Agote vs.

Lorenzo
G.R. No. 142675. July 22, 2005

FACTS:
Petitioner Vicente Agote was charged to have violated Presidential Decree No. 1866 (Illegal Possession
of Firearms) and COMELEC Resolution No. 2826 (Gun Ban) for having in possession one (1) .38 cal.
Rev. with four (4) live bullets in a public place during the election period without having secured the
necessary license and authority from the COMELEC. During the pendency of the case, Republic Act No.
8294 was approved into law. Eventually, the trial court rendered judgment of conviction in both cases
wherein separate penalties were imposed respectively. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, claiming that
the penalty for illegal possession of firearms under P.D. No. 1866 had already been reduced by the
subsequent enactment of Republic Act No. 8294, which the trial court subsequently denied. He then filed
a petition before the Court of Appeals which was docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 2991-UDK, but was
likewise dismissed.
ISSUES:
1) Whether or not Republic Act No. 8294 should be applied retroactively.
2) Whether or not such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as a special aggravating
circumstance.
HELD:
As early as August 1997, the month after Rep. Act No. 8294 took effect, this Court has pronounced in
Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals that said law must be given retroactive effect in favor of those accused
under P.D. No. 1866. There can be no separate offense of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition
if there is another crime committed such as, in this case, that of illegal possession of dangerous drugs.
Hence, if the ‘other crime’ is murder or homicide, illegal possession of firearms becomes merely an
aggravating circumstance, not a separate offense. Since direct assault with multiple attempted homicide
was committed in this case, appellant can no longer be held liable for illegal possession of firearms. The
provisions of Rep. Act No. 8294 should be applied liberally and retroactively in that appellant must be
acquitted of the charge of illegal possession of firearms.
1) Yes. The rule is that penal laws shall have a retroactive effect in so far as they favor the person guilty
of a felony. Republic Act No. 8294 lowers the penalty for illegal possession of firearms depending on the
class of firearm possessed. The lighter penalty may be imposed to a person who shall unlawfully possess
any firearm or ammunition, “unless no other crime was committed”. Moreover, the Court has already ruled
in Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals that said law must be given retroactive effect in favor of those accused
under P.D. No. 1866. But as violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 2826 or the Gun Ban was also
committed by the petitioner at the same time, the Court cannot but set aside petitioner’s conviction for
illegal possession of firearm.
2) No. Section 1 of RA 8294 substantially provides that any person who shall unlawfully possess any
firearm or ammunition shall be penalized, “unless no other crime was committed”. It further provides that
such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered only as an aggravating circumstance in cases of
homicide or murder. Since the crime committed was in violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 2826 or the
Gun Ban, illegal possession of firearms cannot be deemed an aggravating circumstance.