7/28/2019 Roldan Jr vs. Hon Madrona Et Al g.r. No. 152989, Sept 4, 2001

1/2

[G.R. No. 152989. September 4, 2002]

ROLDAN, JR. vs. HON. MADRONA, et al.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated04 SEPT2002.

G.R. No. 152989 (Manuel Jorge Roldan, Jr. vs. Hon. Fortunito L. MadronaPairing Judge, RTC Branch 12, Ormoc City and Hon. Alberto L. Conopio, CityProsecutor, Ormoc City, ATTY. FIEL MARMITA, OIC, DENR-CENRO, Albuera,Leyte.)

At bar is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of CivilProcedure.

Herein petitioner is the owner of a parcel of land consisting of about 60,000square meters covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. TP-331 which he boughtfrom a certain Ildefonso O. Maglasang.

On August 9, 2001, petitioner applied for a Private Land Timber Permit(PLTP) from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for him to cutsome trees for a proposed road and poultry farm in his property. He also paid allthe fees required by the various government agencies.

While waiting for the permit to be issued, petitioner was allegedly informed bysome employees from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources

(DENR) that he could proceed with the cutting of trees even though his applicationwas still awaiting approval.

Consequently, petitioner proceeded with the cutting of trees and bulldozing ofthe roadway. He used the cut logs as materials to build his chicken cages.

About three weeks later, representatives of the Community Environment andNatural Resources Office (CENRO) of the Department of Environment and NaturalResources and personnel from the Intelligence Service, Armed Forces of thePhilippines (ISAFP) of Tacloban City raided petitioners place, allegedly without asearch warrant. An inventory of the cut trees was conducted. The logs were notconfiscated but were entrusted to a barangay kagawadsince there was allegedlyno search warrant at that time.

About two days later, the CENRO representatives came back with membersof the media and ISAFP charging illegal logging but they failed to get the logs,again for alleged lack of search warrant.

Several days thereafter, the CENRO group and ISAFP returned, this timearmed with a search warrant and proceeded to confiscate 872 pieces of sawn

7/28/2019 Roldan Jr vs. Hon Madrona Et Al g.r. No. 152989, Sept 4, 2001

2/2

lumber/flitches (8,506 board feet) and three felled timber logs with a total marketvalue of P235,454.68 at P27.00 per board foot.

Consequently, on September 21, 2001, a complaint for violation of Section 68of PD 705 as amended was filed against herein petitioner by CENRO before theCity Prosecutor of Ormoc City. Thereafter, the City Prosecutor issued a resolution

dated November 16, 2001 finding probable cause to convict petitioner for violationof Section 68 of PD 705 as amended.

A motion for reconsideration proved futile for, as it turned out,the informationhad already been filed in court. Jurisdiction over the case was transferred to theregional trial court, also a public respondent in this case.

A warrant for the arrest of petitioner was then issued by the court a quo. Inview thereof, herein petitioner filed with the trial court a motion for judicialdetermination of probable cause and the recall of his warrant of arrest.

After hearing the said motion, public respondent Judge Fortunito L. Madrona,

in an order dated February 15, 2000 denied the motion but reduced therecommended bail of petitioner.

Hence, the instant petition.

Before us, petitioner raises the following issues: (1) whether the owner of a private

land, the petitioner in this case, is criminally liable under Section 68 of PD 705 for

cutting trees within his own property; (2) whether the owner of the private property

is administratively liable under Sec. 14 of DENR Administrative Order No. 2000-21

despite the fact that he did not transport the logs out of his property and just used

them for his own agricultural purposes therein and (3) whether the logs confiscatedby the DENR should be returned to the petitioner considering that the same were

not transportErris ct :sz w:val="27"/