B

S
C
A

TO : MR. MICHAEL MERTALLA

FROM : YSRAEL D. LOZANO (STUDENT ID# 119-0596)
DATE : SEPTEMBERE 2023
SUBJECT : CUST 335

Asynchronous;

Identify who are parties involved in the case?

*MARIBEL B. JARDELEZA, Petitioner,vs.
*PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent

What are the issues raised in this case?

*The petition seeks to review the Court of Appeals' decision affirming the Regional Trial Court's conviction of Maribel B. Jardeleza
for violating the Philippines' Tariff and Customs Code.

*On October 23, 1997, Jardeleza was charged with violating the TCC by the RTC of Pasay City.

*The accused knowingly and unlawfully imported 20.1 kilograms of gold jewelry into the Philippines, hiding it in a hanger bag and
not declaring it in the Customs Declaration form.
Enumerate the facts that support the counter productivity of signing the order?
*On February 27, 1997, the Customs Police at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) issued an alert order to monitor an
alleged carrier of jewelry on Philippine Airlines Flight No. PR-502. Customs Examiner Estelita Nario was assigned to examine the
luggage of the crew members. When Nario found three black leatherette envelopes containing Bosch spark plug brochures and
jewelry, she retrieved the envelopes and examined them. The incident led to the arrest of the alleged carrier and the subsequent
investigation.

*In 1997, Customs Police at NAIA arrested an alleged jewelry carrier on Philippine Airlines Flight PR-502 after examining three
envelopes containing Bosch spark plug brochures and jewelry.

*Jardeleza, a 23-year-old with PAL, was involved in a taxable jewelry business with her friend Alberto. She was unaware of the
Bureau of Customs' policy and had to declare her taxable items in the Customs Declaration Form. When PAL Flight No. PR-502
landed from Singapore, Jardeleza's luggage was examined, and a count was made. During the examination, Jardeleza was introduced
to Aurelio Cabugao, the investigator, who was later revealed to be Fuentebella.

*Jardeleza was demanded by Atty. Mangaoang for ₱100,000.00 and ₱400,000 for the other Customs people involved. She refused,
and was instructed to call if she had the money. Jardeleza adduced evidence, including a Memorandum of Cabugao, 1st Indorsement,
and Warrant of Seizure and Detention Order.

*Atty. Mangaoang denied bribery accusations against PAL stewardess Jardeleza. She testified that she was approached by Customs
Deputy Collector Rodolfo Buendia and other officials, offering her a bribe of 1.5 million pesos. Mangaoang claimed that the offer
was made to her at the airport, but she did not charge. Jardeleza charged her and Mangaoang.

What is/are the decision/s of the court/courts.

*The trial court found Marilenbo Jardeleza guilty of smuggling under Section 3601 of the TCC, as amended, and sentenced her to
indeterminate imprisonment, a fine of ₱10,000, and forfeiture of the entire jewelry subject.

*The Honorable Court A quato ruled in favor of the accused under Section 3601 of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines,
citing the offense punishable under Section 2505.

*The Honorable Court issued a quo regarding Customs Memorandum Order Nos. 40 and 53, and the administrative construction
based on the current provisions of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines.

*The Honorable Court ruled in favor of the accused, despite the lack of reasonable doubt, assuming the charge and proof can be
legally placed under Section 3601 of the TCC.

*The petitioner argues that Section 2505 of the TCC does not define a crime but provides administrative penalties for unclaimed
dutiable articles in baggage. It outlines remedies available to the Bureau of Customs for seizing such items. Section 3601 of the TCC
defines smuggling as a criminal offense, providing compound penalties of fines, imprisonment, and fines for serious injuries or
homicide. Smuggling is committed by fraudulently importing or bringing articles contrary to law, assisting in doing so, or receiving,
concealing, buying, or selling goods after importation.

*The petitioner was acquitted of a crime under Section 2505 of the TCC for not declaring her jewelry in customs declaration form.
The prosecution argued she admitted to possessing the jewelry and acquired it for business. The trial court found her guilty based on
evidence of her jewelry being hidden in a decoy envelope. The Presiding Judge found her testimony credible.

*Estelita Nario testified that she checked her baggage with Nario, and she claimed she had jewelry items with her. However, the trial
court denied her claim, stating that Cabugao's Memorandum was hearsay and that Nario had direct contact with the accused. The
court affirmed the trial court's findings on appeal, stating that the findings of facts are conclusive unless they are misunderstood or
misinterpreted, which could alter the outcome of the case.

*The court ruled that truth is often hidden in nooks and crannies, only visible to the judge who tries the case. The upper court may
rely on the superior advantage of the lower court in determining a fact, as evidence of truth can be difficult to discern. The petitioner,
who had no intention to fraudulently import jewelries, failed to declare them in the Customs Declaration Form and requested Nario
to continue with the examination of the leatherette envelopes. She cannot evade criminal liability for her actions.

*The petition is dismissed due to lack of merit, and costs are ordered against the petitioner.

YSRAEL D. LOZANO
3rd Year BSCA-B1

Student Id # : 119-0596
School email : ydlozano@aims.edu.ph
Personal email : ydlozano090200@gmail.com
Mobile # : +63 921 769 9918