[Answer/discuss the question below, or see 2016 bar exam Criminal Law Instructions; 2016 Criminal Law questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20; See also 2016 Bar Exam: Information, Discussions, Tips, Questions and Results]
Ofelia, engaged in the purchase and sale ofjewelry, 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 P100,000.00 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] What is a “fence” under PD 1612? (2.5%)
[b] Is Ofelia liable under the Anti-Fencing Law? Explain. (2.5%)