SOLEDAD V PEOPLE

(G.R. No. 184274, February 23, 2011)

FACTS:
Enticed by a loan offer, Henry Yu was told by a certain “Arthur” [later identified as petitioner Mark Soledad].
to submit various documents and he complied by submitting his Globe handyphone card, IDs, and
statements of accounts. Subsequently, Yu followed up on his loan status to no avail.

Months later, Yu was charged for additional accounts in his Globe handyphone statement. Apparently,
additional 5 numbers were added under his name, with the application for said phone lines bearing his
picture and signature. Yu also learned that his Citibank Credit Card database information was altered and
that he had a credit card application with Metrobank.

Thereafter, Yu and a Metrobank employee lodged a complaint with the NBI. In turn, the NBI conducted an
entrapment operation. The NBI Special Investigator, posing as a delivery boy, asked for “Henry Yu”.
Soledad then introduced himself as such and presented 2 IDs bearing Yu’s name, but with Soledad’s photo.
Upon Soledad’s signing of the delivery receipt, the Investigator introduced himself as NBI and apprehended
the former.

Soledad was thus charged with violation of RA 8484 for “possessing a counterfeit access device or access
device fraudulently applied for." RTC convicted Soledad; CA affirming. Soledad now assails his conviction,
averring that he was never in “possession” of the subject credit card because he was arrested immediately
after signing the delivery receipt. Thus, he did not yet know the contents of the envelope delivered and had
no control over the subject credit card.

ISSUES:
W/N Soledad was legally in "possession" of the credit card subject of the case

RULING:
YES.

RATIO:
RA 8484, does not define the word "possession." Thus, we use the term as defined in Art 523, NCC, that is,
"possession is the holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a right." The acquisition of possession
involves two elements: 1) the material holding of the thing; and 2) the intent to possess it.

In this case, Soledad materially held the envelope containing the credit card with the intent to
possess. Contrary to his contention that the credit card never came into his possession because it was
only delivered to him, the facts show that he did an active part in acquiring possession by presenting the
IDs purportedly showing his identity as Henry Yu. Certainly, he had the intention to possess the same. Had
he not actively participated, the envelope would not have been given to him. Moreover, his signature on the
delivery receipt indicates that there was delivery and that possession was transferred to him as the
recipient. Undoubtedly, Soledad knew that the envelope contained the Metrobank credit card, as clearly
indicated in the receipt, coupled with the fact that he applied for it using Yu’s identity..