Case Digest (G.R. No. 141060)
Facts:
People of the Philippines charged Diosdado Rebuton y Melendez and Marilou Rebutazo y Encabo with violations of Republic Act No. 9165 after a buy‑bust on August 11, 2010 in Dumaguete that yielded three heat‑sealed sachets and drug paraphernalia; the RTC convicted them on July 2, 2013, the Court of Appeals affirmed, and this Court initially denied the appeal in a December 13, 2017 Resolution. On motions for reconsideration, the Court reconsidered evidence of the seizure, marking, re‑marking, laboratory testing, and the delayed arrival of insulating witnesses, and resolved the matter anew.Issues:
- Did the prosecution establish the required chain of custody under Section 21, Article II of R.A. 9165 for the seized drugs and paraphernalia?
- Did the absence of insulating witnesses at or near the place and time of apprehension create reasonable doubt as to the identity and integrity of the *corpus delicti*?
- Does Section 11, Rule 122 apply to extend a favorable appellate dispositi
Case Digest (G.R. No. 141060)
Facts:
- Parties, charges, and procedural history
- PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee; accused DIOSDADO REBUTON Y MELENDEZ A.K.A. "DADO" and MARILOU REBUTAZO Y ENCABO A.K.A. "LOI", Accused and Accused-Appellant.
- Accused were charged under Republic Act No. 9165 in three Informations: Criminal Case No. 20088 (illegal sale of one heat-sealed sachet containing 0.03 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride, Section 5, Article II), Criminal Case No. 20090 (illegal possession of two heat-sealed sachets totalling 0.19 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride, Section 11, Article II), and Criminal Case No. 20089 (possession of drug paraphernalia: one glass tooter, one folded aluminum foil, one rolled aluminum foil, Section 12, Article II).
- Accused pleaded not guilty; the three cases were tried jointly.
- Prosecution case and operational facts
- Local NBI received confidential information concerning Rebuton’s illegal drug activities and conducted a buy-bust operation.
- Operational plan: a missed call from PO3 Ramon Bernard Pedeglorio (poseur-buyer) to SPO3 Allen June Germodo would signal a consummated transaction; SPO3 Germodo marked a PHP 500.00 bill as marked money.
- On August 11, 2010, PO3 Pedeglorio and a confidential informant went to Rebuton’s residence; the informant told Rebuton that PO3 Pedeglorio wanted to buy shabu; PO3 Pedeglorio gave the marked PHP 500.00 bill to Rebuton.
- Rebuton allegedly called for Rebutazo, gave the marked money to her; Rebutazo took the bill and said, "Tagae na."
- Rebuton allegedly handed a heat-sealed sachet containing white crystalline granules to PO3 Pedeglorio; thereafter they went into a small room with a small table where two more sachets, lighters, rolled tin foil, tin foil with white residue, scissors, and an improvised glass tooter were present.
- PO3 Pedeglorio surreptitiously called SPO3 Germodo; as Rebutazo sniffed residue on a tin foil, the backup team entered and arrested Rebuton and Rebutazo; PO3 Pedeglorio advised them of their constitutional rights.
- PO3 Pedeglorio handed the sachet to SPO3 Germodo, who marked the sachet seized from PO3 Pedeglorio and the items recovered on the table.
- Approximately thirty minutes after apprehension, witnesses from the media, the local Department of Justice, the local Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, and the barangay arrived to witness an inventory; they were not present at or near the time or place of apprehension.
- The team brought the accused and the seized items to the NBI office, then to the Provincial Crime Laboratory where Police Chief Inspector Josephine S. Llena took custody, re-marked the items, and conducted laboratory examination.
- The three heat-sealed sachets weighed 0.03 gram, 0.01 gram, and 0.18 gram respectively; all tested positive for shabu; PCI Llena kept the specimens in the crime laboratory evidence vault, to which only she had access, until submission to the court.
- Defense, lower court judgments, and appellate history
- Defense raised denial and *set-up*; accused claimed police barged in and that SPO3 Germodo placed the sachets, the PHP 500.00 bill, and paraphernalia on the table; accused claimed they had already consumed the shabu. ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Legal sufficiency and chain of custody
- Whether the prosecution established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, particularly whether it proved the identity and integrity of the seized drugs and paraphernalia through compliance with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21, Article II of R.A. 9165.
- Whether the absence of insulating witnesses *at or near* the place and time of apprehension violated the rule in *Nisperos v. People* and thereby created reasonable doubt.
- Ancillary and procedural issues
- Whether the failure of the prosecution to secure insulating witnesses or to justify the non-compliance requires acquittal.
- Whether the acquittal of accused-appellant Rebutazo entitles accused Rebuton to b...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)