Scribd
Upload
776 views2 pages

People Vs Purisima Case Digest

The case involves 26 petitions filed by the People of the Philippines represented by various fiscal offices against individuals charged with illegal possession of deadly weapons in violation of Presidential Decree No. 9. The judges dismissed the informations filed, finding they failed to allege facts to constitute the offense. The issues are whether the informations contained sufficient facts like carrying weapons outside the home not used for livelihood and connected to crimes. The Court dismissed the petitioner's motions and affirmed the decisions, finding the informations insufficient without alleging the weapons were carried with intent connected to subversion or disorder.

Uploaded by

Enyong Lumanlan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
776 views2 pages

People Vs Purisima Case Digest

The case involves 26 petitions filed by the People of the Philippines represented by various fiscal offices against individuals charged with illegal possession of deadly weapons in violation of Presidential Decree No. 9. The judges dismissed the informations filed, finding they failed to allege facts to constitute the offense. The issues are whether the informations contained sufficient facts like carrying weapons outside the home not used for livelihood and connected to crimes. The Court dismissed the petitioner's motions and affirmed the decisions, finding the informations insufficient without alleging the weapons were carried with intent connected to subversion or disorder.

Uploaded by

Enyong Lumanlan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

People vs.

Purisima

FACTS OF THE CASE:


There are twenty-six (26) Petitions for Review filed by the People of the
Philippines represented, respectively, by the Office of the City Fiscal of Manila,
the Office of the Provincial Fiscal of Samar, and joined by the Solicitor General,
are consolidated in this one Decision as they involve one basic question of law.
Before those courts, Information was filed charging the respective accused with
"illegal possession of deadly weapon" in violation of Presidential Decree No.9.
On a motion to quash filed by the accused, the three Judges mentioned above
issued in the respective cases filed before them
—
the details of which will be recounted below
—
an Order quashing or dismissing the Information, on a common ground, viz, that
the Information did not allege facts which constitute the offense penalized by
Presidential Decree No. 9 because it failed to state one essential element of the
crime.

ISSUES OF THE CASE:


Are the Information filed by the People sufficient in form and substance to
constitute the offense of "illegal possession of deadly weapon" penalized under
Presidential Decree (PD for short) No. 9? There are two elements to the offense:
first, the carrying outside one's residence of any bladed, blunt, or pointed
weapon, etc. not used as a necessary tool or implement for a livelihood; and
second, that the act of carrying the weapon was either in furtherance of, or to
abet, or in connection with subversion, rebellion, insurrection, lawless violence,
criminality, chaos, or public disorder. The petitioner by having one particular
stand of the carrying of any dangerous weapon outside of the residence w/o
regard to motive or intent makes this a case of statutory construction.

HELD:
COURT DISMISSED ALL MOTIONS MADE BY THE PETITIONER AND
AFFIRMS ALL DECISIONS MADE BY THE RESPONDENT JUDGES.

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION LESSON:


The problem of determining what acts fall within the purview of a
statute, it becomes necessary to inquire into the intent and spirit of the decree
and this can be found among others in the preamble or, whereas" clauses which
enumerate the facts or events which justify the promulgation of the decree and
the stiff sanctions stated therein. It is a salutary principle in statutory construction
that there exists a valid presumption that undesirable consequences were never
intended by a legislative measure, and that a construction of which the statute is
fairly susceptible is favored, which will avoid all objectionable,
mischievous, indefensible, wrongful, evil, and injurious consequence

You might also like