MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the prison sentence imposed on an individual for the unlawful possession and use of counterfeit banknotes.
In a 12-paged decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Lopez dated Aug. 23, 2023, the high court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) to upheld the ruling of a Regional Trial Court (RTC) to convict Allan Gacasan on illegal possession and use of fake bank notes.
Gacasan is sentenced to a penalty of imprisonment of eight to ten years.
“From a careful reading of the narration of facts and the evidence, the prosecution adequately established Gacasan's guilt beyond reasonable doubt,” the court’s decision read.
Gacasan was caught with 100 pieces of P1000 bills and 25 pieces of P50 bills when he was arrested by the operatives of the Philippine National Police‘s Criminal Investigation Detection Group on Nov. 10, 2018 during a buy-bust operation in Bukidnon.
Following the arrest of Gacasan, an official from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas verified the counterfeit nature of the seized banknotes upon immediate examination.
The RTC then ruled that Gacasan was guilty beyond reasonable doubt in violation of Article 168 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
The court said that “all the elements of the crime of illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit” are present.
Article 168 of the RPC is defined as unlawful possession and utilization of counterfeit treasury or bank notes and other credit instruments.
Gacasan filed an appeal to the CA which then ruled against him. He also filed a motion for reconsideration in the appellate court which was also dismissed.
This prompted Gacasan to assail the lower courts’ decisions to the SC, questioning whether the CA was wrong in upholding the RTC’s conviction against him.
The high court, however, still upheld the decision of the lower courts.
“The petition is bereft of merit,” the SC’s decision read.
The SC rejected Gacasan's arguments, asserting the absence of admissible evidence for a criminal conviction.
Gacasan claimed that there was no valid buy-bust operation and that he was a victim of a frame-up.
“Gacasan's unverified and flimsy defense of a frame-up is not corroborated by any evidence, and pales in comparison to the consistent and positive identifications by several law enforcement officers who categorically testified that Gacasan, for consideration, delivered the envelope full of counterfeit notes,” the high court said.