FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 128618. November 16, 1998]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FELICISIMO NAR ASA, !IMM" ORANIA #$% MATEO NAR ASA, accused, FELICISIMO NAR ASA #$% !IMM" ORANIA appellants. &ECISION
PANGANI'AN, J.(

What crime or crimes are committed when a killing is perpetrated with the use of unlicensed firearms? In the a sence of the firearms themsel!es" ma# illegal possession of firearms e pro!en # parol e!idence?
T)e C#*e

$ppellants Felicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania seek the re!ersal of the Octo er &&" &''( Decision)&* of the Regional Trial +ourt of $laminos" ,angasinan" in +riminal +ase Nos- .(.'/$" .(01/$ and .(0(/$" finding them guilt# e#ond reasona le dou t of illegal possession of firearms in its aggra!ated form and sentencing them to reclusion perpetua. $ssistant ,ro!incial ,rosecutor 2miliano $- Ra ina filed three Informations ).* against the appellants and their co/accused" 3ateo Nar!asa- In +riminal +ase No- .(01/$" the $mended Information filed on No!em er &4" &''5 charged Felicisimo Nar!asa 6in conspirac# with the other accused7 with aggra!ated illegal possession of firearm allegedl# committed as follows8

9That on or a out Fe ruar# (" &''. at Sitio :ugtong" :aranga# ,atar" )3*unicipalit# of $gno" ),*ro!ince of ,angasinan" New )sic* Repu lic of the ,hilippines and within the ;urisdiction of this <onora le +ourt" the a o!e/named accused" did then and there willfull#" unlawfull# and feloniousl# ha!e in his possession" control and custod# an 3/&0 Rifle without first securing the necessar# license or permit from the lawful authorities and which firearm in conspirac# with %imm# Orania and 3ateo Nar!asa was used in the killing of one S,O5 ,rimo +am a" !ictim in +rim- +ase No- .(.'/ $-=
In +riminal +ase No- .(0(/$" %imm# Orania 6in conspirac# with the other accused7 was charged with aggra!ated illegal possession of firearm in the $mended Information which reads8

9That on or a out Fe ruar# (" &''. at Sitio :ugtong" :aranga# ,atar" )3*unicipalit# of $gno" ),*ro!ince of ,angasinan" New )sic* Repu lic of the ,hilippines and within the ;urisdiction of this <onora le +ourt" the a o!e/named accused" did then and there willfull#" unlawfull# and feloniousl# ha!e in his possession" control and custod# a -54 >-S- +ar ine without first securing the necessar# license ?and?or permit from the lawful authorities and which firearm in conspirac# with 3ateo Nar!asa and Felicisimo Nar!asa was used in the killing of S,O5 ,rimo +am a" !ictim in +rim+ase No- .(.'/$-=
In +riminal +ase No- .(.'/$" Felicisimo Nar!asa" %imm# Orania and 3ateo Nar!asa were charged with homicide allegedl# committed as follows8

9That on or a out Fe ruar# (" &''." at Sitio :ugtong" ):*aranga# ,atar" )3*unicipalit# of $gno" ),*ro!ince of ,angasinan" New )sic* Repu lic of the ,hilippines and within the ;urisdiction of this <onora le +ourt" the a o!e/named accused" conspiring" confederating and mutuall# helping one another" with intent to kill" armed with high powered guns" did then and there willfull#" unlawfull#" and feloniousl# shoot S,O5 ,RI3O +$3:$ which caused his instantaneous death as a conse@uence" to the damage and pre;udice of his heirs-=
Felicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania were arrested" ut 3ateo Nar!asa remained at large- When arraigned" the two appellants" assisted # their counsel" )5* pleaded not guilt#- )0* Trial proceeded in due course- Thereafter" the court a quo rendered the assailed Decision" the dispositi!e portion of which reads8

9W<2R2FOR2" in consideration of the foregoing premises and the e!idence presented" this +ourt finds oth accused Felicisimo Nar!asa in +riminal +ase No.(01/$ and %imm# Orania in +riminal +ase No-.(0(/$ )g*uilt# e#ond reasona le dou t of the crime of )i*llegal )p*ossession of )f*irearms in its aggra!ated form in these cases and therefore" oth accused are sentenced to death penalt# ut for reasons that the law at that time of the commission of the crime prohi its death sentence penalt#" these two accused therefore shall each suffer the sentence of single" indi!isi le penalt# of reclusion perpetua and are ordered to pa# ;ointl# and se!erall# the heirs of the !ictim the amount of ,A4"444-44 as death indemnit# and moral damages of ,&44"444-44 each" plus cost9In +riminal +ase No- .(.'/$ for )h*omicide" this +ourt has considered this case as )a* necessar# component of the crimes of )i*llegal )p*ossession in their aggra!ated form" as the same is merel# an element of the principal offense of )i*llegal )p*ossession of )f*irearms in )its* aggra!ated form" which is the gra!er offense-

9With respect to accused 3ateo Nar!asa" since he has not een arrested and ne!er rought to the ;urisdiction of this +ourt" this case in the meantime" is ordered archi!ed insofar as said accused 3ateo Nar!asa is concerned9Bet an $lias Warrant of $rrest issue as against accused 3ateo Nar!asa9The ) *ail ond posted # accused Felicisimo Nar!asa is here # ordered cancelled-=
$ppellantsC counsel then filed a Notice of $ppeal to the +ourt of $ppeals- )A* In an Order)(* dated Octo er .0" &''(" the trial court deemed the appeal filed # Felicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania perfected" and effected the transmittal of the case records to the +ourt of $ppeals- RealiDing the mistake" the +ourt of $ppeals su se@uentl# forwarded the records to this +ourt-)E*
T)e F#+,* Evidence for the Prosecution

In his :rief" the solicitor general)1* presented the following narration of facts8

9On Fe ruar# (" &''." after lunch time)"* Villamor Baderas and 2rnesto Nagal" councilmen of Fuinaoa#anan" :ani" ,angasinan" acting on a report that there were missing cara aos" pigs and goats" repaired to the far/flung Sitio :ugtong of the town of :ani and to Sitio ,atar of the ad;oining town of $gno in ,angasinan" which the# reached at around A854 that afternoon- Then Baderas and Nagal patrolled the area$long their wa#" the two chanced upon the gang of appellants)-* )T*he# were fi!e and three of them were armed- %imm# Orania was holding a cali er -54 >-S- car ine" 3ateo Nar!asa was armed with )an* 3/&( and Felicisimo Nar!asa was carr#ing an 3/&09The two are familiar with those kind)s* of guns as the# ha!e seen similar ones carried # policemen- The# said" a car ine is shorter than )an* 3/&0 and )an* 3/&( is longer than )an* 3/&0 6Tsn-" $pril .&" &''0" pp- &/5A" Decem er &5" &''A" pp- &/&.79Baderas and Nagal simpl# stared at the fi!e and then the# proceeded to their wa# home- >nluckil# for the goons" the two councilmen met the two policemen)"* S,O5 ,rimo +am a and ,O. Simeon Na!ora who were on patrol and the# reported what the# saw 6I id79The two policemen were also responding to a report a out the missing animals and the# suggested that all of them should track down the armed goons 6I id7-

9$fter walking some distance" the four responding men saw the house of appellant Felicisimo Nar!asa on a hill# portion around &44 meters awa# from their path- The# decided to in!estigate at the house ut efore the# could negotiate the distance" the# were met # a !olle# of gunfire- The four)"* who were ten meters apart)"* do!e and sought co!er 6Tsn-" $pril" &''0" p- &&7- When the firing took a halt" Baderas had the courage to raise his head and )!iew* GGG the source of the gunfire- Baderas saw Felicisimo Nar!asa in a s@uatting position aiming at the two policemen and %imm# Orania was seated near him guiding him at his target- 3ateo Nar!asa was also aiming his gun- There was an eGchange of gunfire as the policemen were a le to take proper positions- >nfortunatel#" S,O5 +am a was hit- Na!ora summoned Baderas and Nagal to get closer to gi!e aid to +am a- Baderas and Nagal carried +am a as the# retreated and" Na!ora followed mo!ing ackwards as he kept firing at their enemies 6I id" tsn-" %ul# .4" &''0" pp- &/1H tsn-" $ugust &A" &''0" pp- ./5479In the process of the retreat" +am a ) led* profusel# and he died e!en efore he could e rought out from the scene of the crime9The od# of +am a was left at the scene of the crime while his companions escaped and called for help- Se!eral policemen arri!ed- ,ieces of e!idence like empt# shells of 3/&(" 3/&0 and cali er -54 >-S- car ine ullets were gathered and some policemen were tasked to track down the goons 62Ghs- +" +/& to +/0H tsn-" $ugust &(" &''0" pp(/&479Shortl# thereafter" Felicisimo Nar!asa" Ilicerio Nar!asa" Rederio Nar!asa and %imm# Orania were apprehended- 3ateo Nar!asa was not found- The four were in!estigated and paraffin testedFelicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania were found positi!e of gunpowder urns 6Tsn-" $ugust &(" &''0" pp- &&/&A7-=)'*
Evidence for the Defense

$ppellants den# the charges against them- Felicisimo Nar!asa e!en claims that his son $rnel was shot # 2rnesto Nagal" Villamor Baderas and ,O. Simeon Na!ora- In their :rief" )&4* the# state8

9Felicisimo Nar!asa testified that he was sleeping at his house on the afternoon of Fe ruar# (" &''. when Ilicerio Nar!asa woke him up and informed him that his son $rnel was shot- <e went downstairs and saw his co/accused %imm# Orania em racing his son- <e asked his son who shot him and the latter told his father that it was the group of +ouncilman Baderas who shot him- <e instructed Orania and his wife to ring his son to the hospital ut the latter died at the hospital- <e further a!erred that efore he slept" %imm# Orania" Ilicerio Nar!asa and Rederio Nar!asa were in his

house drinking two ottles of gin after helping him )fiG* the fence in his house- $ccused/appellant Nar!asa when asked to eGplain the charge against him denied committing the same- On 3arch &E" &''. he ga!e his affida!it naming 2rnesto Nagal" Villamor Baderas and Simeon Na!ora as the assailants of his son- 6TSN" $ugust 1" &'''" pp- 5/&E7 9%imm# Orania testified that on Fe ruar# (" &''." he was in the house of his co/ accused Felicisimo Nar!asa ecause he was in!ited to work on the fence of Felicisimo- $fter finishing their work" %imm#)"* together with Ilicerio and Rederio Nar!asa)"* drunk two ottles of gin- $t a out A844 oCclock in the afternoon he instructed $rnel Nar!asa to get their cara aos graDing around &44 meters north of the house of Felicisimo" when he heard a gunshot coming from that direction- $rnel shouted for help" so he proceeded to the place where $rnel was shot and carried him to the house of Felicisimo- The latter was awakened # Ilicerio and when he asked his son who shot him" $rnel answered that it was the group of Baderas9%imm# Orania further a!erred that he knew nothing and denied participation in the killing of ,rimo +am a- That on the da# after Fe ruar# (" &''." the# were picked up # the police- 6TSN" $ugust .4" &''(" pp- 5/&57-=)&&*
R-./$0 o1 ,)e Tr/#. Co-r,

The trial court accorded credi ilit# to the prosecution witnesses and held that mere denial could not o!ercome the prosecution e!idence showing that appellants used high/powered firearms to shoot at the prosecution witnesses" there # resulting in the death of S,O5 ,rimo +am a- Further supporting said testimonies were the results of the paraffin test conducted on appellants and the reco!er# of !arious cartridges and shells matching the firearms purportedl# used in the crime- Though these unlicensed firearms were not presented as e!idence" the trial court" citing People v. Ferrera,)&.* ruled that appellants ma# still e con!icted of illegal possession of firearmsFinall#" the trial court found that appellants acted in conspirac# in the killing of ,rimo +am a- <owe!er" on the asis of People v. Barros")&5* it held that the homicide was merel# an element of the illegal possession of firearms in its aggra!ated formH thus" homicide in the present case was taken into account not as a separate crime ut as an aggra!ating circumstance which increased the penalt# for the illegal possession of firearms<ence" this appeal-)&0*
A**/0$me$, o1 Error*

In assailing the trial courtCs Decision" appellants interpose the following errors8

9I T<2 TRI$B +O>RT IR$V2BJ 2RR2D IN IIVINI F>BB W2II<T $ND +R2D2N+2 TO T<2 IN+ONSIST2NT T2STI3ONI2S OF T<2 WITN2SS2S FOR T<2 ,ROS2+>TIONII T<2 TRI$B +O>RT 2RR2D IN +ONVI+TINI T<2 $++>S2D/ $,,2BB$NTS D2S,IT2 T<2 INS>FFI+I2N+J OF T<2 ,ROS2+>TIONCS 2VID2N+2 TO W$RR$NT +ONVI+TION OF T<2 $++>S2D/$,,2BB$NTS :2JOND R2$SON$:B2 DO>:T OF T<2 +RI32 OF $IIR$V$T2D IBB2I$B ,OSS2SSION OF FIR2$R3-=)&A*
In the main" the resolution of this case re!ol!es around the credi ilit# of the prosecution witnesses" the sufficienc# of the prosecution e!idence and the characteriDation of the crime committedT)e Co-r,2* R-./$0

The appeal is not meritorious- In light of Repu lic $ct 1.'0" )&(* howe!er" appellants should e con!icted onl# of homicide" with the special aggra!ating circumstance of the use of illegall# possessed firearmsF/r*, I**-e( Credibility of Prosecution Witnesses

$ppellants @uestion the credi ilit# of Witnesses Baderas and Nagal ecause of an alleged inconsistenc# in their testimonies- Baderas testified that there was an eGchange of fire etween appellants and ,O. Simeon Na!ora" while Nagal declared that onl# the appellants fired- $ppellants point out that 9conflicting testimonies on a material and rele!ant point casts dou t )on* the truthfulness or !eracit#=)&E* of such testimonies$ppellantsC contention is untena le- The circumstances of the instant case eGplain the seeming inconsistenc# in the testimonies of the two witnesses- $t the time" the# were under fire and in fear of losing their li!es- 3oreo!er" the# did not take co!er in the same place that Na!ora didNonetheless" their uncertaint# on whether Na!ora had fired ack is immaterial to the crime charged and too insignificant to impair their credi ilit#- In an# e!ent" the +ourt has ruled that a witness is not eGpected to remem er an occurrence with perfect recollection of minute details-)&1*

Se+o$% I**-e( Sufficiency of the Evidence

$ppellants cite People v- Lualhati,)&'* wherein this +ourt ruled 9that in crimes in!ol!ing illegal possession of firearm" the prosecution has the urden of pro!ing the elements thereof" !iD8 the eGistence of the su ;ect firearm and the fact that the accused who owned or possessed the firearm does not ha!e the corresponding license or permit to possess the same-= $ppellants contend that the eGistence of the firearms was not sufficientl# pro!en ecause the prosecution had not presented the firearms as e!idence- It is necessar#" the# argue" that said 9firearms allegedl# possessed # the accused/appellants and allegedl# used in the killing of ,oliceman ,rimo +am a e presented in e!idence as those firearms constitute the corpus delicti of the crime with which the# are sentenced-=).4* $ppellantsC argument is not persuasi!e- In People v- Lualhati, this +ourt merel# stated that the eGistence of the firearm must e esta lishedH it did not rule that the firearm itself had to e presented as e!idence- Thus" in People v- Orehuela").&* the +ourt held that the eGistence of the firearm can e esta lished # testimon#" e!en without the presentation of the said firearm- In the said case" $ppellant Orehuela was con!icted of @ualified illegal possession of a firearm despite the fact that the firearm used was not presented as e!idence- The eGistence of the weapon was deemed ampl# esta lished # the testimon# of an e#ewitness that Orehuela was in possession of it and had used it to kill the !ictim" !iD-8

9We consider that the certification was ade@uate to show that the firearm used # 3odesto Orehuela in killing Teo erto +aniDares was a firearm which Orehuela was not licensed to possess and to carr# outside his residence on the night that Teo erto +aniDares was shot to death- That that firearm was a -51 cali er pistol was shown # the testimon# and report of N:I :allistician :onifacio $#ag- When the a o!e circumstances are taken together with the ,e*,/mo$3 o1 ,)e e3e4/,$e** ,)#, Mo%e*,o Ore)-e.# 4#* /$ 1#+, /$ 5o**e**/o$ o1 # 1/re#rm #$% -*e% ,)e *#me ,o 6/.. Teober,o C#$/7#re*" we elie!e that accused Orehuela was properl# found guilt# of aggra!ated or @ualified illegal possession of firearm and ammunition-=
In the present case" the testimonies of se!eral witnesses indu ita l# demonstrate the eGistence of the firearms- Villamor Baderas stated that when he went to :aranga# Fuinaoa#anan" :ani" ,angasinan to in!estigate a report regarding missing cara aos" pigs and goats" he saw the appellants carr#ing long firearms- We @uote hereunder the rele!ant portion of his testimon#8
9F $nd when #ou saw the two accused together with the three others" what ha!e #ou noticed in their persons? $ F $ F The# were holding long firearms" sirWho of the fi!e persons did #ou see was holding long firearms? %imm# Orania was holding a car ineH 3ateo Nar!asa was holding an 3/&($ out Felicisimo Nar!asa" what was he holding?

Felicisimo Nar!asa was holding )an* 3/&0-=)..*

2rnesto Nagal likewise stated that he saw appellants carr#ing long firearms" as his testimon# indicates8
9F What did #ou notice in the persons of the fi!e persons #ou met? $ F $ F $ F The# were carr#ing arms" sirWhat kind of firearm were the fi!e persons" or some of them" carr#ing? %imm# Orania is carr#ing a cali er -54<ow a out 3ateo Nar!asa? 3ateo Nar!asa is carr#ing )an* 3/&(<ow a out Felicisimo Nar!asa?

$ long firearm was carried # Felicisimo Nar!asa" sir" ut I donCt know the cali er-=).5*

That herein appellants were the ones who had shot at the prosecution witnesses was confirmed # Baderas" who testified as follows8
9F <ow did #ou know that the gunfire came from the west? $ F $ F :ecause we were facing west$nd while the gunfire was going on" did #ou know who fired those gunshots? We know sir" ecause we can see themWhom did #ou see?

Felicisimo Nar!asa" %imm# Orania and 3ateo Nar!asa" sir-=).0*

In addition" ,rimo +am a was hit # a ullet" and empt# shells of 3/&(" 3/&0 and -54 cali er car ine ullets were later on reco!ered in the !icinit# of the place where the shooting occurredThe a o!e facts" dul# pro!en and taken together" sufficientl# esta lish the eGistence of the su ;ect firearms and the fact that appellants possessed and used said firearms in firing at Villamor Baderas" 2rnesto Nagal" and Simeon Na!ora" as well as ,rimo +am a who succum ed to the gunshot wound he had sustainedThe present case can e distinguished from People v. Navarro).A* wherein the +ourt held that illegal possession of firearm could not e deemed an aggra!ating circumstance ecause the eGistence of the said firearm was not pro!en- In said case" a witness testified that he saw appellant shoot the !ictim with a 9short= firearm- No firearm" howe!er" was presented as e!idence" although a gun was reco!ered from the accused when he was arrested- 3oreo!er" $o 5roo1 4#* #%%-+e% ,o *)o4 ,)#, ,)e 1/re#rm #..e0e%.3 *ee$ b3 ,)e 4/,$e** 4#* ,)e *#me o$e re+overe% b3 ,)e #-,)or/,/e* 1rom ,)e #++-*e%- Thus" the +ourt held8

9In the case at ar" the Information alleged that on %anuar# A" &''&" the appellant had in his possession an unlicensed firearm which he used in killing Ferdinand Ra adonThis firearm was allegedl# reco!ered on %anuar# A" &''0" when appellant was arrested- <owe!er" said firearm was not presented in court or offered as e!idence

against the appellant- $lthough Ra ago testified that he saw the appellant with a KshortC firearm when the latter shot Ra adon on %anuar# A" &''& no other proof was presented to show that such gun" allegedl# used on January 5, 1991, was the sa e one recovered on January 5, 199!- The prosecution was not a le to esta lish sufficientl# the eGistence of the su ;ect firearm G G G-=
In other words" the e!idence on the eGistence of the firearm was eset with dou t and conflict- Such uncertaint# is not found in the present case" for the testimonies of se!eral witnesses indu"ita"ly esta"lished that the su ;ect firearms were in the possession of the appellants$s to proof that appellants had no license or permit to possess the firearms in @uestion" we ha!e held in People v- #illanueva).(* that the second element of illegal possession of firearms can e pro!en # the testimon# or the certification of a representati!e of the ,N, Firearms and 2Gplosi!es >nit that the accused was not a licensee of the firearm in @uestion- The +ourt ruled8

9$s we ha!e pre!iousl# held" the testimon# of" or a certification from the ,N, Firearms and 2Gplosi!es >nit that the accused/appellant was not a licensee of the said firearm would ha!e sufficed to pro!e e#ond reasona le dou t the second element of the crime of illegal possession-=
The prosecution su mitted a certification showing that $ppellants Felicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania were not licensed firearm holders").E* a fact that was attested to # S,O0 Ro erto 3anuel" a mem er of the ,N, stationed at the pro!incial head@uarters of the ,angasinan ,ro!incial +ommand as $ssistant Firearms and 2Gplosi!es N+,O" who testified thus8
9F $nd did #ou ring with #ou the 3aster Bist of the firearm licensed holders in ,angasinan? $ F $ F $ Jes" sirWill #ou please produce it? 6Witness showing a folder" which is the 3aster Bist of firearm licensed holders in ,angasinan-7 $nd with the aid of that !oluminous list of firearm holders in ,angasinan" will #ou please tell his <onor if Felicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania appear therein as licensed firearm holders? Their names do not appear" as manifested # our )3aster Bist as licensed* holders of an# cali er" sir-=).1*

$ppellants did not present an# e!idence L and neither did the# e!en claim // that the# were in fact licensed firearm holdersAppellants Responsible for Police an!s Death

Baderas" Nagal and Na!ora testified that as their group" which included ,rimo +am a" approached Felicisimo Nar!asaCs house" the# were suddenl# fired upon- +am a was hit and it

was from that ullet wound that he died- That appellants were responsi le for his death is clear from Na!oraCs testimon#8
9F $nd on #our wa# following them what happened? $ F $ When we were a out &44 meters North of the <ouse of Ising Nar!asa we were met ) #* a hea!# !olume of gunfireNow" if #ou were met according to #ou with hea!# !olume of gunfire" what did #ou GGG and #our companion )do*? We di!e)d* to the ground for safet#" sir-

GGG
F $ F $ F $ ,rimo +am a was hit" sir)-*

GGG

GGG

>pon di!ing to the ground" what happened to ,rimo +am a?

<ow did #ou come to know that ,rimo +am a was hit # the first eGchange of gunfire? %ust after we di!ed to the ground" GGG ,rimo +am a told me that he was hit$nd when ,rimo +am a told #ou that he was hit" what did #ou do? I signalled the two 6.7 councilmen to get near me-

GGG
$ F $

GGG

GGG

MMF $fter gi!ing instruction to the two 6.7 councilmen" what did #ou do? The# carr)ied* him while we were retreating+arried the od# of ,rimo +am a" to what place? We retreated )to the* 2ast direction" until we reach the #ard of )a* certain ,rudencio-

GGG
F

GGG

GGG

$nd when #ou reach)ed* the premises of ,rudencio" what was the condition of ,rimo +am a?

<e )was* no longer reathing" sir-).'*

Baderas was a le to identif# their attackers as Felicisimo Nar!asa" %imm# Orania and 3ateo Nar!asa- $s these three directed and fired their guns at Baderas" Nagal" Na!ora and +am a" there was unit# in action and purpose" and thus" conspirac# was present- $lthough it was not ascertained who among them actuall# shot +am a" all of them are lia le for his death- In conspirac#" the act of one is the act of allT)/r% I**-e( "he Cri e

The totalit# of the e!idence shows that appellants possessed unlicensed firearms" which the# used in killing ,rimo +am a- In its Decision" the trial court con!icted appellants of 9)i*llegal )p*ossession of )f*irearms in its aggra!ated form= and considered homicide 9merel# an element of the principal offense of )i*llegal )p*ossession of )f*irearms in its aggra!ated

form-= $ppl#ing People v. Barros)54* to the pro!en facts" the trial court imposed upon appellants the penalt# of reclusion perpetua- <owe!er" a new law has in the meanwhile een enactedRepu lic $ct No- 1.'0")5&* which imposes a lighter penalt# for the crime" pro!ides8

9Section &$nlaw%ul &anu%acture, 'ale, (cquisition, )isposition or Possession o% Firear s or ( unition or *nstru ents $sed or *ntended to "e $sed in the &anu%acture o% Firear s or ( unition- // The penalt# of prision correccional in its maGimum period and a fine of not less than Fifteen Thousand pesos 6,&A"4447 shall e imposed upon an# person who shall unlawfull# manufacture" deal in" ac@uire" dispose" or possess an# low powered firearm" such as rimfire handgun" -514 or -5. and other firearm of similar firepower" part of firearm" ammunition" or machiner#" tool or instrument used or intended to e used in the manufacture of an# firearm or ammunitionH Provided" That no other crime was committed9The penalt# of prision ayor in its minimum period and a fine of Thirt# Thousand pesos 6,54"4447 shall e imposed if the firearm is classified as high powered firearm which includes those with ores igger in diameter than -51 cali er and ' millimeter such as cali er -04" -0&" -00" -0A and also lesser cali ered firearms ut considered powerful such as cali er -5AE and cali er -.. center/fire magnum and other firearms with firing capa ilit# of full automatic and # urst of two or threeH Provided" howe!er" That no other crime was committed # the person arrested9If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm" such use of an unlicensed firearm shall e considered as an aggra!ating circumstance-=
In People v- &olina")5.* this +ourt en "anc eGplained that R$ 1.'0 considers the use of an unlicensed firearm onl# an aggra!ating circumstance in murder or homicide" !iD-8

9>nder our ruling in ,eople !s- Fui;ada" !iolation of ,D &1(( is an offense distinct from murderH appellants should perforce e culpa le for two separate offenses" as ruled # the trial court9Fortunatel# for appellants" howe!er" R$ 1.'0 has now amended the said decree and considers the use of an unlicensed firearm simpl# as an aggra!ating circumstance in murder or homicide" and not as a separate offense-=
>nder R$ 1.'0" appellants can e held lia le onl# for homicide )55* and penaliDed with reclusion te poral- ,ursuant to $rticle .. of the Re!ised ,enal +ode" )50* R$ 1.'0 should e gi!en retroacti!e effectCivil #iability

+onsistent with pre!ailing ;urisprudence" appellants are lia le to pa#" ;ointl# and se!erall#" the heirs of ,rimo +am a the sum of fift# thousand pesos 6,A4"4447 as indemnit# e+ delicto for his death<owe!er" the award of two hundred thousand pesos 6,.44"4447 representing moral damages should e deleted since no e!idence of anGiet#" moral shock" wounded feelings or similar in;ur# was presented during the trial8HEREFORE" the assailed Decision is here # $%D&'&ED. For the death of ,rimo +am a" $ppellants Felicisimo Nar!asa and %imm# Orania are found ()&#"* of +%$&C&DE with the special aggra!ating circumstance of using unlicensed firearms- $ppl#ing the Indeterminate Sentence Baw" the# are each sentenced to twel!e 6&.7 #ears of prision ayor" as minimum" to twent# 6.47 #ears of reclusion te poral" as maGimumH and ordered to pa# the heirs of ,rimo +am a ,A4"444 as death indemnit#- <owe!er" the award of moral damages is here # DE#E"EDSO OR&ERE&. )avide Jr. ,-hair an., Bellosillo, #itu/ and 0uisu "in/ JJ., concur-