THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. RAMON LOPEZ, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE.

People versus Lopez

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against Ramon Lopez, a criminal case for illegal possession of false keys under the Revised Penal Code. The accused moved to dismiss the information on the ground that the facts charged do not constitute an offense, and the trial court agreed and quashed the information. The case matters because it teaches how an information is tested for sufficiency: whether the very words of the charge, read together with the statute, allege every element of the crime, even where the prosecution omits a description that the law itself already supplies.

Procedural History

Ramon Lopez, Manuel Buico, and Arturo Caniete were first charged in the Justice of the Peace Court of Bacuag, Surigao del Norte, with illegal possession of firearms and, in a separate complaint, with illegal possession of false keys. They pleaded guilty to illegal possession of firearms and not guilty to illegal possession of false keys. The record of the false keys case was transmitted to the Court of First Instance of Surigao del Norte, where an information was filed against the three accused. In that court, Buico and Caniete pleaded guilty, while Lopez pleaded not guilty and stood trial. After the prosecution presented one witness, Lopez moved to dismiss on the ground that the facts charged do not constitute an offense, arguing that the information failed to allege that the picklock or false keys were specially adapted to the commission of robbery. The trial court dismissed the case. The prosecution appealed, and the matter reached the Supreme Court.

Facts

At ten o'clock in the morning of December 21, 1960, the Chief of Police of Bacuag, Surigao del Norte, apprehended three suspicious-looking strangers loitering in Pagao, a sitio of Bacuag. A bag they were carrying was confiscated. Inside were three carbines, caliber thirty M1; one revolver, caliber twenty-two; three flashlights with batteries; two fully loaded carbine ammunition magazines; twelve rounds of carbine ammunition; one balisong; a screw driver; seven false keys, one of which was a master key; trousers; shirts; and a pair of shoes.

After investigation, Ramon Lopez, Manuel Buico, and Arturo Caniete were charged in the Justice of the Peace Court of Bacuag with illegal possession of firearms and, in a separate complaint, with illegal possession of false keys. They pleaded guilty to illegal possession of firearms and not guilty to illegal possession of false keys.

When the record of the false keys case reached the Court of First Instance of Surigao del Norte, an information was filed alleging that the accused, with deliberate and criminal intent and without lawful cause, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously had in their possession, custody, and control seven false keys, one of which is a picklock or master key, contrary to Article 301 in relation to Article 305 of the Revised Penal Code, with the aggravating circumstance that the offenders had been previously punished for an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty, namely their conviction on December 24, 1960 for illegal possession of firearms. Buico and Caniete pleaded guilty; Lopez pleaded not guilty and stood trial. After one prosecution witness, Lopez moved to dismiss on the ground that the facts charged do not constitute an offense, because the information did not allege that the picklock or false keys were specially adapted to the commission of robbery. The trial court dismissed the case, and the prosecution appealed.

Issues

• Whether or not the information for illegal possession of false keys validly charges an offense even though it does not allege that the picklock or false keys were specially adapted to the commission of robbery.
• Whether or not the allegation of possession of seven false keys, one of which is a picklock or master key, sufficiently describes tools specially adapted to the commission of robbery.

Applicable Provisions

Article 304 of the Revised Penal Code provides:

Article 304. Possession of picklocks or similar tools. Any person who shall without lawful cause have in his possession picklocks or similar tools specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery, shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correctional in its minimum period.

This is the crime charged, and the Court draws from it the two elements that the information must allege.

Article 299 of the Revised Penal Code, in its relevant portion, provides:

Article 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or Office devoted to worship. Any armed person who shall commit robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship, shall be punished by reclusion temporal, if the value of the property taken shall exceed 250 pesos, and if (a) The malefactors shall enter the house or building in which the robbery was committed, by any of the following means: 3. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools.

This shows that picking locks is one way of gaining entrance to commit robbery, so a picklock is in itself specially adapted to robbery.

Article 302 of the Revised Penal Code, in its relevant portion, provides:

Article 302. Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private building. Any robbery committed in an uninhabited place or in a building other than those mentioned in the first paragraph of article 299, if the value of the property taken exceeds 250 pesos, shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods provided that any of the following circumstances is present: 3. If the entrance has been effected through the use of keys, picklocks or other similar tools.

This confirms the same point for robbery in an uninhabited place or private building.

Article 306 of the Revised Penal Code defines false keys to include the tools mentioned in the next preceding article, which is Article 304. This is why the allegation of false keys sufficiently describes the tools.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the information validly charges the offense. The crime of illegal possession of picklocks or similar tools has two elements: possession of picklocks or similar tools specially adapted to the commission of robbery, and possession without lawful cause. The information alleged that the accused possessed, without lawful cause, seven false keys, one of which is a picklock or master key. A picklock, a tool used in picking locks, is in itself specially adapted to the commission of robbery of the kind provided in Article 299 and Article 302. Since picking locks is one way to gain entrance to commit robbery, a picklock is per se specially adapted to the commission of robbery. The description of a picklock as specially adapted to the commission of robbery is therefore unnecessary for the sufficiency of the information. Notwithstanding the omission of that superfluous description, the charge of illegal possession of a picklock is valid, and both elements of the crime are clearly alleged.

On the second issue, the Court held that the allegation of illegal possession of seven false keys sufficiently describes the tools. Article 306 defines false keys to include the tools mentioned in the next preceding article, and Article 304 mentions picklocks or similar tools specially adapted to the commission of robbery. It follows that the term false keys appearing in the information sufficiently describes such tools.

Doctrine

Illegal possession of picklocks or similar tools under Article 304 has two elements: possession of picklocks or similar tools specially adapted to the commission of robbery, and possession without lawful cause. A picklock is per se specially adapted to the commission of robbery, because picking locks is one of the means of entering to commit robbery under Article 299 and Article 302. An information that alleges possession of a picklock or master key without lawful cause therefore validly charges the offense even without the express allegation that the tool is specially adapted to robbery, that description being superfluous. False keys, as defined in Article 306 by reference to Article 304, sufficiently describe tools specially adapted to the commission of robbery.

Disposition

The Supreme Court set aside the order quashing the information and remanded the case for further trial, without costs.

Remember This

The one line to memorize: a picklock is per se specially adapted to the commission of robbery, so an information alleging its possession without lawful cause need not repeat that description. Examiners use this case to test the sufficiency of an information and the elements of illegal possession of picklocks or similar tools under Article 304.