Amuguis Soledadvspeople
Amuguis Soledadvspeople
Amuguis Soledadvspeople
Facts:
Issue: Whether or not Soledad is guilty of Violation of Section 9(e) RA No. 8484
(possessing a counterfeit access device or access device fraudulently applied for)
Ruling:
Yes, the trial court convicted petitioner of possession of the credit card fraudulently
applied for, penalized by R.A. No. 8484. The law, however, does not define the word
possession. Thus, we use the term as defined in Article 523 of the Civil Code, that is,
possession is the holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a right. The acquisition of
possession involves two elements: the corpus or the material holding of the thing, and
the animus possidendi or the intent to possess it. Animus possidendi is a state of mind,
the presence or determination of which is largely dependent on attendant events in
each case. It may be inferred from the prior or contemporaneous acts of the accused,
as well as the surrounding circumstance.
Petitioner materially held the envelope containing the credit card with the intent to
possess. Contrary to petitioner’s contention that the credit card never came into his
possession because it was only delivered to him, the above narration shows that he, in
fact, did an active part in acquiring possession by presenting the identification cards
purportedly showing his identity as Henry Yu. Certainly, he had the intention to possess
the same. Had he not actively participated, the envelope would not have been given to
him. Moreover, his signature on the acknowledgment receipt indicates that there was
delivery and that possession was transferred to him as the recipient. Undoubtedly,
petitioner knew that the envelope contained the Metrobank credit card, as clearly
indicated in the acknowledgment receipt, coupled with the fact that he applied for it
using the identity of private complainant.