G.R. No. 261670 , August 23, 2023
Allan Gacasan y Langamin, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

The petitioner, Allan Gacasan y Langamin, was charged with violation of Article 168 of the Revised Penal Code (Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit). The Information alleged that on November 10, 2018, in Manolo Fortich, Bukidnon, Gacasan willfully, unlawfully, and criminally possessed and attempted to sell 125 pieces of counterfeit Philippine peso bills (100 pieces of 1000-peso bills and 25 pieces of 500-peso bills) with a total face value of PHP 112,500.00, knowing them to be forged. The case stemmed from a buy-bust operation conducted by the Criminal Investigation Detection Group (CIDG) after a confidential agent reported the proliferation of counterfeit bills. During the operation, Gacasan delivered the counterfeit bills to a poseur-buyer, Police Corporal Joseph A. Dalman, in exchange for marked money. A certification from Atty. Andrew E. Asperin, a Bank Officer II of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), confirmed that the seized bills were counterfeit. Gacasan pleaded not guilty and claimed during trial that an unknown person threw the fake money at the bench where he was sitting, and he was merely instructed to deliver a brown envelope to the poseur-buyer without knowing its contents. He also questioned the identity and chain of custody of the seized items. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Gacasan guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of six years of prision correccional maximum as minimum to ten years, eight months, and one day of prision mayor medium as maximum, plus a fine of PHP 7,500.00. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision in toto. Gacasan filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of Allan Gacasan y Langamin for violation of Article 168 of the Revised Penal Code, specifically, whether the prosecution proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the conviction with modification. The Court held that all elements of illegal possession and use of false bank notes under Article 168 were proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) the bills were forged or falsified, as certified by the BSP; (2) Gacasan knew the bills were counterfeit, inferred from his receipt of consideration during the sale and his defensive behavior; and (3) he possessed them with intent to use, evidenced by his act of delivering them in exchange for payment during the buy-bust operation. The Court found the testimonies of the poseur-buyer and the BSP officer credible and rejected Gacasan’s denial and frame-up claim, noting the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty by the police officers. The Court also ruled that the chain of custody of the seized items was properly established. However, the Supreme Court modified the penalty. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law and considering the absence of modifying circumstances, the proper penalty is one degree lower than prision mayor in its medium period (the prescribed penalty for the related offense of forgery under Article 166). Thus, the indeterminate penalty is modified to eight years and one day of prision mayor medium as minimum to ten years, eight months, and one day of prision mayor maximum as maximum. The fine is also modified to PHP 10,000.00, applying the more favorable fine under the Revised Penal Code prior to its amendment by Republic Act No. 10951 , pursuant to Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code.