JurisAtlas

HomeBar Review2016Criminal LawQuestion VI

Question VI

2016 Bar · Criminal Law · 2 sub-questions

VI. Ofelia, engaged in the purchase and sale of jewelry, was charged with violation of PD 1612, otherwise known as the Anti-Fencing Law, for having been found in possession of recently stolen jewelry valued at Pl 00,000.00 at her jewelry shop. Her defense is that she merely bought the same from Antonia and produced a receipt covering the sale. She presented other receipts given to her by Antonia representing previous transactions. Convicted of the charge, Ofelia appealed, arguing that her acquisition of the jewelries resulted from a legal transaction and that the prosecution failed to prove that she knew or should have known that the pieces of jewelry which she bought from Antonia were proceeds of the crime of theft.
(a)[a] What is a "fence" under PD 1612? (2.5%)
(b)[b] Is Ofelia liable under the Anti-Fencing Law? Explain. (2.5%)

Model answer · ALAC

Answer — Legal basis — Application — Conclusion.

AI-drafted in ALAC form and AI-verified against landmark authorities — refined with every round of verification.

Sign in free to read Question I of every Criminal Law year — subscribe to unlock all model answers & authorities.

Sign in or register — it's freeHave an access code? Redeem it →