Maita was the object of Solito’s avid sexual desires. Solito had attempted many times to entice Maita to a date in bed with him but Maita had consistently refused. Fed up with all her rejections, Solito abducted Maita around 7 p.m. one night. With his cohorts, Solito forced Maita into a Toyota lnnova and drove off with her to a green-painted house situated in a desolate part of the town. There, Solito succeeded in having carnal knowledge of Maita against her will.
Meanwhile, the police authorities were tipped off that at 11:30 p.m. on that same night Solito would be selling marijuana outside the green-painted house. Acting on the tip, the PNP station of the town formed a buy-bust team with PO2 Masahol being designated the poseur buyer. During the buy-bust operation, Solito opened the trunk of the Toyota lnnova to retrieve the bag of marijuana to be sold to PO2 Masahol. To cut the laces that he had tied the bag with, Solito took out a Swiss knife, but his doing so prompted PO2 Masahol to effect his immediate arrest out of fear that he would attack him with the knife. PO2 Masahol then confiscated the bag of marijuana as well as the Toyota lnnova.
(a) Two informations were filed against Solito in the RTC – one for forcible abduction with rape, raffled to Branch 8 of the RTC; the other for illegal sale of drugs, assigned to Branch 29 of the RTC. Was Solito charged with the proper offenses based on the circumstances? Explain your answer. (5%)
(b) While the Prosecution was presenting its evidence in Branch 29, Branch 8 convicted Solito. Immediately after the judgment of conviction was promulgated, Solito filed in both Branches a motion for the release of the Toyota lnnova. He argued and proved that he had only borrowed the vehicle from his brother, the registered owner. Branch 8 granted the motion but Branch 29 denied it. Were the two courts correct in their rulings? Explain your answer. (5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
(a) Solito was improperly charged with drug sale instead of attempted sale; and (b) both courts ruled correctly on the release motions.
Abduction is absorbed in rape or complexed under Article 48 of the RPC, while drug sale requires delivery to be consummated. Under Article 45 of the RPC, property of an innocent third party is exempt from forfeiture. Under Section 20 of RA 9165, seized items remain in custodia legis during trial.
Here, Solito was arrested before delivering the marijuana, making the charge attempted sale. Branch 8 correctly released the car to his innocent brother after conviction under Article 45. Branch 29 properly denied release because the drug case remains pending under Section 20.
Consequently, the drug sale charge was improper, while both courts correctly resolved the release motions.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What crime is committed when an offender is arrested while drawing a knife to open a bag of marijuana before delivering it to a buyer?
The crime remains in the attempted stage because the actual delivery and sale transaction were interrupted before completion.
Can a motor vehicle owned by an innocent third party be ordered confiscated or forfeited by the trial court upon conviction of the accused?
Under Article 45 of the RPC, instruments of a crime belonging to an innocent third person cannot be confiscated.
Why was Branch 29 correct in denying the motion to release the Toyota Innova while the drug case was still pending presentation of evidence?
Seized evidence must remain in custodia legis under the control of the court while the criminal proceeding is pending.
When is the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs under RA 9165 considered fully consummated?
Illegal sale of drugs is consummated upon the concurrence of the sales agreement and the delivery of the drug.
What is the effect on property seized as evidence when the trial court promulgates a final judgment of conviction and the case terminates?
Upon termination of the case, property belonging to an innocent third party must be returned rather than forfeited.
Learn more about these topics
1. Forcible Abduction Complex
Under Article 335 in relation to Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, when forcible abduction is committed as a necessary means to commit rape, a complex crime of forcible abduction with rape is formed. However, if the abduction is merely incidental or absorbed in the execution of rape, the proper charge remains rape. In either case, the prosecution must properly allege the specific qualifying and inherent circumstances in the criminal information.
2. Attempted Drug Sale
Under Section 5 in relation to Section 26 of Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, consummated illegal sale of dangerous drugs requires the complete concurrence of the sale transaction and the actual delivery of the drug to the buyer. If the seller is arrested while retrieving the drugs before actual exchange or delivery occurs, the offense is committed only in its attempted stage.
3. Forfeiture Third Party
Under Article 45 of the Revised Penal Code and Section 20 of Republic Act No. 9165, instruments and proceeds of a crime are subject to confiscation and forfeiture, provided they do not belong to an innocent third party who has not participated in the offense. While trial courts must release seized property belonging to an innocent owner upon termination of the case, pending criminal cases require the property to remain in custodia legis as evidence until final judgment.