Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 453 views

    MEL DIMAT, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent

    Uploaded by

    Rejmali Good
    1) Dimat was charged with violating the anti-fencing law for selling a car that had been stolen. The car was a 1997 Nissan Safari that Dimat claimed to have bought in good faith from a man named Tolentino. 2) The elements of fencing are: a theft has occurred, the accused deals with a stolen item knowing or should have known it was stolen, and intends to profit from the deal. 3) Dimat knew or should have known the Nissan Safari was stolen, as Tolentino could not provide proper documentation and its vehicle information did not match the stolen car. Nevertheless, Dimat sold the car, intending to profit. 4) The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    MEL DIMAT, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent

    Uploaded by

    Rejmali Good
    453 views2 pages
    1) Dimat was charged with violating the anti-fencing law for selling a car that had been stolen. The car was a 1997 Nissan Safari that Dimat claimed to have bought in good faith from a man named Tolentino. 2) The elements of fencing are: a theft has occurred, the accused deals with a stolen item knowing or should have known it was stolen, and intends to profit from the deal. 3) Dimat knew or should have known the Nissan Safari was stolen, as Tolentino could not provide proper documentation and its vehicle information did not match the stolen car. Nevertheless, Dimat sold the car, intending to profit. 4) The

    Original Title

    Dimat v People

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Dimat was charged with violating the anti-fencing law for selling a car that had been stolen. The car was a 1997 Nissan Safari that Dimat claimed to have bought in good faith from a man named Tolentino. 2) The elements of fencing are: a theft has occurred, the accused deals with a stolen item knowing or should have known it was stolen, and intends to profit from the deal. 3) Dimat knew or should have known the Nissan Safari was stolen, as Tolentino could not provide proper documentation and its vehicle information did not match the stolen car. Nevertheless, Dimat sold the car, intending to profit. 4) The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    453 views2 pages

    MEL DIMAT, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent

    Uploaded by

    Rejmali Good
    1) Dimat was charged with violating the anti-fencing law for selling a car that had been stolen. The car was a 1997 Nissan Safari that Dimat claimed to have bought in good faith from a man named Tolentino. 2) The elements of fencing are: a theft has occurred, the accused deals with a stolen item knowing or should have known it was stolen, and intends to profit from the deal. 3) Dimat knew or should have known the Nissan Safari was stolen, as Tolentino could not provide proper documentation and its vehicle information did not match the stolen car. Nevertheless, Dimat sold the car, intending to profit. 4) The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    MEL DIMAT, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

    (G.R. No. 181184 January 25, 2012)

    Facts of the Case:

    A 1997 Nissan Safari with a suspicious plate number, that had been sold by petitioner to Sonia,
    a wife of Delgado-the police officer, was upheld by the Traffic Management Group in E.
    Rodriguez, Quezon City. It was discovered that this was a carnapped car. He was charged for
    Anti-Fencing Law. Dimat argued that he bought the car in good faith in a certain Tolentino with
    a deed of sale indicating the details of the said car. RTC and CA both affirmed in the decision as
    against the petitioner. Hence, a petition for certiorari was filed beyond the Supreme Court

    Issues:

    Whether or not the officer is liable for Anti-Fencing Law?

    Held:

    Elements of "fencing" are:

    1) a robbery or theft has been committed;

    Someone carnapped Mantequilla’s Nissan Safari on May 25, 1998. Two years later in
    December 2000, Dimat sold it to Delgado for ₱850,000.00

    2) the accused, who took no part in the robbery or theft, "buys, receives, possesses, keeps,
    acquires, conceals, sells or disposes, or buys and sells, or in any manner deals in any article or
    object taken" during that robbery or theft;

    The Nissan Safari he bought from Tolentino and later sold to Delgado had engine
    number TD42-126134 and chassis number CRGY60-YO3553 as evidenced by the deeds
    of sale covering those transactions. The Nissan Safari stolen from Mantequilla, on the
    other hand, had engine number TD42-119136 and chassis number CRGY60-YO3111.

    (3) the accused knows or should have known that the thing derived from that crime; and

    Dimat knew that the Nissan Safari he bought was not properly documented. He said
    that Tolentino showed him its old certificate of registration and official receipt. But this
    certainly could not be true because, the vehicle having been carnapped, Tolentino had
    no documents to show. That Tolentino was unable to make good on his promise to
    produce new documents undoubtedly confirmed to Dimat that the Nissan Safari came
    from an illicit source.

    (4) he intends by the deal he makes to gain for himself or for another.
    Still, Dimat sold the same to Sonia Delgado who apparently made no effort to check the
    papers covering her purchase. That she might herself be liable for fencing is of no
    moment since she did not stand accused in the case.

    Decision:

    WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Court of Appeals dated October 26, 2007
    in CA-G.R. CR 29794.

    You might also like