7/25/2019 People of the Philippines vs.

Trestiza Digest

People of the Philippines vs. Trestiza

Facts:
This is an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the
RTC of Makati for the case of Kidnapping for Ransom and Robbery.

The trial court found Trestiza guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal by direct
 participation of the crime of Kidnapping for Ransom under Article !" of the Re#ised
$enal Code and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of Reclusion $erpetua and to pay
damages to the #ictims.

The #ictims alleged that on %o#. &&' the accused Trestiza' Manri(ue and $ineda' armed
)ith firearms' kidnapped *a)rence +u and Maria ,rma %a#arro' or other)ise depri#ed
them of their liberty )ithout legal grounds for the purpose of e-torting money.

n February &&/' public prosecutor filed a motion to )ithdra) information of 

Kidnapping )ith Ransom

after he conducted and to in#estigation'
preliminary Admit information for Robbery.
he found 0e pointed
no probable out that
cause e-ists to
)arrant the indictment of the accused for the crime of kidnapping )ith ransom. 0e added
that they should be charged instead for the crimes of Robbery and gra#e threats. The
Court set a hearing for this motion.

1efore the issue could be resol#ed' another 2udge took o#er the Court as Assisting
$residing 3udge after 3udge 4al#ador Abad 4antos re(uested to be relie#ed. 3udge
1ernabe issued an order directing the City $rosecution ffice to conduct re5assessment
and re5e#aluation of the e#idence presented and to submit its report )ithint /& days.

The $rosecution
accused maintains
should be that and
for robbery the correct and appropriate
gra#e threats charges
but for t)o countstoeach
be filed
and against
not for 
kidnapping as initially filed. Thus' it prayed for this Court to be allo)ed to )ithdra) the
 present information. To 2ustify' the prosecution said that the case of kidnapping )ould not
 prosper against all the accused because the essential elements for the crime of 
Kidnapping for ransom defined and penalized under Article !" of the R$C is that the
offender must be a pri#ate indi#idual )hich does not obtain in the case at bar as
respondents are public officers.

,ssue:
6hether or not the charges should be kidnapping for ransom or Robbery and gra#e
threats.

0eld:
The Court denied the Motion to 6ithdra) information for kidnapping.

The prosecutor argues that the essence of the crime of kidnapping could not be possibly
committed by the accused as they are police officers )ho at the time the complainants
)ere di#ested of cash and personal belongings )ere conducting a police operation to

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/people-of-the-philippines-vs-trestiza-digest 1/2
7/25/2019 People of the Philippines vs. Trestiza Digest

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/people-of-the-philippines-vs-trestiza-digest 2/2