G.R.No.193833
PlaintiffAppellee,
Present:

CARPIO,J.,Chairperson,
BRION,
versus PEREZ,
SERENO,and
REYES,JJ.

PO1FROILANL.TRESTIZA,

P/SINSP.LORIEMAN*L.MANRIQUE,

andRODIEJ.PINEDA@Buboy,

Accused.

PO1FROILANL.TRESTIZA, Promulgated:

AccusedAppellant. November16,2011

xx

DECISION

CARPIO,J.:

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 1/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

TheCase

G.R.No.193833isanappeal1fromtheDecision2promulgatedon30June2009aswellasthe
Resolution3promulgatedon11June2010bytheCourtofAppeals(appellatecourt)inCAG.R.
CR.HC.No.03119.Theappellatecourtaffirmedthe24July2007JointDecision4ofBranch143
oftheRegionalTrialCourtofMakatiCity(trialcourt)inCriminalCaseNos.023393for
Kidnapping(forRansom),03766forRobbery,and041311alsoforRobbery.

ThetrialcourtfoundappellantPO1FroilanL.Trestiza(Trestiza)guiltybeyondreasonabledoubtas
principalbydirectparticipationofthecrimeofKidnappingforRansomunderArticle267ofthe
RevisedPenalCode,asamendedbySection8ofRepublicActNo.7659(RA7659),andsentenced
himtosufferthepenaltyofreclusionperpetuaandtopaydamagestoIrmaNavarro(Navarro)and
LawrenceYu(Yu).P/Insp.LoriemanL.Manrique(Manrique)andRodiePinedayJimenez
(Pineda)werelikewisefoundguiltyofthesamecrimebythetrialcourt,andadjudgedthesame
sentenceasTrestiza.ThetrialcourtacquittedTrestiza,ManriqueandPinedainCriminalCaseNos.
03766and041311.

TheFacts

ThefollowingchargeswerebroughtagainstTrestiza,ManriqueandPinedaon20November2002:

CriminalCaseNo.023393forKidnapping

Thatonoraboutthe7thdayofNovember2002,intheCityofMakati,MetroManila,Philippinesand
withinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,PO1FroilanTrestizayLacson
andP/SInsp.LoriemarL.Manrique,bothactivemembersofthePhilippineNationalPolice,andRodie
PinedayJimenez,aprivateindividual[,]allofthemarmedwithfirearms,conspiring,confederatingand
mutuallyhelpingoneanotherwithonePO2[Reynel]Jose,amemberofthePhilippineNationalPolice,did
thenandtherewillfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslykidnapLawrenceYuyLimandMariaIrmaNavarro,or
otherwisedeprivethemoftheirlibertybythenandtherekidnapwithoutlegalgroundsforthepurposeof
extortingmoneyfortheirsafetyandimmediatereleaseasinfactsaidaccuseddemandedtheamountof
P1,000,000.00asransommoneyfromthem.

CONTRARYTOLAW.5

CriminalCaseNo.023394forIllegalPossessionofFirearmandAmmunitions

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 2/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Thatonoraboutthe16thdayofNovember2002,intheCityofMakati,MetroManila,Philippinesand
withinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,didthenandtherewillfully,
unlawfullyandfeloniouslyhaveinhispossession,custodyandcontrolone(1)PistolGlock21bearingSN
035481withthirteen(13)roundsofliveammunitionsandwithoutthecorrespondinglicenseorpermit
thereof,whichhecarriedoutsideofhisresidence.

CONTRARYTOLAW.6

On15April2004,TrestizawasacquittedofthecrimechargedinCriminalCaseNo.023394.7The
AffidavitofArreststatedthattheserialnumberofthefirearmseizedwas035481,whilethefirearm
itselfhadaserialnumberofBRG768.Thetrialcourtrejectedtheexplanationthatthedifference
betweentheserialnumberswasameretypographicalerror.

Anorder8ofthetrialcourtdated16April2004inCriminalCaseNos.023393,023394,03766
and041311recountedthecircumstancesinvolvedinthefilingofthechargesagainstTrestiza,
ManriqueandPineda.

CriminalCaseNo.023393forKidnappingagainstaccusedPO1FroilanTrestizayLacson(PO1
Trestiza),PS/Insp.LoriemarL.Manrique(PS/Insp.Manrique)andRodiePinedayJimenez(Pineda)and
CriminalCaseNo.023394forIllegalPossessionofFirearmsandAmmunitionsagainstaccusedPO1
TrestizaalonewerefiledbeforethisCourton20November2002.Surprisingly,however,SPO2[Reynel]
JosewasnotincludedasanaccusedintheKidnappingcasealthoughintheoriginalInformation,
ProsecutorAndresN.Marcosmentionshimassomeonewhomutuallyhelpedalltheotheraccusedinthe
willful,unlawful,feloniouskidnappingofprivatecomplainantsLawrenceYuyLim(Yu)andMa.Irma
Navarro(Navarro).AMotionforReinvestigationdated21November2002wasthenfiledbyallthree
accusedwhileaseparateMotionforReinvestigationand/orPreliminaryInvestigationdated22November
wasfiledbyaccusedPS/Insp.Manrique.

ThenActingPresidingJudgeSalvadorS.AbadSantosissuedtheOrderdated26November2002
grantingtheMotionsfiledbyallaccused.InthesaidOrder,hedirectedthePublicProsecutortoconducta
PreliminaryInvestigationofthecasesfiledandtofurnishtheCourtwithhisReportwithinsixty(60)days
fromsaiddate.

On21February2003,PublicProsecutorAndresN.MarcosfiledaMotiontoWithdrawInformationof
KidnappingwithRansomandtoAdmitInformationforRobberywithattachedResolutiondated03
January2008.Hepointedoutthereinthatafterheconductedapreliminaryinvestigation,hefoundno
probablecauseexiststowarranttheindictmentoftheaccusedforthecrimeofKidnappingwithRansom.
HeaddedthattheyshouldbechargedinsteadforthecrimesofRobberyandGraveThreats.TheCourtset
thehearingofthisMotionto06March2003.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 3/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

On03March2003,privatecomplainantsappearingthroughPrivateProsecutorTeresitaG.Oledanfiledan
UrgentMotiontoHoldWithdrawalofInformationforKidnappingChargewithEntryofAppearanceas
PrivateProsecutor.TheyallegedinsaidMotionthattheywerenotfurnishedclearandcertifiedtruecopies
oftheResolutiondated03January2003toenablethemtofiletheirOpposition/CommenttotheMotionto
Withdraw.

On05March2003,theBranchClerkofCourtofRTCMakatiBranch135sentaletterdated26
February2003addressedtotheBranchClerkofthisCourtostensiblytransmittingtheReleaseOrderof
PO1Trestizadated22February2003togetherwithotherpertinentdocumentsinconnectionwithCriminal
CaseNo.023394,whichwasdulyapprovedbytheHon.FranciscoB.Ibay,PresidingJudgeofsaid
Court.

TheOrderofReleasedated22February2003signedbyJudgeIbaydirectedtheJailWardenofMakati
PoliceStation,MakatiCitytodischargefromhiscustodythepersonofsaidaccusedasthelatterwasable
tofilethecorrespondingbailbondintheamountoftwohundredthousandpesos(PHP200,000.00)thru
thePlaridelSuretyandInsuranceCompanyprovidedthereexistsnoorderinanyothercasetothe
effectthatheshallremainconfinedunderyourcustody.Hesetthearraignmentoftheaccusedon14
March2003at8:30oclockinthemorning.

BeforethescheduledhearingoftheMotiontoWithdrawat2:00oclockintheafternoonof06March
2003,thePrivateProsecutorfiledherOppositiontheretoat1:30oclockintheafternoonofsaiddate.She
allegedthereinthatwhiletheMotiontoWithdrawfiledbyPublicProsecutorMarcospraysforthe
withdrawaloftheInformationforKidnappingwithRansomandthesubstitutionthereofwithanInformation
forRobbery,thelatterInformationwasfiledimmediatelywiththeCriminalCasesUnitoftheOfficeofthe
ClerkofCourtonthesamedatethattheMotiontoWithdrawwasfiledwiththisCourton21February
2003.Subsequently,saidInformationforRobberywasraffledtoRTCBranch57on03March2003yet
therewasascheduledhearingoftheMotiontoWithdrawon06March2003.Sheaddedthatthe
complainantswereinaquandarywhytheallegedsubstitutedInformationforRobberywasraffledto
anotherCourtanddocketedasCriminalCaseNo.03766,whenthisCourthasalreadyacquired
jurisdictionovertheoriginalcasesfiled.ThesamecasewasthereafterconsolidatedwiththisCourton26
March2003asperOrderdated24March2003renderedbytheHonorableReinatoG.Quilala,Presiding
Judgethereat.AccusedPS/Insp.Manrique,PO1Trestiza,andPinedapostedbailinthiscase,whichwas
dulyapprovedbyJudgeIbay,whileaccusedSPO2JosesbailwasapprovedbyJudgeNapoleonE.
Inoturan,PresidingJudgeofRTCBranch133.

AtthehearingtotheMotiontoWithdraw,thenActingPresidingJudgeAbadSantosgavecounselforthe
accusedtimewithinwhichtofilehiscomment/objectiontotheUrgentMotiontoHoldWithdrawalof
InformationforKidnappingfiledbytheprivatecomplainants,furnishingthePrivateProsecutoracopy
thereof,whowasgiventhesamenumberofdaystofileherReply,ifnecessary.TheCourtlikewiseordered
the
recommitmentofallthree(3)accused,whowerethenpresentatthathearing,tothecustodyofthe

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 4/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

MakatiCityJaildespitethefactthattheyhavealreadypostedbail,consideringthattheMotionto
Withdrawwasstillpendingresolution.

CounselfortheaccusedfiledhisCommenttotheOppositiondated10March2003allegingthatthesame
didnotbeartheconformityofthePublicProsecutorwhohasdirectcontrolandsupervisionoverthe
PrivateProsecutorasprovidedforundertheRulesofCriminalProcedure.SaidComment,tohismind,is
thusamerescrapofpaperwhichdidnotdeserveanyconsiderationbytheCourt.

On13March2003,theCourtwasfurnishedbytheprivatecomplainantsacopyoftheirMotionfor
ReconsiderationoftheResolutiondatedJanuary03,2003butReleasedonFebruary20,2003whichthey
filedwiththeOfficeoftheCityProsecutorofMakatiCity.

xxx

On29May2003,accusedPO1TrestizaandPS/Insp.ManriquefiledanUrgentMotiontoResolve
MotionforWithdrawalofOriginalInformationclaimingthatsaidOriginalInformationshavesubsequently
beenamendedbythePublicProsecutorsOfficeandjustneedsthecourt/judge[s]approvaloftheMotion
toWithdrawComplaintandforAdmissionoftheAmendedInformation.Moreover,theyaverredthatthe
CityProsecutorsOfficehasapprovedthefindingsofthereinvestigatingAssistantCityProsecutoronthe
downgradingoftheoriginalcomplaint.Bothaccusedprayedthatsaidmotionbeheardon28May2003.

On9June2003,thePrivateProsecutorfiledanExParteOppositiontoAccusedsMotionforWithdrawal
ofOriginalInformationwithMotionforIssuanceoftheWarrantofArrestagainstaccusedSPO2Jose.She
allegedthereinthatitistruethatoneoftheaccusedsrightistherighttospeedytrial.However,where,asin
thiscase,thestenchofsomethingfishyalreadywasevidentwhensuddenlytherobberycaseasamended
byProsecutorMarcosandmorerecentlyaffirmedbyProsecutorSibucao,thereshouldbefurtherindepth
investigationasthecircumstancesonhowthethreeaccusedwereabletopostbailwithouttheknowledge
andapprovalofthisHonorableCourt,whichhadalreadyacquiredjurisdictionoverthecase.Infact,a
PetitionforReviewfromtheResolutionofProsecutorSibucaodenyingthePrivateComplainantsMotion
forReconsiderationofthe03January2003ResolutionofProsecutorMarcosdulyapprovedbytheCity
Prosecutorhasbeenseasonablyfiled.Shefurtherallegedthat,theUrgentMotionallegedlyfiledby
accusedPO1TrestizaandPS/Insp.ManriquedoesnotincludeaccusedSPO2Jose,alsoamemberofthe
PoliceForce.However,therecordsshowthatthelatteralsopostbailfortheRobberycaseandwasinfact
outsidetheChamberofthisHonorableCourtwhenthehearingwasbeingconducted.However,whenshe
wentouttolookforhim,SPO2JosewasabletodoaHoudinianddisappearedfromview.Private
ProsecutorOledanprayedforthedefermentoftheproceedingshereinuntilthefinalresolutionofthe
PetitionforReview.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 5/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

ReferringbacktotheUrgentMotiontoResolvebyaccusedPO1TrestizaandPS/Insp.Manrique,
consideringthatthelatterprayedforittobeheardon28May2003,butfiledsaidMotionthefollowing
dayonly,thesamewasthensetforhearingon10June2003.Onthesamedate,thePrivateProsecutor
furnishedtheCourtacopyoftheirPetitionforReviewwhichtheyfiledwiththeDepartmentofJustice.In
themeantime,theBranchClerkofthisCourtissuedaCertificationtotheeffectthatActingPresidingJudge
AbadSantoswasonofficialleaveuntil15July2003andthatthereisanUrgentMotiontoberesolved.
PairingJudgeManuelD.Victorio,actingontheUrgentMotion,issuedtheOrderofevendatedirectingthe
CityProsecutionOfficetosubmittotheCourtthecompleterecordsofitsPreliminaryInvestigationwithin
five(5)daysfromnotice,thereafterthesameshallbeconsideredforresolution.

On23June2003,accusedPO1TrestizafiledanExParteMotionforEarlyResolutionofthePending
MotiontoResolve,reiteratingthegroundsstatedinhispreviousMotion.

BeforetheissuecouldberesolvedbythePairingJudge,however,theHonorableEstelaPerlasBernabe,
tookoverthisCourtasAssistingPresidingJudge,aftertheHonorableSalvadorS.AbadSantosrequested
theSupremeCourttoberelievedofhisassignmentherein.JudgeBernabeissuedtheOrderdated27June
2003holdinginabeyancetheResolutionoftheProsecutionsMotiontoWithdrawInformationforaperiod
ofsixty(60)daysfromthefilingofthePetitionforReviewbyprivatecomplainantswiththeReviewing
Office.On08July2003,shedeniedtheMotiontoDismissCriminalCaseNo.023394forIllegal
PossessionofFirearmsfiledagainstaccusedPO1Trestizaonthegroundsthattheallegationsraisedby
saidaccusedaredefensesproperfordeterminationinafullblowntrialandsetthepretrialofthesameto
24July2003.TrialonthemeritsforthisparticularCriminalCaseensueduntiltheProsecutionrestedits
caseandsaidaccusedfiledhisDemurrertoEvidenceon05March2004.

Inthemeantime,withoutanywordyetastotheoutcomeofthePetitionforReviewfiledwiththeDOJ
relativetoCriminalCaseNo.023393,JudgeBernabeissuedtheOrderdated28August2003,directing
theCityProsecutionOfficetoconductareassessmentandreevaluationoftheevidencepresentedandto
submititsreportandrecommendationwithinaperiodofthirty(30)daysfromreceiptofsaidOrder.The
ResolutionofthesubjectMotionwasagainheldinabeyance.

On02March2004,theProsecutionfiledaMotiontoResolve(MotiontoWithdrawInformationof
Kidnapping)withattachedOrderdated19February2004.Itallegedthereinthatitconductedathorough
reassessmentandreevaluationoftheevidenceobtaininginthiscaseincompliancewiththeOrderofthis
Courtdated28August2003andmaintainsthatthecorrectandappropriatechargestobefiledagainst
accusedshouldbeforROBBERYandGRAVETHREATSbutfortwo(2)countseach,andNOTfor
KIDNAPPINGasinitiallyfiled.Thus,itprayedforthisCourttobeallowedtowithdrawthepresent
InformationforKidnappingconsideringthattheappropriatechargesoftwo(2)countsofRobberyandtwo
(2)countsofGraveThreatsinlieuofthechargeofKIDNAPPINGhavealreadybeenfiledwiththeproper
Courts.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 6/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

TojustifytheProsecutionswithdrawaloftheInformationforKIDNAPPING,PublicProsecutorEdgardo
G.Hirangstates,intheOrderattachedtothesaidMotion,that,towit:

Acarefulreevaluationofthepiecesofevidenceadducedbybothpartiesshowsthattheoffenseof
Kidnappingshallnotprosperagainstalltheaccused.AscorrectlystatedintheResolutionissued
onFebruary20,2003,oneoftheessentialelementsforthecrimeofKidnappingforRansom
definedandpenalizedunder[Article]267oftheRevisedPenalCode,asamended,isthat[the]
offendermustbeaprivateindividualwhichdoesnotobtaininthecaseatbarasrespondents
Trestiza,Manrique,andJosearepublicofficersbeingpoliceofficerswhoatthetimethe
complainantswereallegedlydivestedoftheircashmoneyandpersonalbelongingsbyherein
respondents,wereconductingapoliceoperationtoenforcetheprovisionoftheDangerousDrug
Law(R.A.9165).

Allaccusedwereintheplaceoftheincidenttoconductsuchoperationisshownnotonlybythe
existenceofcoordinationbetweenthemandthepoliceauthoritiesbutalsobythedeclarationofthe
complainantsthattheywereabletoverifytheplatenumberofthevehicleoftheaccusedfromthe
MakatiPoliceStation.

Hence,theyshouldbechargedwiththeoffenseofRobberyunderArticle294,paragraph5ofthe
RevisedPenalCodeandGraveThreatsasrecommendedbythisOfficeinitsResolutionissuedon
February20,2003.Consideringthattherearetwo(2)complainants,therespondentsshouldbe
chargedwithtwo(2)countsofRobberyandGraveThreats.

TheProsecutionfiledonthesamedateaMotiontoAmendInformationandtoAdmitAttachedAmended
InformationinCriminalCaseNo.02766allegingthattheCriminalInformationthereinforRobberyshould
onlybelimitedtoprivatecomplainantYuscomplaintandnottoNavarros.Counselfortheaccused,Atty.
JoseMa.Q.Austria,filedanUrgentMotiontocalendarthehearingoftheMotiontoAmendInformation
andtoAdmitAmendedInformationwhichtheCourtgrantedinitsOrderdated25March2004.

Inthemeantime,CriminalCaseNo.041311forRobberywhichwasfiledonthestrengthofthe
ComplaintofNavarrowasconsolidatedwithsimilarcasespendingbeforethisCourt,upontheOrder
dated12March2004bytheHonorableMa.CristinaJ.Cornejo,PresidingJudgeofRTCBranch147.

Afterstudy,theCourtresolvesto:

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 7/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

1.DENYtheMotiontoWithdrawInformationforKidnappingunderCriminalCaseNo.023393

2.To[sic]GRANTtheMotiontoAmendInformationforRobbery[and]

3.To[sic]HoldinAbeyancetheIssuanceoftheWarrantofArrestagainstSPO2JoseinCriminalCase
No.023393untilaftertheInformationrelativetheretoshallhavebeendulyamendedbytheProsecution.

InitsMotiontoWithdrawInformationforKidnapping,thePublicProsecutorarguesinessencethatthe
crimeofKidnappingcouldnotbepossiblycommittedbytheaccusedasthey,exceptforone,arepolice
officers,whoatthetimethecomplainantsweredivestedofcashandotherpersonalbelongingswere
conductingapoliceoperationtoenforcetheprovisionsoftheDangerousDrugsLaw.Thistothemindof
themovantrunscountertotheprovisionsofArt.267oftheRevisedPenalCodewhichprovidesthatany
privateindividualwhoshallkidnapordetainanother,orinanyothermannerdeprivehimofhisliberty,shall
sufferthepenaltyofreclusionperpetuatodeath:

1.Ifthekidnappingordetentionshallhavelastedmorethanthreedays

2.Ifitshallhavecommittedsimulatingpublicauthority

3.Ifanyseriousphysicalinjuriesshallhavebeeninflicteduponthepersonkidnappedordetained,orif
threatstokillhimshallhavebeenmade

4.Ifthepersonkidnappedordetainedshallbeaminor,exceptwhentheaccusedisanyoftheparents,
femaleorapublicofficer.

TheCourtfindsthisunmeritorious.Evenapublicofficercancommitthesaidcrimewithinthecontextofthe
aforesaidlegalprovision.ThisissettledinourjurisprudenceinthecaseofPeoplevs.ALIPIO
SANTIANO,JOSESANDIGAN,etal.(GRNo.123979[,]December3,1998)whichprovidesinpart:

ThefactalonethatappellantPillnetaisanorganicmemberoftheNARCOMandappellant
SandiganamemberofthePNPwouldnotexemptthemfromthecriminalliabilityofkidnapping.It
isquiteclearthatinabductingandtakingawaythevictim,appellantsdidsoneitherinfurtheranceof
officialfunctionsnorinthepursuitofauthorityvestedinthem.Itisnot,infine,inrelationtotheir
office,butinpurelyprivatecapacitythattheyhaveactedinconcertwiththeircoappellantSantiano
andChanco.

Evenaneminentjurist,JusticeFlorenzB.Regaladoelucidatesonthispointclearly:

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 8/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Thisarticleprovidesthatthecrimesofkidnappingandseriousillegaldetentionarecommittedby
privateindividualsobviouslybecauseiftheoffenderisapublicofficerthecrimeisarbitrary
detentionunderArt.124,butpassingsubsilentioonthematterofkidnapping.Itshouldbe
understoodhowever,thatthepublicofficerwhounlawfullydetainsanotherandispunishableby
Art.124isonewhohasthedutytoapprehendapersonwithacorrelativepowertodetainhim.If
heisonlyanemployeewithclericalorpostalfunctions,althoughtheCodeconsidershimasa
publicofficer,hisdetentionofthevictimisillegaldetentionunderthisarticlesinceheisactingina
private,andnotanofficial,capacity.Ifapolicemankidnapsthevictim,exceptwhenlegally
authorizedaspartofpoliceoperations,hecannotalsobesaidtobeactinginanofficialcapacity,
henceheistobetreatedasaprivateindividualliableunderthisarticle.(underscoringours)

FromthepurposeandtheformulationofR.A.18andR.A.1084,itcanbededucedthatthe
legislativeintendmentwastoputallformsofkidnappingunderArt.267whenCongressamendedit
togetherwithArt.270.Thereappearstohavebeensomeoversight,however,intherelatedarticles
andthesewillbediscussedattheproperjuncture.(FlorenzB.Regalado,Pages488and489,
CriminalLawConspectus,FirstEdition,March2000)

Astowhetherornottheaccusedwereindeedengagedintheperformanceofalegitimatepoliceoperation
atthetimetheprivatecomplainantswereallegedlydeprivedoftheirlibertyandpersonalbelongingsisa
matterwhichatthisstagecanonlybeconsideredasadefensethatcallsforfurtherfactualsupportinthe
courseofjudicialproceedings.WasthereaMissionOrder?Aretheredocumentstoshowthatpoliceto
policecoordinationswereindeedmade?Aretherecorroborationstotheseclaimswhetherdocumentaryor
testimonial?Theneedforfurtherevidencesupportiveofthisclaimgainssignificanceinthelightofthe
emphaticassertionstothecontrarybytheprivatecomplainantsandtheirwitnesses.

AsthereappearstobeprobablecausefortheinclusionofaccusedSPO2JoseinCriminalCaseNo.02
3393forKidnappingconsideringthatthelatterwasspecificallymentionedinthebodyoftheInformationas
someonewhoconspired,confederatedandmutuallyhelpedtheotheraccusedinthiscase,theCourt
resolvestoawaitfortheProsecutiontoamendthesamebeforeissuingaWarrantofArrestagainstsaid
accused.

Lastly,theCourtfindsthesoughtamendmentoftheInformationforRobberytobewelltaken.

WHEREFORE,premisesconsidered,theCourtresolvesto:

1.DENYtheMotiontoWithdrawInformationforKidnapping[underCriminalCaseNo.023393]

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 9/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

2.GRANTtheMotiontoAmendInformationforRobbery

3.HoldinabeyancetheIssuanceoftheWarrantofArrestagainstaccusedSPO2JoseinCriminalCase
No.023393untilaftertheInformationrelativetheretoshallhavebeendulyamendedbytheProsecution.

Setthesecasesforarraignmenton27April2004at8:30oclockinthemorning.TheAmendedInformation
forRobberydulyattachedintheMotionisherebyADMITTED.

SOORDERED.

Atty.JoseMa.Q.Austria(Atty.Austria)withdrewascounselforManriqueandPineda.Atty.
AustriaalsomanifestedthathewouldfileanOmnibusMotionrelativetothe16April2004Orderof
thetrialcourt.Thearraignmentwasresetto25May2004,9whichwasfurtherresetto28June
2004,1019July2004,1123August2004,12andfinallyon31August2004.13

Atty.AustriafiledhisOmnibusMotionforTrestiza:motionforreconsiderationofthe16April2004
Order,motiontoquashtheinformations,andmotiontoallowTrestizatopostbail.14Complainants
opposedtheOmnibusMotion.15Thecorrespondingreply16andrejoinder17werealsofiled.Inits19
August2004Order,18thetrialcourtdeniedtheOmnibusMotion.Itruledthatthetrialcourthasthe
authoritytodenyaMotiontoWithdrawInformationrelativetoacriminalcasefiledbeforeit.
Moreover,thequashaloftheinformationsagainsttheaccusedgoesintothedeterminationofthe
natureofthearrest,which,inturn,goesintothemeritsofthecase.Finally,thechargeof
kidnappingisanonbailableoffense.

Whenthecasewascalledforarraignment,Trestiza,ManriqueandPinedaallpleadednotguiltyto
thefollowingcharges:

CriminalCaseNo.023393:

Thatonoraboutthe7thdayofNovember2002,intheCityofMakati,MetroManila,
PhilippinesandwithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,
PO1FroilanTrestizayLacsonandP/SInsp.LoriemarL.Manrique,bothactivemembersof
thePhilippineNationalPolice,andRodiePinedayJimenez,aprivateindividual[,]allof
themarmedwithfirearms,conspiring,confederatingandmutuallyhelpingoneanotherwith
onePO2ReynelJose,amemberofthePhilippineNationalPolice,didthenandthere
willfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslykidnapLawrenceYuyLimandMariaIrmaNavarro,or
otherwisedeprivethemoftheirlibertybythenandtherekidnapwithoutlegalgroundsfor
thepurposeofextortingmoneyfortheirsafetyandimmediatereleaseasinfactsaid
accuseddemandedtheamountofP1,000,000.00asransommoneyfromthem.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 10/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

CONTRARYTOLAW.

CriminalCaseNo.03766:

Thatonoraboutthe7thdayofNovember2002,intheCityofMakati,MetroManila,
Philippines,aplacewithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamed
accused,PO1FroilanTrestizayLacsonandP/SInsp.LoriemarL.Manrique,PO2Reynel
Jose,allactivemembersofthePhilippineNationalPolice,andRodiePinedayJimenez,a
privateindividual[,]allofthemarmedwithfirearms,conspiring,confederatingand
mutuallyhelpingoneanotherwithintenttogainbymeansofforceandviolenceor
intimidation,didthenandtherewillfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslyrobanddivestLawrence
YuyLimandMariaIrmaNavarroofthefollowingitemstowit:

a.One(1)pieceofnecklace(gold)withpendantamountingtoP50,000.00

b.Two(2)piecesbracelet(gold)worthmoreorlessP70,000.00

c.One(1)RolexwatchworthP270,000.00

d.One(1)mensringworthP15,000.00

e.Two(2)cellphone[s]describedasNokia9210&3310

f.One(1)PhilipChariole[sic]watchworthP150,000.00

g.One(1)PhilipChariole[sic]braceletworthP75,000.00

h.One(1)solodiamondstudded[sic](3K)worthP500,000.00

i.One(1)womensringgoldworthP12,000.00

j.One(1)necklacegold[sic]worthP20,000.00

k.One(1)[sic]cellphone[s]describedasNokia7650&8855and,

l.CashmoneyamountingtomoreorlessP300,000.00

tothedamageandprejudiceofthesaidcomplainants.

CONTRARYTOLAW.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 11/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

CriminalCaseNo.041311:

Thatonoraboutthe7thdayofNovember2002,intheCityofMakati,MetroManila,
PhilippinesaplacewithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamed
accused,conspiring,confederatingtogetherandmutuallyhelpingandaidingoneanother,
withintentofgainandbymeansofforceandviolenceorintimidation,didthenandthere
willfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslyrobanddivestIrmaMariaA.Navarroofthefollowing
itemstowit:

a.One(1)Chariol(sic)watch

b.One(1)Goldring

c.One(1)Chariol(sic)bracelet

d.One(1)pairdiamondearring(sic)

e.One(1)goldnecklace

f.One(1)cellphone7650Nokia

g.One(1)cellphone8855Nokia

h.CashmoneyamountingtoP120,000.00

tothedamageandprejudiceofthecomplainant.

CONTRARYTOLAW.19

Thetrialcourtsetthecaseforpretrialconferenceon14September2004,20whichwasresetto20
September2004.21Thepartiesstipulatedonthefollowing:

1.ThatonNovember7,2002,thethree(3)accused,Trestiza,ManriqueandPinedawereusingan
Adventurevanwithplateno.XAU298

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 12/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

2.ThatLoriemarManriquewastheteamleaderofthegroupcomprising[sic]ofRodiePinedaandReynel
JoseonNovember7,2002

3.ThattheincidentstartedattheHotelInterconlocatedinMakatiCity

4.ThatLoriemarManriqueisamemberofthePNPDrugEnforcementAgency

5.ThataccusedFroilanTrestizawasthedriveroftheAdventurevanbearingplateno.XAU298on
November17,2002

6.Thataftertheoperationwasconducted,therewasneveranyoccasionthattheaccusedFroilanTrestiza
communicatedwithanyofthecomplainants

7.NoneoftheitemsallegedlylostbythecomplainantswererecoveredfromaccusedFroilanTrestiza.22

Thetrialcourtsummarizedthetestimoniesduringtrialasfollows:

Theprosecutionsoughttoestablishitscasebypresentingthefollowingwitnesses:Ma.IrmaA.Navarro,
LawrenceYuyLim,PO2RodolfoSantiago,PO3RosauroP.Almonte,JohnPaulJosephP.Suguitan,
AngeloGonzales,PO3EdwardC.Ramos,SchneiderR.Vivas,PSInsp.SalvadorV.Caro,andChief
Insp.RosellerFabian.

TheProsecutionsmainevidencereliesheavilyupontheaccountsofIrmaandLawrencewhotestified
respectivelyasfollows:

OnNovember7,2002ataboutoneoclockinthemorning,IrmaandherboyfriendLawrence,both
twentytwo(22)yearsoldatthetimeoftheincident,wereattheWhereElseDiscoinMakatiattendinga
party.Theystayedthereatforaroundthirty(30)minutesonly.Irmahowever,wentoutaheadofLawrence.
WhenshewasabouttoproceedtowhereLawrencesHondaESIcarwasparked,shenoticedthatthe
saidcarwasblockedbyanothervehiclewhichwasaMitsubishiAdventurevan.Three(3)armedmenlater
onemergedfromthesaidvan.AsshewasabouttoopenthedooroftheHondaESI,somebodyhitherin
[sic]thenape.Whensheturnedherback,shesawthethree(3)meninthecompanyofRodiePinedaalias
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 13/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Buboy(Pineda).SheknewPinedabecausethelatterwashersisterCynthiaskumpare,Pinedabeingthe
godfatherofCynthiaschild.Furthermore,shesawPinedaintheirresidencethenightofNovember6,2002
ashevisitedhis[sic]sister.SheaskedPinedawhatwashappeningbutthelatterrepliedpasensyana,
mare,trabaholang(Bearwithme,mare,thisisjustajob).

Shewastoldthatthethree(3)whoseidentitiesshelateronlearnedasCapt.LoriemanManrique,PO2
ReynelJoseandPO1FroilanTrestiza,werepolicemen.Sheaskedwhyshewasbeingaccostedbutshe
washandcuffedbyManrique.ShewasusheredinsidetheHondaESI.PinedaaskedherwhereLawrence
wasbutshewasleftinsidethecarwithJosewhilePineda,TrestizaandManriqueontheotherhandwent
awayapparentlytolookforLawrence.PinedaandManriquelateronwentbackinsidetheHondaESI.
TheydrovelaterwithJosebehindthewheels[sic]whilePinedaoccupiedthepassengerseat.They
followedtheMitsubishiAdventurevanwhichwasthendrivenbyTrestiza.UnknowntoIrma,Lawrence
wasalreadyinsidethevanatthetime.Theyjustdroveanddrovearound(umiikot),passingthroughsmall
alleysastheyavoidedmajorroutes.ShewasaskedlaterbyPinedatoremoveherjewelry.Shewasableto
removeonlyherearringsasshewasinhandcuffs.PinedahimselfremovedherPhilipChariolle[sic]watch
andbracelet.Hernecklaceandringfollowed.AllthesewerelateronturnedoverbyPinedatoManrique.
HerbagwhereherwalletcontainingtheamountofP120,000.00waslikewisetaken.

Hertwo(2)cellphones,a7650andan8855,werelikewisetakenbyPineda.Theystoppedseveraltimes
atthesidestreetsandtheaccusedwouldtalktoeachother.Pinedawouldstaywithherinsidethevehicle
whileJosewouldgooutandtalktotheoccupantsoftheMitsubishiAdventure.Lateron,sheand
LawrencewerebroughttogetherinsidetheMitsubishiAdventurevan.Itwastherethattheyweretoldthat
theywillnotbereleasediftheywillnotbeabletoproduceonemillionpesos.Thesewereallutteredby
JoseandManrique.ItwassomewhereinBlumentritt,SanJuanwherealltheaccusedstoppedforthelast
time.Shewascryingallthewhile.

Shelateronfeltthecallofnature,promptinghertoaskpermissionifshecouldpossiblyrelieveherself.She
wasaccompaniedbyPinedatoanearbyShellgasstationinSanJuan.Whentheyreturnedtowherethey
stopped,shewasaskedastowhomshecouldpossiblycallsothatthemoneythattheaccusedwere
askingwillbeproduced.TheaccusedlateronaskedLawrencetomakeacallusinghiscellphonewith
speakerphone.LawrencewasabletogetintouchwithhisfriendsJohnPaulSuguitanandAngelo
Gonzales.ThelatterwastoldthatLawrencefiguredinanaccidentandthatheneedsmoneybadly.
LawrenceandhisfriendsagreedthatthemoneythetwowillproducewillbebroughttotheCaltexgas
stationalongOrtigascornerWilsonStreetinGreenhills.Theyproceededtothesaidplacelaterwherethey
waitedforthefriendsofLawrence.ShewastoldlaterbyManriquethatshebetterpraythatthetransaction
pushesthrough.Manriquefurtherwarnedheragainstreportingtheincidenttoanyonelestherwholefamily
willbeheldliable.Shewasevenshownbytheaccusedthepictureofherchild.ShewascursedbyJose.
TrestizaontheotherhandtoldherthatLawrencestransactionshouldbetterpushthrough.

Thetwo,JohnPaulSuguitanandAngeloGonzales,lateronarrivedatthegasstation.Lawrencetookfrom
themwhatappearstobeapackageandhandedthesametoPineda.ManriquethereaftercalledPineda
askingpositivenaba?towhichPinedarepliedyes.TheamountraisedbythefriendsofLawrencewas
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 14/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

onehundredeightythousandpesos(Php180,000.00).They(IrmaandLawrence)werelaterbroughtto
theStarMallalongEdsa.Theircaptorswarnedthemnottoreportthemattertotheauthoritiesotherwise
theywillfacedireconsequences.TheitemstakenfromIrmalikethecashmoney,jewelryandcellphone
wereplacedbythemeninsidetheconsoleboxoftheMitsubishiAdventure.WhentheyreachedStarMall,
thementalkedtothemforthirtyminutes.Again,theywerewarnedabouttheconsequencesoftheir
reportingtheincidenttothepolice.Irmawastoldthatthemenknewheraddress,themembersofher
familyandthattheyhavethepictureofherchild.Shewaslikewisewarnednottoreportthemattertoher
father,RodNavarro,whowasanactorandapoliceman,otherwiseherdaughterwithLawrencewillbethe
one[to]beartheconsequences(anakkoangmananagot).Theywerereleasedafterthirty(30)minutes.
LawrencehadtopleadfortheirgasolinefromtheaccusedandhewasgivenPhp100.00.

Irmadecidednottotellhermotherabouttheincidentasshewasveryafraid.Lawrencehowevermadea
reporttotheMakatipolicestationintheeveningof7November2002wherehewasshownacoordination
sheetpertainingtotheplatenumberoftheMitsubishiAdventure.BuboyPinedainthemeanwhilekepton
callingthem(IrmaandLawrence)demandingfortheirbalanceofonemillionpesos(Php1,000,000.00).
Irmasmotherhoweversoonlearnedoftheincidentbecauseofanewspaperitem.Herfatherlikewise
learnedoftheincidentandlostnotimeincontactingauthoritiesfromtheCIDG.They(IrmaandLawrence)
werelaterinvestigatedbytheCIDGpeopletowhomtheygavetheirswornstatementsonNovember14,
2002.AsBuboyPinedacontinuedtocallthemfortheallegedbalance,anentrapmentoperationwas
plannedonthatdate.Boodlesofmoneyweredustedwithultravioletpowder.Onthesamedate,Buboy
PinedacalledLawrenceforpurposesofmeetinghimthatnightinordertogettheremainingmoney.The
entrapmentoperationwhichwasconductedalongtheNewWorldHotel,andparticipatedinbyPO2
Almonte,wassuccessfulasBuboyPinedawasarrested.RecoveredfromthepossessionofPinedawerea
goldnecklacewithoutapendantaNokiacellphonemodel7650aToyotacorollacarwithplatenumber
PNG214colorredandone(1)ignitionkey.Thenecessaryacknowledgmentreceiptwasdulysignedby
thesaidaccused.Apawnshopticketwaslikewiserecoveredfromhispossession.

Lawrenceontheotherhandnarratedthatduringthatfatefuldayof7November2002ataround1:30
oclockinthemorning,ashewassteppingoutfromtheWhereElseDisco,hewassuddenlysandwhiched
[sic]bytwo(2)persons,ManriqueandTrestiza.Pinedawhomhelikewiseknew,heldagunandpointed
thesametohim.HewaslateronliftedthroughhisbeltandloadedtoayellowMitsubishiAdventure.He
wasmadetooccupythepassengerseatatthebackwhileTrestizadrovethesaidvehicle.Manrique
occupiedtheseatbesideTrestiza.Heaskedtheaccusedwhotheywereandhewastoldthattheywere
policemen.Atthetime,TrestizawaswearinganoutfitwhichwashiphopwhileManriquewaswearinga
polowhichwasbuttondown.Hewascursedandtoldtoshutup.Hewasaskedtobowdownhisheadas
theydrovealong.Heremembersthattheaccuseddugintohispocketsandhisvaluablesconsistingof
cellphones,a9210anda3310models[sic]respectively,includinghiswallet,cigarettes,watchbracelet,
ring,necklaceandapairofearrings,weretakenfromhim.HelateronsawhisHondaESIcar.Henoticed
thattheMitsubishiAdventuretheyridingwasfollowingthesaidHondaESI.Manriquelateraskedhimhow
muchmoneydidhehave.Whenrepliedthathismoneywasinsidehiscar,Manriqueallegedlyretorted
imposible.TheylateronstoppedinMandaluyongnearanopencanal.HewasaskedagainbyManrique
abouthismoney.Atthatpoint,anothermanwhosenamehelateronlearnedwasSPO2ReynelJose,
boardedalsotheMitsubishiAdventure.Joseaskedhimabouthismoney.Whenherepliedthathismoney
wasinsidehiscar,Josegotmadandboxedhimonhisface.Theylateronresumeddrivingaround.When
theystoppedagain,Joseaskedhimwhetherhehasthoughtofthemoney.Whenheagainrepliedthatthe

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 15/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

moneywasinsidehiscar,hewasboxedrepeatedlybyJose.ManriqueandTrestizawereseatedinthe
frontseatsbutdidnotdoanything.

Theyresumeddrivingagain.Joseaskedhimagainaboutthemoney.Whenhegavethesameresponse,
Joseputaplasticmaterialoverhisheadwhichmadehimunabletobreath[sic].Josestrangledhim,
promptinghimtoshoutlaterokayna,okayna.Sigena,sigenamagbibigaynaako(Okay,okay.Iwill
give.).Josestoppedstranglinghimandimmediatelyremovedtheplasticmaterialoverhishead.Jose
remarkedthathadhecooperatedearlier,hewouldnothavebeenhurt.TrestizaandManriquetoldhimthat
heshouldnothavekeptthematterlong.Lateron,thefour(4)menhadabriefhuddle.Hewaslateron
approachedbythemsayingokaynaha,isangmilyonna(Okeyha,itsonemillion).Hecouldnotrecall
howeverwhoinparticularmadetheremark.HewaslateroninstructedbyManriquetocallcertainpersons
withtheinformationthathefiguredin[an]accident.Hewasmadetousehis9210modelphoneasthe
samehadaspeakerthusenablingtheaccusedtolistentotheconversation.Hetriedtogetintouchwithhis
siblingsbutfailed.HewasabletocontactlateronhisfriendsJohnPaulSuguitanandAngeloGonzaleswho
weretheninLibis.Hetoldhisfriendsthatheneededmoneyverybadlyashehadanaccident.He
instructedhisfriendstoproceedtotheareagivenbyManriquewhichwasattheCaltexgasstationalong
OrtigascornerWilsonStreetinGreenhills.

Lateron,IrmaandLawrencewereallowedtobetogetherinsidetheMitsubishiAdventure.Itwasatthat
pointwheretheyweretoldtoproducetheamountofOneMillionpesos(Php1,000,000.00)thatnightso
theywillbereleased.TheseverywordswereutteredbyJoseandManrique.Irmalateronasked
permissiontoanswerthecallofnatureandshewasaccompaniedbyPinedatotheShellgasstationinSan
Juanwheresherelievedherself.Uponarrivingatthesaidgasstation,Lawrencewasdirectedtodrivehis
HondaESIcar.HewasinthecompanyofPinedawhileIrmaontheotherhandwaswithManrique,
TrestizaandJoseinsidetheMitsubishiAdventure.WhileIrmawasinsidetheMitsubishiAdventure,she
wastoldthatifthepersoncontactedbyLawrencewillnotshowup,theywillnotbereleasedandif
Lawrencewillescape,shewillbefinishedoff.ManriquethereaftertoldIrmatobetterpraythatthe
transactionwillpushthrough.Shewaswarnedthatifshereportstheincident,herfamilywillbeharmed.
Thesaidaccusedhadherchildspictureatthetime.Josewascursingher.Trestizaontheotherhandwas
seatedatthedriversideoftheMitsubishiAdventurevanandremarkedthatLawrencestransactionshould
pushthroughsothattheywillbereleased.

Notlongafter,Lawrencealightedfromhiscarandstoodbesidethevehicle.Hisfriendsvehiclelateron
arrived.Lawrenceapproachedthevehiclethathasjustarrivedandtooksomething.Pinedaremained
seatedinLawrencescarwhilesmoking.Thedoorofthesaidcarwasopenatthetime.Lawrence
thereafterwalkedbacktowherePinedawasandhandedtohimapackage.Itwasalreadyaround4:or
4:30inthemorning.Lawrencesfriendsthereafterwentaway,promptingPinedatocallManrique.
Manriqueallegedlyaskedpositivenaba?towhichPinedarepliedyes.

TheamountraisedbythefriendsofLawrencewasonehundredeightythousandpesos(Php180,000.00).
They(IrmaandLawrence)werelaterbroughttotheStarMallalongEdsa.Theircaptorswarnedthemnot
toreportthemattertotheauthoritiesotherwisetheywillfacedireconsequences.Theitemstakenfrom
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 16/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Irmalikethecashmoney,jewelryandcellphonewereplacedbythemeninsidetheconsoleboxofthe
MitsubishiAdventure.WhentheyreachedStarMall,thementalkedtothemforthirtyminutes.Again,they
werewarnedabouttheconsequencesoftheirreportingtheincidenttothepolice.Irmawastoldthatthe
menknewheraddress,themembersofherfamilyandthattheyhavethepictureofherchild.Shewas
likewisewarnednottoreportthemattertoherfather,RodNavarro,whowasanactorandapoliceman,
otherwiseherdaughterwithLawrencewillbetheone[to]beartheconsequences(anakkoang
mananagot).TheywerereleasedalongEdsaafterthirty(30)minutes.Lawrencehadtopleadfortheir
gasolinefromtheaccusedandhewasgivenPhp100.00.

Irmadecidednottotellhermotherabouttheincidentasshewasveryafraid.Lawrencehowevermadea
reporttotheMakatipolicestationintheeveningof7November2002wherehewasshownacoordination
sheetpertainingtotheplatenumberoftheMitsubishiAdventure.BuboyPinedainthemeanwhilekepton
callingthem(IrmaandLawrence)demandingfortheirbalanceofonemillionpesos(Php1,000,000.00).
Irmasmotherhoweversoonlearnedoftheincidentbecauseofanewspaperitem.Herfatherlikewise
learnedoftheincidentandlostnotimeincontactingauthoritiesfromtheCIDG.They(IrmaandLawrence)
werelaterinvestigatedbytheCIDGpeopletowhotheygavetheirswornstatementsonNovember14,
2002.AsBuboyPinedacontinuedtocallthemfortheallegedbalance,anentrapmentoperationwas
plannedonthatdate.Boodlesofmoneyweredustedwithultravioletpowder.Onthesamedate,Buboy
PinedacalledLawrenceforpurposesofmeetinghimthatnightinordertogettheremainingmoney.The
entrapmentoperationwhichwasconductedalongtheNewWorldHotel,andparticipatedinbyPO2
Almonte,wassuccessfulasBuboyPinedawasarrested.RecoveredfromthepossessionofPinedawerea
goldnecklacewithoutpendantaNokiacellphonemodel7650aToyotacorollacarwithplatenumber
PNG214colorredandone(1)ignitionkey.Thenecessaryacknowledgmentreceiptwasdulysignedby
thesaidaccused.Apawnshopticketwaslikewiserecoveredfromhispossession.

EarlyinthemorningofthefollowingdayattheCIDG,LoriemanManriquewenttothesaidofficelooking
forhiscoaccusedFroilanTrestiza.He(Manrique)wasarrestedthereatwhentheprivatecomplainants
whohappenedtobethereastheyweregivingadditionalstatementsidentifiedhim(Manrique)througha
onewaymirror.TrestizawaslikewisearrestedlaterashewasidentifiedbyhiscoaccusedRodiePineda.
Duringthearrest,Trestizawasfoundtobeinpossessionofanunlicensedfirearmforwhichthe
correspondingchargewasfiled.He(Trestiza)waslikewisethesubjectofthecomplaintsheetfiledbyIrma
andLawrenceandwaslikewiseidentifiedbyhiscoaccusedPinedaasoneofthecohortsinthe
kidnappingoftheformer.

TheDefenseontheotherhandpresentedthefollowingversion:

PrivatecomplainantsIrmaNavarroandLawrenceYuwereknowntoaccusedRodieBuboyPineda,a
freelancedanceinstructorpriortohisincarceration,andagodfathertothechildofIrmassister,since1997.
Thetwo(IrmaandLawrence)areknowntoPinedaassuppliersofprohibiteddrugs,particularlyEcstasy,
blueanchors,andyengyen.Thetwo,IrmaandLawrencehavebeendistributingthesedrugstovarious
customerswho[sic]frequentedbarsanddiscopubs.Pinedahasbeentransactingwiththetwo,particularly
Lawrence,foraprofit.RealizinglaterthathisinvolvementwiththegroupofLawrencehasbecomedeeper
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 17/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

anddeeper,Pinedathoughtofcausingthearrestofthelatter.He(Pineda)soondecidedtoreportthe
mattertothepoliceauthoritiesandcontactedforthwithhislongtimeacquaintance,nowhiscoaccused
FroilanTrestizaonNovember6,2002at10:30intheevening.Atthattime,Trestizawasapoliceman
undertheSpecialActionUnit,GroupDirectorsOfficeoftheNationalCapitalRegion.PinedaandTrestiza,
whohaveknowneachotherforthepasttenyears,usedtobedancersattheEquinoxDiscoalongPasay
Road.UponlearningtheinformationfromPineda,TrestizacontactedhisclassmatePO2Rolandode
GuzmanofthePhilippineDrugsEnforcementAgency(PDEA)whointurnreferredTrestizatoCaptain
LoriemanManriquewhowasthentheDeputyChiefoftheSpecialEnforcementUnitofthePDEA,Metro
ManilaRegionalOffice.ManriquewascalledlaterbyTrestizathroughcellphoneandtheyagreedtomeet
thesamenight,ataroundmidnight,attheparkinglotoftheIntercontinentalHotelinMakati.Manrique
preparedaPreOperationsheetforapossiblenarcoticsoperation.Helikewisegave[the]platenumberof
thevehiclehewasthendrivingwhichwasaMitsubishiAdventurevanwithplatenumberHAU298.

Duringtheirensuingmeeting,ManriquewaswithPO2ReynelJose.PinedaandManriquetalkedtoeach
other.ManriquelateronbriefedPinedaandJose.Trestizawasaboutthreetofivemetersawayfromthe
three(3).Afterthebriefing,ManriqueaskedTrestizatodrivetheMitsubishiAdventure.Manriquetold
TrestizathatthebuybustoperationhasbeenprecoordinatedwiththeMakatipolice.Manriquelater
joinedTrestizainsidetheMitsubishiAdventurewhileJoseandPinedawereoutsideasthoughwaitingfor
someone.IrmaandLawrencelateronarrivedandtheytalkedtoPinedaandJose.PinedaintroducedJose
toIrmaandLawrenceasthebuyer.JosewasonlywearingatshirtatthetimeanditseemedLawrence
andIrmadoubtedhim.Josetoldthetwothathehasthemoneywithhimandhewouldliketobuydrugs.
IrmahoweverwhisperedsomethingtoLawrencepromptingthelattertovascillate[sic].Fromwherethey
areseatedinsidetheMitsubishiAdventure,TrestizaandManriquecouldseewhatwere[sic]goingon
amongIrma,Lawrence,JoseandPineda.Lateron,JoseapproachedTrestizaandManriqueandtoldthem
thattheprearrangedsignaliswhenhe(Jose)scratchedhishead.AccordingfurthertoJose,hisscratching
ofhisheadwillmeanasignaltoTrestizatodrivetowardsthemthevehicle.AsJoselateronscratchedhis
head,Trestizadrovethevehicletowardsthegroupasinstructed.Manriquethereafteralightedandeffected
thearrestofIrmaandLawrence.IrmawenthystericalandwasloadedintotheHondaESIwhileLawrence
wasmadetoboardtheMitsubishiAdventure.Itwasatthatpointwhentwo(2)mobilecarsarrivedwith
policemenonboard.Acommotionimmediatelyensuedbetweenthepolicemenaboardthemobilecars
andManriquesmen.Firearmsweredrawnandpokedagainsteachofthemen(nagkatutukanngbaril).
Jose,however,lateronshowedwhatappearedtobeadocumenttothemenaboardthemobilecar.One
ofthemenlateronmadeacallthroughhisradioandthenleftafterwards.

ManriquelateroninstructedTrestizatodrivetowardsEdsaontheirwaytoCampCrame.Alongtheway,
ManriqueconductedatacticalinterrogationagainstLawrenceandIrmaabouttheirdrugrelatedactivities.
UponreachingSMMegamall,however,ManriquetoldTrestizatopullover.ManriquetalkedtoLawrence,
Irma,JoseandPineda.Trestizaremainedinsidethevan.Trestiza,however,overheardthatLawrencewas
atthatpointwastalkingabouthissupplierofecstasy.Thereafter,ManriquebriefedanewPinedaandJose
inthepresenceofIrmaandLawrence.ItwasunderstoodamongthemthatLawrencewillwaitforhis
allegedsupplierwhosenamewasallegedlyJojoattheCaltexgasstationalongWilsonStreetinGreenhills.
LawrencetoldManriquethatthisJojowasreallyabigtimesupplierofecstasyandcocaine.Uponarriving
atthegasstation,thegroupwaitedforLawrencessupplierforanhourbutnobodyappeared.Manrique

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 18/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

becameimpatientandwenttowhereLawrencewas.ManriquelatertoldhismenthatLawrencemighthave
alertedhissupplier.He(Manrique)thendecidedtobringthetwo(IrmaandLawrence)toCampCrame.
Trestiza,however,pointedouttoManriquethatnothingwastakenfromthepossessionofthetwo.
ManriqueconferredanewwithJose.Joseremarkedthattheitemscouldhavebeenthrownaway.Itwas
laterondecidedthatIrmaandLawrencewilljustbereleased.Thetwowereindeedreleasednearthe
[Manuela]ComplexalongEdsa.

TrestizawaslateronarrestedbytheCIDGoperativesintheearlymorningofNovember16,2002atthe
parkinglotoftheClub5Disco.Agunwaspokedathimandhewasshovedinsideavehicle.Hewas
boxedandplacedonhandcuffs.Hewasnotshownanywarrantofarrest.Hetoldthearrestingofficersthat
heisalsoapoliceman.HewasbroughtlatertoCampCrame.WhileatCampCrame,hewasshowntohis
coaccusedPinedaandthelatterwasaskeddibasyayungnagdrivenoongmayoperationlabankina
IrmaNavarro?(IshenottheonewhodroveduringtheoperationagainstIrmaNavarro?).He(Trestiza)
askedtheauthoritieswhatwerethegroundsfordetaininghimbuthisquerieswerenotanswered.His
watch,walletandcellphoneweretaken.Lateronthesameday,IrmaarrivedinCampCrame.The
authoritiesthereattalkedtoIrma,afterwhich,apolicemantoldheretoyungitinuturoniBuboynanag
drive.(ThisistheonepointedtobyBuboyastheonewhodrove).Severaldayslater,alltheaccused
werepresentedtothepressbytheofficeofGeneralMatillano.ThePhilippineDailyInquirercoveredthe
storyandlateroncameoutwithanarticleentitledWeWereFramed.

ThedefenselikewisepresentedPO2RolandodeGuzmanwhocorroboratedtheclaimofTrestizathathe
wascalledbythelatterconcerningtheinformationgivenbyPineda.Nofurtherevidencewaspresented.23

TheTrialCourtsRuling

InitsJointDecision24dated24July2007,thetrialcourtfoundTrestiza,Manrique,andPineda
guiltybeyondreasonabledoubtasprincipalsbydirectparticipationofthecrimeofKidnappingfor
Ransom.

Thetrialcourtconcentrateditsrulingonthecredibilityofthewitnesses.Itfoundthetestimoniesof
theprosecutioncredible,withtheirversionsoftheincidentdovetailingwitheachotherevenon
minordetails.Ontheotherhand,thedefensestestimoniestaxedthecredulityofthetrialcourt.The
trialcourtraisednumerousquestionsaboutthedefensesstoryline:

xxxButthisleadsthecourttowonder:ifindeedPinedawassobotheredbyhisinvolvementwiththe
groupofLawrence,whydidhespillthebeansagainstIrmaandLawrenceonly?Didhenotstatethatit
wasagroupthathewastransactingwith?Whoweretheothermembersofthisgroup?Whatweretheir

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 19/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

activitiesthatweresodarkandclandestinesoastomakehimsuddenlyshudderandoptforachangeof
life?ThesewerenotansweredbyPinedastestimony.

Also,whileManriquepresentedwhatappearstobeaPreOperationCoordinationReport,thuscreatingat
firstglancetheimpressionthattheirswasalegitimatepoliceoperation,thisstilldoesnotdetractfromnor
diminishthecredibilityofthecomplainantsclaimthattheyweresubsequentlyabductedandmoneywas
demandedinexchangefortheirrelease.Forevenifthecourtistoindulgetheclaimofthedefensethatthe
complainantswereindeeddrugpushersandundeservingofthiscourtssympathy,thenaggingdoubtabout
theexistenceofapreparedpoliceoperationaswhatManriqueandhiscoaccusedreferto,persists.For
one,thesaidPreOperation/CoordinationSheetappearstobeunreliable.Asidefromthefactthatthesame
wasnotdulyauthenticated,thefailureofthedefense,particularlyaccusedManrique,tosummonthe
signatoriesthereinwhomayattesttotheexistenceandauthenticityofsuchdocumentwasnotatall
explained.Second,alltheaccusednarratedabouttheiralmostfatalencounterwithanothergroupof
policemenwhiletheywereallegedlyintheactofconductingthesupposedbuybustoperationagainstthe
complainants.Thisevent,totheviewofthiscourt,onlyinvitesthesuspicionthatthePre
Operation/CoordinationSheetwasdubiousifnotactuallynonexistent.

TheaccusedlikewiseclaimedthattheyreleasedthetwolateralongEdsaasnothingwasfoundonthem.
Themanneroftherelease,however,raisesseveralquestions:whywerethecomplainantswhowereearlier
suspectedofbeingdrugpushersnotbroughttothepoliceprecinct?DidnotLawrencevolunteerthename
ofhisallegedsupplierearlierduringthetacticalinterrogation?Whyweretheyunloadedjustlikethatalong
Edsaatthatungodlyhour?WasthereanincidentreportonthematterconsideringthatManriquewas
mindfulenoughearliertofirstsecureaPreOperation/Coordinationsheet?25

ThedispositiveportionofthetrialcourtsDecisionstates:

WHEREFORE,premisesconsidered,judgmentisherebyrenderedinCriminalCaseNo.023393finding
theaccusedPO1FROILANTRESTIZAYLACSON,P/INSPLORIEMANL.MANRIQUEand
RODIEPINEDAYJIMENEZGUILTYbeyondreasonabledoubtasprincipalsbydirectparticipationof
thecrimeofKIDNAPPINGforRANSOM,andtheyareherebysentencedtosufferthepenaltyof
RECLUSIONPERPETUA.Inadditionthereto,theyareorderedtopay,jointlyandseverally,theprivate
complainantsthesumsofPHP300,000.00asactualdamages,andPHP300,000.00asexemplary
damages.AlltheaccusedareACQUITTEDinCriminalCasesNos.03766and041311bothfor
Robberyrespectively.

SendtherecordsofthiscasetothearchivesinsofarasaccusedPO2ReynelJose,whocontinuestobeat
large,isconcerned.Let,however,aWarrantofArrestbeissuedagainsthim.

SOORDERED.26

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 20/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Onthesamedateasthepromulgationofitsdecision,thetrialcourtissuedanOrderof
Commitment27ofTrestiza,Manrique,andPinedatotheDirectoroftheBureauofCorrections.

On27July2007,Trestiza,Manrique,andPinedafiledaMotionforNewTrialandforInhibition.
Twowitnesses,CamilleAnneOrtizyAlfonso(Ortiz)andPauloAntonioDeLeonyEspiritu(De
Leon),allegedlyintimatefriendsofNavarroandYu,willtestifyastothecircumstanceswhichtook
placeintheearlymorningof7November2002.Theirtestimonies,ifadmitted,willallegedlyresult
intheacquittalofTrestiza,Manrique,andPineda.Thesewitnessesarenotknowntotheaccused,
andtheycouldnothavebeenproducedduringtrial.Moreover,theaccusedareofthebeliefthattrial
courtjudgeZenaidaT.GalapateLaguillesactedwithbiasagainstthem.Sheallegedlymadeanoff
therecordremarkandstatedthattheprosecutionfailedtoestablishwhattheysoughttoprove,but
thenlateronquestionedtheexistenceofthedefensesPreOperation/CoordinationSheetinher
decision.JudgeGalapateLaguillesalsofailedtoresolvethePetitionforBail,andfailedtopointout
discrepanciesinthetestimoniesofthedefenseswitnesses,particularlythoseregardingthearrestsof
Trestiza,Manrique,andPineda.

TheprosecutionopposedtheMotionforNewTrialandInhibition.28DeLeonsharedacellwith
ManriquesinceJuly2003,whilethetrialwasongoing,andhenceDeLeonssupposedtestimony
shouldnotbeconsiderednewlydiscoveredevidence.Ontheotherhand,Ortizsnarrationofevents
inheraffidavitisfullofinconsistencies.Theprosecutionlikewisequestionedthecredibilityofthe
witnesseswhoallegedlyheardJudgeGalapateLaguillesofftherecordremark.OnewasTrestizas
relative,whiletheotherwasasecurityescortwhowassupposedtostayoutsidethecourtroom.
Finally,themotionitselfwasfiledlate.Thesupplementtothemotion,towhichtheaffidavitsofthe
additionalwitnesseswereattached,wasfiledtwodaysafterthefinalityofthetrialcourtsdecision.
Copiesofthedecisionwerefurnishedtobothprosecutionanddefenseon24July2007,whichwas
alsothedateofpromulgation.TheMotionforNewTrialandInhibitionwasdated27July2007,
whiletheSupplementtotheMotionwhichincludedthewitnessesaffidavitswasdated10August
2007.

Thetrialcourtheldhearingsonthetwinmotions.On3October2007,thetrialcourtissuedan
Order29denyingtheMotionforNewTrialandforInhibition.Theevidencepresentedwasmerely
corroborative,andtheprosecutionwasabletoproveitscasedespitethejudgesallegedoffthe
recordequivocalremark.

On19October2007,Trestiza,Manrique,andPinedafiledanoticeofappeal.30TheOrderdenying
theMotionforNewTrialandforInhibitionwasreceivedon18October2007,whiletheMotionfor
NewTrialandforInhibitionwasfiledon27July2007orthreedaysafterthepromulgationofthe
Decisionon24July2004.Thetrialcourtgaveduecoursetothenoticeofappeal.31Intheirbrief
filedwiththeappellatecourt,Trestiza,Manrique,andPinedaassignedthefollowingerrors:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 21/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

ThetrialcourterredinconvictingaccusedTrestizadespitethefactthathewasnotpartofthealleged
conspiracyinthatitwasnotstipulatedduringthepretrialthathewasjustthedriverandwasnotpartof
theteam.Besides,hedidnotperformanyactinfurtheranceoftheallegedconspiracy.

ThetrialcourterredingivingcredencetothetestimoniesofprivatecomplainantsLawrenceYuandIrma
Navarroastheirdemeanorinthewitnessstandshowhesitationindicativeofguiltoffabricationandtheir
testimonieslackspontaneityandwerenotstraightforward.

ThetrialcourterredingivingcredencetothetestimoniesofprosecutionwitnessesJohnPaulSuguitanand
AngeloGonzalesastheyallegedfactsandcircumstancethatarecontrarytohumannatureandexperience.

Thetrialcourterredinconvictingtheaccuseddespitethefactthatthecomplainantswerearrestedina
legitimateoperationasevidencedbythePreOperation/CoordinationSheetwhichwasauthenticatedby
accusedappellantManrique.32

TheAppellateCourtsRuling

On30June2008,theappellatecourtdismissedtheappealandaffirmedthetrialcourtsdecision.

Initsrecitationoffacts,theappellatecourtquotedfromthePeoplesBrieffortheprosecutionand
fromthetrialcourtforthedefense.TheappellatecourtruledthatTrestizascontentionthathewas
justthedriverofthevanandnevercommunicatedwiththewitnessesdeservesscantconsideration.
YuidentifiedTrestizaasoneofthetwomenwhosandwichedhimasheleftWhereElseDisco,and
insistedthatYucooperatewithJosewhenJoseaskedYuforcash.Trestizasactsthusshowthathe
actedinconcertwithhiscoaccusedinthecommissionofthecrime.Theappellatecourtreliedon
thetrialcourtsassessmentofthereliabilityoftheprosecutionswitnesses,andgavecredencetotheir
testimonies.Theappellatecourtdeclaredthatalltheelementsofkidnappingforransomarepresent
andthusaffirmedthetrialcourtsdecision:

Inanyevent,itwasestablishedthatalltheelementsconstitutingthecrimeofkidnappingforransominthe
caseatbararepresent.TheelementsofkidnappingforransomunderArticle267oftheRevisedPenal
Code(RPC),asamendedbyRepublicAct(R.A.)7659areasfollows:(a)intentonthepartofthe
accusedtodeprivethevictimofhisliberty(b)actualdeprivationofthevictimofhislibertyand(c)motive
oftheaccused,whichisextortingransomforthereleaseofthevictim(Peoplevs.RaulCenahonon,527
SCRA542).Here,NavarroandYutestifiedhowtheywereabductedatgunpointfromtheparkinglotin
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 22/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Makatiandconfinedinsidethecarandvanrespectivelythattheywerebothhandcuffed,hence,deprived
oftheirlibertyandthatappellantsmadeademandforthemtodeliveracertainamountinexchangefortheir
release.

Infine,theCourtrulesandsoholdsthatappellantsguiltfortheoffenseofkidnappingforransomhasbeen
provenbeyondmoralcertaintyofdoubt.

WHEREFORE,thedecisionappealedfromisherebyAFFIRMEDandthisappealishereby
DISMISSED.

SOORDERED.33

TrestizaalonefiledaMotionforReconsideration34oftheappellatecourtsdecision.InhisMotion,
Trestizaclaimedthathealone,throughcounsel,filedanappealbrief.Trestizafurtherclaimedthat
thestipulationsmadeduringpretrialestablishedTrestizaslimitedinvolvement,thatis,hewas
merelyadriverofthevehiclewhentheallegedcrimetookplace,henevercommunicatedwiththe
complainants,andnoneoftheitemsallegedlytakenfromthecomplainantswererecoveredfrom
Trestizaspossession.Thetrialcourtdidnotmentionnordiscussthesestipulationsinitsdecision.
EventhetrialcourtsfindingoffactsshowsTrestizasparticipationwasmerelythatofaninvited
driverinalegitimatePhilippineDrugEnforcementAgency(PDEA)drugbustoperation.Moreover,
thetestimoniesofwitnessesofbothprosecutionanddefenseestablishthatTrestizawasamember
ofthePhilippineNationalPolice(PNP)whenheallegedlycommittedthecrime.Underthe
circumstances,TrestizaclaimedheshouldbeheldliableonlyforArbitraryDetention.Finally,
Trestizasidentificationwasnotonlyimproperforbeingsuggested,buthiswarrantlessarrestshould
alsobeheldinvalid.

TheOfficeoftheSolicitorGeneral(OSG)filedacommentopposingTrestizasMotionfor
Reconsideration.ThestipulationsdonotdiscountthatTrestizaconspiredwithhiscoappellants
ManriqueandPinedaincommittingthecrimecharged.TheapprehensionanddetentionofNavarro
andYuwereclearlyeffectedforthepurposeofransomhence,thepropercrimereallyis
KidnappingwithRansom.TrestizafiledaReplytotheComment35on20October2009.

TheappellatecourtdeniedTrestizasMotionforReconsiderationinaResolutiondated11November
2009.36AnexaminationoftheappellantsbriefshowedthatthebriefwasfiledforTrestiza,

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 23/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

ManriqueandPineda.Theappellatecourtfoundnocompellingreasontowarrantconsiderationof
itsdecision.

TrestizastillfiledaNoticeofAppeal37oftheappellatecourtsdecisionon10January2010.The
appellatecourtinitiallydenied38TrestizasNoticeofAppealduetolatefiling,buteventually
granted39TrestizasMotionforReconsideration40ofthe16February2010resolutiondenyinghis
NoticeofAppeal.

Trestizafiledthepresentsupplementalbrief41beforethisCourton15August2011.Inhisbrief,
TrestizaemphasizedthatYuwasapprehendedbyagentsofthePNPandPDEAon30June2011
duringaraidofanillegaldrugslaboratory.Yuwaschargedwiththecrimeofmanufacturing,
possessing,andsellingillegaldrugsunderSections8,11,and12,ArticleIIofRepublicActNo.
9165.

TheIssues

Trestizaraisedthefollowingargumentsagainsttheappellatecourtsdecision:

I.ThesuperveningeventinvolvingtheapprehensionofLawrenceL.Yuastheheadofabigtimedrug
syndicatethrowshiscredibilityasawitnessbeneaththeabyssofmorassanddecaythatmustbenow
totallydiscarded.

II.Thefactsandcircumstancessurroundingtheaboveentitledcaseisconsistentwiththeinnocenceof
[Trestiza]renderingtheevidencepresentedinsufficientandwithoutmoralcertaintytosupportaconviction.

III.Attheveryleast,theequipoiserulefindsapplicationinthecaseatbar,takingintoconsiderationthe
superveningeventthatdemolishedthecredibilityofthewitnessespresentedbytheprosecution.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 24/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

IV.TheConstitutionalpresumptionofinnocenceof[Trestiza]hasnotbeenoverwhelmedbythetainted
testimonyandtotallackofcredibilityofLawrenceL.Yuand,inlightofthesuperveningevent,couldnot
nowbeovercomebyquestionabletestimoniespresentedbytheprosecution.

V.Theconvictionofaninnocentmanisagreatinjusticethataffectstheveryfoundationsofhumanity.

VI.Itwasnotsufficientlyshownthatalltheaccusedintheaboveentitledcaseconspiredincommittingthe
crimeofKidnappingforRansomandthesamewasnotprovenbyproofbeyondreasonabledoubt.

VII.[Trestiza]hasnomaliciousorevilintentinacquiescingtodrivethevehicleusedinthebuybust
operation.

VIII.[Trestiza]isinnocentofthecrimeofKidnappingforRansom.42

TheCourtsRuling

Attheoutset,wedeclarethatthe30June2011arrestofYuhasnobearingonthepresentcase.The
twocasesareindependentofeachotherandshouldbetreatedassuch.Yusinnocenceorguilt
regardinghis30June2011arrestdoesnotaffirmornegatethecommissionofthecrimeof
KidnappingforRansomagainsthim.

WarrantlessArrest

ThesearethecircumstancessurroundingTrestizasarrest:PinedahadbeencontactingYutofollow
uponthebalanceontheransom.Pinedawasthenarrestedpursuanttoanentrapmentoperation
conductedintheearlymorningof16November2002atNewWorldHotel.Duringtheinvestigation
atCampCrame,PinedarevealedthatTrestizacouldbefoundatClub5inMakati.PinedaandYu
accompaniedthearrestingteamtoClub5.YupointedoutTrestizatothearrestingteamwhile
TrestizawasonhiswaytohisblackHummer.43

TrestizaquestionedthelegalityofhiswarrantlessarrestinanOmnibusMotion44filedbeforehis
arraignment.InitsOrderdated19August2004,thetrialcourtstatedthatthequashalofthe
informationsonaccountofTrestizasillegalarrestisnotwarranted.Thedeterminationofthenature
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 25/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

ofthearrestgoesdirectlyintothemeritsofthecase,andneedsadeeperjudicialdetermination.
MattersofdefensearenotgroundsforaMotiontoQuash.Thetrialcourt,however,didnotmake
anyrulingrelatedtoTrestizaswarrantlessarrestinits24July2007Decision.

Section5,Rule113ofthe2000RulesofCriminalProcedureenumeratestheinstanceswhen
warrantlessarrestsarelawful.

Sec.5.Arrestwithoutwarrantwhenlawful.Apeaceofficeroraprivatepersonmay,withouta
warrant,arrestaperson:

(a)When,inhispresence,thepersontobearrestedhascommitted,isactuallycommitting,orisattempting
tocommitanoffense

(b)Whenanoffensehasjustbeencommittedandhehasprobablecausetobelievebasedonpersonal
knowledgeoffactsorcircumstancesthatthepersontobearrestedhascommitteditand

(c)Whenthepersontobearrestedisaprisonerwhohasescapedfromapenalestablishmentorplace
whereheisservingfinaljudgmentoristemporarilyconfinedwhilehiscaseispending,orhasescapedwhile
beingtransferredfromoneconfinementtoanother.

Incasesfallingunderparagraphs(a)and(b)above,thepersonarrestedwithoutawarrantshallbe
forthwithdeliveredtothenearestpolicestationorjailandshallbeproceededagainstinaccordancewith
section7ofRule112.

ItisclearthatTrestizaswarrantlessarrestdoesnotfallunderanyofthecircumstancesmentionedin
Section5,Rule113.However,Trestizafailedtomakeavalidobjectiontohiswarrantlessarrest.

Anyobjectiontotheprocedurefollowedinthematteroftheacquisitionbyacourtofjurisdiction
overthepersonoftheaccusedmustbeopportunelyraisedbeforeheentershispleaotherwise,the
objectionisdeemedwaived.45Trestiza,beingapolicemanhimself,couldhaveimmediatelyobjected
tohiswarrantlessarrest.However,hemerelyaskedforthegroundsforhisarrest.Hedidnoteven
filechargesagainstthearrestingofficers.Therewasalsoalengthyamountoftimebetween
Trestizasarreston16November2002andthefilingoftheOmnibusMotionobjectingtoTrestizas
warrantlessarreston11May2004.Althoughitmaybearguedthattheobjectionwasraisedpriorto
theentryofTrestizaspleaofnotguiltyinthekidnappingforransomcharge,itmustbenotedthat
thecircumstancesofthepresentcasemakeusruleotherwise.Trestizawaschargedwithtwocrimes
atthetimeofhisarrest:kidnappingwithransomunderCriminalCaseNo.023393andillegal
possessionoffirearmsunderCriminalCaseNo.023394.Trestizadidnotquestionthelegalityof
hiswarrantlessarrestnortheacquisitionofjurisdictionofthetrialcourtoverhisperson,andfully
participatedinthehearingoftheillegalpossessionoffirearmscase.Thus,Trestizaisdeemedto
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 26/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

havewaivedanyobjectiontohiswarrantlessarrest.Underthecircumstances,TrestizasOmnibus
Motioninthekidnappingforransomcaseisamereafterthoughtandcannotbeconsideredasa
timelyobjection.

AssumingarguendothatTrestizaindeedmadeatimelyobjectiontohiswarrantlessarrest,our
jurisprudenceisrepletewithrulingsthatsupporttheviewthatTrestizasconvictionisproperdespite
beingillegallyarrestedwithoutwarrant.InPeoplev.Manlulu,theCourtruled:

[T]heillegalityofthewarrantlessarrestcannotdeprivetheStateofitsrighttoprosecutetheguiltywhenall
otherfactsonrecordpointtotheirculpability.46

Indeed,theillegalarrestofanaccusedisnotsufficientcauseforsettingasideavalidjudgment
rendereduponasufficientcomplaintafteratrialfreefromerror.47Thefatalflawofaninvalid
warrantlessarrestbecomesmootinviewofacredibleeyewitnessaccount.48

KidnappingwithRansom

Thetrialcourtsfindingsoffacts,itscalibrationofthecollectivetestimoniesofwitnesses,its
assessmentoftheprobativeweightoftheevidenceoftheparties,aswellasitsconclusions
anchoredonthesaidfindings,areaccordedgreatweight,andevenconclusiveeffect,unlessthetrial
courtignored,misunderstoodormisinterpretedcogentfactsandcircumstancesofsubstancewhich,
ifconsidered,wouldaltertheoutcomeofthecase.Thisisbecauseoftheuniqueadvantageofthe
trialcourttoobserve,atcloserange,theconduct,demeanorandthedeportmentofthewitnessesas
theytestify.49WeseenoreasontooverrulethetrialcourtsfindingthatTrestizaisguiltyof
kidnappingwithransom.

Article267oftheRevisedPenalCodeprovides:

Art.267.Kidnappingandseriousillegaldetention.Anyprivateindividualwhoshallkidnapordetain
another,orinanyothermannerdeprivehimofhisliberty,shallsufferthepenaltyofreclusionperpetuato
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 27/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

death:

1.Ifthekidnappingordetentionshallhavelastedmorethanthreedays.

2.Ifitshallhavebeencommittedsimulatingpublicauthority.

3.Ifanyseriousphysicalinjuriesshallhavebeeninflicteduponthepersonkidnappedordetainedorif
threatstokillhimshallhavebeenmade.

4.Ifthepersonkidnappedordetainedshallbeaminor,exceptwhentheaccusedisanyoftheparents,
femaleorapublicofficer.

Thepenaltyshallbedeathwherethekidnappingordetentionwascommittedforthepurposeofextorting
ransomfromthevictimoranyotherperson,evenifnoneofthecircumstancesabovementionedwere
presentinthecommissionoftheoffense.

Whenthevictimiskilledordiesasaconsequenceofthedetentionorisraped,orissubjectedtotortureor
dehumanizingacts,themaximumpenaltyshallbeimposed.

Beforethepresentcasewastriedbythetrialcourt,therewasasignificantamountoftimespentin
determiningwhetherkidnappingforransomwasthepropercrimechargedagainsttheaccused,
especiallysinceTrestizaandManriquewerebothpoliceofficers.Article267oftheRevisedPenal
Codespecificallystatedthatthecrimeshouldbecommittedbyaprivateindividual.50Thetrialcourt
settledthematterbycitingourrulinginPeoplev.Santiano,51thus:

ThefactalonethatappellantPilluetaisanorganicmemberoftheNARCOMandappellantSandigana
memberofthePNPwouldnotexemptthemfromthecriminalliabilityofkidnapping.Itisquiteclearthatin
abductingandtakingawaythevictim,appellantsdidsoneitherinfurtheranceofofficialfunctionsnorinthe
pursuitofauthorityvestedinthem.Itisnot,infine,inrelationtotheiroffice,butinpurelyprivatecapacity
thattheyhaveactedinconcertwiththeircoappellantSantianoandChanco.

Inthesameorder,thetrialcourtaskedforfurtherevidencewhichsupportthedefensesclaimof
holdingalegitimatepoliceoperation.However,thetrialcourtfoundasunreliablethePre
Operation/CoordinationSheetpresentedbythedefense.Thesheetwasnotauthenticated,andthe
signatorieswerenotpresentedtoattesttoitsexistenceandauthenticity.

ThesecondtothelastparagraphofArticle267prescribesthepenaltyofdeathwhentheextortionof
ransomwasthepurposeofthekidnapping.YuandNavarrowerereleasedonlyaftertheywereable

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 28/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

togivevariouspersonaleffectsaswellascashamountingtoP300,000,withthepromisetogivethe
balanceofP1,000,000atalaterdate.

TrestizainsiststhathisparticipationislimitedtobeingadriveroftheMitsubishiAdventurevan.Yu
testifiedotherwise.

DirectExaminationofLawrenceLimYu

Atty.Oledan:

Q:Whathappened[afteryouleftWherelseDisco]?

Witness:

A:AssoonasIsteppedoutoftheWherelseDisco,somebodybumpedmeatmyrightside.Andthenlater
on,Iwassandwichedbytwo(2)personsandwhenIlookedup,Inotedthepresenceofone(1)man
immediatelyinfrontofmeholdingagun.

Q:Andthesemenwhosandwichedyouandthethirdmen[sic]whoheldtheguninfrontofyou,wouldyou
beabletoidentifythem?

A:Yes,maam.

Q:AretheyinsidethisCourtroom?

A:Yes,maam.

Q:Willyoupleaseidentifythem?

A:Thethreeofthem,maam.

Atthisjuncture,thewitnessistopointingtothethree(3)men,whoaretheaccusedinthiscase,insidethe
Courtroom.

COURT:(TotheAccused)Again,fortherecord,pleasestandup,gentlemen.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 29/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Atthisjuncture,thethree(3)accusedstoodup.

COURT:(ToWitness)Areyousurethesewerethethree(3)menwhomyouarereferringto?

WITNESS:

A:Yes,maam.

COURT:MakeitofrecordthatthewitnesspointedtoaccusedPO1FroilanTrestiza,PSINPLoriemar
ManriqueandRodiePineda.

ATTY.OLEDAN:

Q:(ToWitness)Specifically,whoamongthesethree(3)sandwichedyou?

WITNESS:

A:ItwasPO1TrestizaandCapt.Manrique.

xxx

Q:WhathappenedafteryouwerebroughtinsidetheMitsubishivehicle?

A:Lateron,OfficerTrestizaandCapt.ManriquelikewiseboardedtheMitsubishiAdventure.

xxx

Q:Whowasdrivingthevehicle?

A:ItwasFroilanTrestiza,maam.

xxx

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 30/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Q:After[ReynelJose]said[thathadYucooperatedearlier,hewouldnothavebeenhurt]andtheplastic
removedfromyourhead,whatdid[sic]thetwo,TrestizaandManrique,doing?

A:Theytoldmethesamething.TheytoldmethatIshouldnothavekeptthematterlong.

Q:Whathappenedafterthat?

A:Afterthat,ReynelJosealightedagainandwedrovetowardsanarea,whichIknownowtobewithin
SanJuan.RightinfrontoftheTambuntingPawnshop.

Q:WhathappenedattheTambuntingPawnshop?Didthevehiclestopthere?

A:Thetwo(2)vehiclesparkedtherebesideeachother.

Q:WhathappenedwhenyouwerethereatTambuntingPawnshop?

A:AfterparkinginfrontoftheTambuntingPawnshop,theyboardedIrmaandhavehersat[sic]besideme.
Thenafterwhich,thedooratmyleftsidewasopened.

Q:Whatelsehappened?

A:Theytoldmenottomakeanymove,thatIjustkeeponsittingthere.Afterwards,themenhuddledwith
eachother(nagkumpulkumpolposila).

Q:Wheredidtheyhuddle?

A:Theyhuddledinanareaclosetome,almostinfrontofme.

Q:Whoamongtheaccusedhuddledtogether?

A:Thefour(4)ofthem,maam.

Q:Howlongdidtheyhuddle?

A:Forawhileonly,maam,around(10)tenminutes.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 31/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Q:Afterten(10)minutes,whathappened?

A:Afterten(10)minutes,Buboyapproachedme.

Q:Whatdidhesay?

A:HetoldmethattheythoughtmymoneywouldbeOneMillionPesos(P1,000,000.00).

xxx

Q:So,afterthathuddle,afteryouweretoldbyBuboythatokaynayongonemillionandthatwas
confirmedbyoneofthethree(3)menwhosaidisangmillionna,whathappened?

A:IwastalkingtoBuboyatthattimeandIwastellinghim,Whydoyouhavetodothistome?Youare
thekumpareoftheeldersisterofIrma.

Q:WhatdidBuboysaytothat?

A:Buboyretorted,Pare,pasensyana,peraperalangyan.

Q:AfterBuboysaidthat,whathappened?

A:Itoldhimthatheneednotdothat,becauseifheneedsmoney,Icanalwayslendhim.

Q:WhatdidBuboysay?

A:AftersayingthistoBuboy,hetoldmetojustshutupandthenhelateronhandedovertomeacell
phoneandtoldmetocontactaperson,whocangivememoney.

Q:Whohandedyouyourcellphone?

A:ItwasFroilanTrestiza,maam.

xxx

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 32/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

Q:Afterthat,wereyoutoldtogohomealready?

A:Notyet,maam.Beforelettingusgo,theythreatenedus.TheyremindedusthattheyhaveourIDs,the
picturesofourchildrenandthemembersofourfamily.

Q:Whatdidyoudoafterthat?

A:Wejustkeptonsayingyesbecausewewantedtogohomealready.

Q:Whattimewasthat?

A:Itwasalmostdaybreak(maguumagana).Ihavenowatchalreadyatthattime,maam.

Q:So,whatdidyoudoafterthat?

A:Afterthat,FroilanTrestizahandedtomemysimcardtellingmethattheywillbecallingmeinmyhouse
concerningmyallegedbalance.52

WeagreewiththeappellatecourtsassessmentthatTrestizasactswerefarfromjustbeingamere
driver.Theseriesofeventsthattranspiredbefore,during,andafterthekidnappingincidentmore
thanshowsthatTrestizaactedinconcertwithhiscoaccusedincommittingthecrime.Conspiracy
maybeimpliedifitisprovedthattwoormorepersonsaimedtheiractstowardsthe
accomplishmentofthesameunlawfulobject,eachdoingapartsothattheircombinedacts,though
apparentlyindependentofeachother,were,infact,connectedandcooperative,indicatinga
closenessofpersonalassociationandaconcurrenceofsentiment.53

TrestizascivilliabilityisjointandseveralwithManriqueandPineda.Theyareliableforthe
P120,000takenfromNavarroandtheP180,000raisedbyYu.Inlinewithprevailing
jurisprudence,54TrestizaisalsoliableforP75,000ascivilindemnitywhichisawardedifthecrime
warrantstheimpositionofdeathpenaltyP75,000asmoraldamagesbecausethevictimisassumed
tohavesufferedmoralinjuries,withoutneedofproofandP30,000asexemplarydamages.

WHEREFORE,weDENYthepetition.TheDecisionoftheCourtofAppealsinCAG.R.H.C.
No.03119promulgatedon30June2009,aswellastheResolutionpromulgatedon11June2010,is
AFFIRMEDwithMODIFICATION.FroilanL.Trestizaisguiltybeyondreasonabledoubtof
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 33/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

KidnappinginCriminalCaseNo.023393andissentencedtosufferthepenaltyofreclusion
perpetua,aswellastheaccessorypenaltiesprovidedbylaw.Inadditiontotherestitutionof
P300,000fortheransom,TrestizaisorderedtopayLawrenceYuandIrmaNavarroP75,000as
civilindemnity,P75,000asmoraldamages,andP30,000asexemplarydamages.

CostsagainstFroilanL.Trestiza.

SOORDERED.

ANTONIOT.CARPIO

AssociateJustice

WECONCUR:

ARTUROD.BRION

AssociateJustice

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 34/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

JOSEPORTUGALPEREZMARIALOURDESP.A.SERENO

AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice

BIENVENIDOL.REYES

AssociateJustice

ATTESTATION

IattestthattheconclusionsintheaboveDecisionhadbeenreachedinconsultationbeforethecase
wasassignedtothewriteroftheopinionoftheCourtsDivision.

ANTONIOT.CARPIO

AssociateJustice

Chairperson

CERTIFICATION

PursuanttoSection13,ArticleVIIIoftheConstitution,andtheDivisionChairpersonsAttestation,I
certifythattheconclusionsintheaboveDecisionhadbeenreachedinconsultationbeforethecase
wasassignedtothewriteroftheopinionoftheCourtsDivision.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 35/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833

RENATOC.CORONA

ChiefJustice

*SometimesreferredtoasLoriemarintherecords.

1UnderRule45ofthe1997RulesofCivilProcedureandRule122oftheRevisedRulesofCriminalProcedure.

2Rollo,pp.226.PennedbyAssociateJusticeAndresB.Reyes,Jr.,withAssociateJusticesFernandaLampasPeraltaandApolinarioD.
Bruselas,Jr.,concurring.

3Id.at3132.PennedbyAssociateJusticeAndresB.Reyes,Jr.,withAssociateJusticesFernandaLampasPeraltaandApolinarioD.
Bruselas,Jr.,concurring.

4CArollo,pp.5873.PennedbyJudgeZenaidaT.GalapateLaguilles.

5Records,pp.23.Signedby2ndAssistantCityProsecutorAndresN.Marcos,anunnamedReviewProsecutor,andSeniorState
ProsecutorLeoB.DaceraIII.

6Id.at6.Signedby2ndAssistantCityProsecutorAndresN.Marcos,AssistantCityProsecutorMelquiadesI.Mutiangpili,
ReviewProsecutorRodolfoC.Lalin,andSeniorStateProsecutorLeoB.DaceraIII.

7Id.at530533.PennedbyJudgeZenaidaT.GalapateLaguilles.

8Id.at534545.PennedbyJudgeZenaidaT.GalapateLaguilles.

9Id.at550551.

10Id.at601602.

11Id.at628.

12Id.at650,656657.

13Id.at659.

14Id.at565584.

15Id.at611622.

16Id.at637643.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 36/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833
17Id.at644647.

18Id.at656657.

19CArollo,pp.5960.Italicsintheoriginal.

20Records,p.671.

21Id.at681.

22Id.at688.

23CArollo,pp.6169.Italicsintheoriginal.

24Id.at5873.

25Id.at7172.

26Id.at73.

27Records,p.1093.

28Id.at11231131.

29Id.at11571161.

30CArollo,p.75.

31Id.at76.

32Id.at89.

33Rollo,pp.2526.

34CArollo,pp.609633.

35Id.at653663.

36Id.at665667.

37Id.at672673.

38Id.at676.

39Id.at701704.

40Id.at687699.

41Rollo,pp.59122.

42Id.at6687.

43TSN,23November2004,pp.541(PO3RosauroP.Almonte).

44Records,pp.565584.

45DeAsisv.Hon.Romero,148BPhil.710,716717(1971).Citationsomitted.

46G.R.No.102140,22April1994,231SCRA701,710citingPeoplev.Briones,G.R.No.90319,15October1991,202SCRA708.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 37/38
3/16/2017 G.R.No.193833
47Peoplev.Calimlim,416Phil.403,420(2001).SeealsoPeoplev.DeGuzman,G.R.Nos.9832124,30June1993,224SCRA93People
v.DeGuia,G.R.Nos.10720003,9November1993,227SCRA614Peoplev.Lopez,315Phil.59(1995)Peoplev.Conde,408Phil.532
(2001).

48Peoplev.Manlulu,supra.

49Peoplev.Tonog,Jr.,G.R.No.144497,29June2004,433SCRA139,153154.

50SeeLuisB.Reyes,2TheRevisedPenalCode:CriminalLaw542(1998).

Thefollowingaretheelementsofthecrime:

1.Thattheoffenderisaprivateindividual.

2.Thathekidnapsordetainsanother,orinanyothermannerdeprivesthelatterofhisliberty.

3.Thattheactofdetentionorkidnappingmustbeillegal.

4.Thatinthecommissionoftheoffense,anyofthefollowingcircumstancesispresent:

(a)Thatthekidnappingordetentionlastsformorethan3days

(b)Thatitiscommittedsimulatingpublicauthority

(c)Thatanyseriousphysicalinjuriesareinflicteduponthepersonkidnappedordetainedorthreatstokillhimaremade
or

(d)Thatthepersondetainedisaminor,femaleorapublicofficer.

51359Phil.928,943(1998).

52TSN,11July2005,pp.1315,2021,4851,5354,8182.

53Peoplev.Pagalasan,452Phil.341,363(2003)paraphrasingReginav.Murphy,172Eng.Rep.502(1837).

54Peoplev.Bautista,G.R.No.188601,29June2010,622SCRA524.Citationsomitted.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/november2011/193833.html 38/38