Posted by: Kristina M. Egnar, July 13, 2018
FACTS:
On September 1, 1997, private offended parties together with SPO3 Andres B. Cinco, Jr. and SPO1 Rufo Capoquian, were sent to the Island of Daram, Western Samar to conduct intelligence operations on possible illegal logging activities. At around 4:30-5:00 p.m., the team found two boats measuring 18 meters in length and 5 meters in breadth being constructed at Barangay Locob-Locob. There they met petitioner Benito Astorga, the Mayor of Daram, who turned out to be the owner of the boats. Petitioner called for reinforcements and, moments later, a boat bearing ten armed men, some wearing fatigues, arrived at the scene.
Upon investigation of the group, a heated altercation ensued between petitioner and the DENR team. The offended parties were then brought ti Mayor Astorga's house where the y had dinner and drinks and left at 2:30 AM. SPO3 Capoquian were allowed to go down from the house but not to leave the barangay. On the other hand, SPO3 Cinco and the rest just sat in the house until 2:00 AM when the team was finally allowed to leave. With this, Astorga was guilty of arbitrary detention.
The accused filed a Motion for Reconsideration dated July 11, 2001 which was denied by the Sandiganabayan in a Resolution dated September 28, 2001. A Second Motion for Reconsideration dated October 24, 2001 was also filed, and this was similarly denied in a Resolution dated July 10, 2002
ISSUE:
Whether or not the court grievously erred in finding the accused guilty of Arbitrary Detention
HELD:
The court denied the petition. It is a time-honored doctrine that the trial court's factual findings are conclusive and binding upon appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted. In the case at bar, the restraint resulting from fear is evident. Inspite of their pleas, the witnesses and the complainants were not allowed by petitioner to go home. This refusal was quickly followed by the call for the arrival of almost a dozen "reinforcements," all armed with military-issue rifles, who proceeded to encircle the team, weapons pointed at the complainants and the witnesses. Given such circumstances, the court gave credence to SPO1 Capoquian's statement that it was not "safe" to refuse Mayor Astorga's orders. It was not just the presence of the armed men, but also the evident effect these gunmen had on the actions of the team which proves that fear was indeed instilled in the minds of the team members, to the extent that they felt compelled to stay in Brgy. Lucob-Lucob. The intent to prevent the departure of the complainants and witnesses against their will is thus clear.
The Decision of the Sandiganbayan in Criminal Case No. 24986, dated July 5, 2001 finding petitioner BENITO ASTORGA guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Arbitrary Detention and sentencing him to suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to one (1) year and eight (8) months of prision correccional, as maximum, is AFFIRMED.
*Arbitrary Detention is committed by any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a person.. The elements of the crime are:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds.
FACTS:
On September 1, 1997, private offended parties together with SPO3 Andres B. Cinco, Jr. and SPO1 Rufo Capoquian, were sent to the Island of Daram, Western Samar to conduct intelligence operations on possible illegal logging activities. At around 4:30-5:00 p.m., the team found two boats measuring 18 meters in length and 5 meters in breadth being constructed at Barangay Locob-Locob. There they met petitioner Benito Astorga, the Mayor of Daram, who turned out to be the owner of the boats. Petitioner called for reinforcements and, moments later, a boat bearing ten armed men, some wearing fatigues, arrived at the scene.
Upon investigation of the group, a heated altercation ensued between petitioner and the DENR team. The offended parties were then brought ti Mayor Astorga's house where the y had dinner and drinks and left at 2:30 AM. SPO3 Capoquian were allowed to go down from the house but not to leave the barangay. On the other hand, SPO3 Cinco and the rest just sat in the house until 2:00 AM when the team was finally allowed to leave. With this, Astorga was guilty of arbitrary detention.
The accused filed a Motion for Reconsideration dated July 11, 2001 which was denied by the Sandiganabayan in a Resolution dated September 28, 2001. A Second Motion for Reconsideration dated October 24, 2001 was also filed, and this was similarly denied in a Resolution dated July 10, 2002
ISSUE:
Whether or not the court grievously erred in finding the accused guilty of Arbitrary Detention
HELD:
The court denied the petition. It is a time-honored doctrine that the trial court's factual findings are conclusive and binding upon appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted. In the case at bar, the restraint resulting from fear is evident. Inspite of their pleas, the witnesses and the complainants were not allowed by petitioner to go home. This refusal was quickly followed by the call for the arrival of almost a dozen "reinforcements," all armed with military-issue rifles, who proceeded to encircle the team, weapons pointed at the complainants and the witnesses. Given such circumstances, the court gave credence to SPO1 Capoquian's statement that it was not "safe" to refuse Mayor Astorga's orders. It was not just the presence of the armed men, but also the evident effect these gunmen had on the actions of the team which proves that fear was indeed instilled in the minds of the team members, to the extent that they felt compelled to stay in Brgy. Lucob-Lucob. The intent to prevent the departure of the complainants and witnesses against their will is thus clear.
The Decision of the Sandiganbayan in Criminal Case No. 24986, dated July 5, 2001 finding petitioner BENITO ASTORGA guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Arbitrary Detention and sentencing him to suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to one (1) year and eight (8) months of prision correccional, as maximum, is AFFIRMED.
*Arbitrary Detention is committed by any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a person.. The elements of the crime are:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds.
