Case Digest (G.R. No. 133879)
Facts:
People of the Philippines charged Garry Briones y Espina with violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act (RA) 9165 for allegedly selling Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (shabu) in a buy-bust operation on April 16, 2013 in Brgy. Gulod Labac, Batangas City. After arrest, the team marked the sachet and conducted inventory and photography at the barangay hall; however, the media representative was not present, and the mandatory witnesses were contacted only after the buy-bust operation and seizure had already been accomplished. The RTC convicted him, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.Issues:
- Whether Garry was proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt for violating Section 5, Article II of RA 9165 considering the prosecution’s handling of the seized drug and compliance with Section 21 of RA 9165.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court acquitted Garry and reversed the Court of Appeals and RTC decisions, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the corpus delicti with the r Case Digest (G.R. No. 133879)
Facts:
- Charges and arraignment
- The Information charged Garry Briones y Espina (Garry) with violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165, for allegedly selling, dispensing, or delivering one (1) transparent plastic sachet of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (“shabu”), weighing 0.15 gram.
- The Information alleged that the act occurred “on or about April 16, 2013 at around 11:50 in the morning” at Brgy. Gulod Labac, Batangas City, and that Garry acted “not being authorized by law,” “knowingly, willfully, and criminally.”
- Upon arraignment, Garry pleaded not guilty.
- Prosecution’s version: buy-bust operation and handling of seized item
- On April 16, 2013 at around 10:00 in the morning, PO1 Carandang was on duty at the Station Anti-Illegal Drugs Special Operation Task Force of the Batangas City Police Station.
- An asset arrived and reported that a person was selling shabu on a consignment basis; the person was referred to as “Garry.”
- PO1 Carandang relayed the information to SPO1 de Chavez, SPO1 Yap, and PO2 Ponciano Asilo.
- SPO1 de Chavez, acting as team leader, decided to conduct a buy-bust operation; SPO1 Pepito Adelantar prepared the coordination form and the pre-operation report.
- Upon receipt of coordination forms, PDEA provided control number 0413-00087.
- During briefing, PO1 Carandang was assigned as poseur-buyer and was accompanied by the asset during the purchase.
- Before leaving the police station, desk officer PO2 Adora recorded their departure under Entry No. 010317, dated 4/16/13 at 11:15 a.m.
- The team proceeded to the barangay hall of Brgy. Gulod Labac before the transaction, coordinated with barangay officials, and had the buy-bust operation recorded in the barangay blotter.
- The team proceeded to the Fil Oil Gasoline Station in Brgy. Gulod Labac.
- At the gasoline station, PO1 Carandang and the asset alighted and waited at a vacant lot nearby, while SPO1 de Chavez and SPO1 Yap parked about two (2) meters away.
- After five (5) minutes, a man referred to by the asset as alias “Garry” arrived.
- The asset and Garry talked while PO1 Carandang stood beside them; Garry handed the asset a plastic sachet and uttered “point three yan, two five yan.”
- The asset immediately passed the sachet to PO1 Carandang, and PO1 Carandang arrested Garry.
- SPO1 Yap and SPO1 de Chavez alighted when they saw the transaction; PO2 Asilo also approached when he saw the arrest and that the other officers had alighted.
- SPO1 de Chavez frisked Garry; the frisk did not recover any other illegal item.
- PO1 Carandang marked the plastic sachet with his initials “RBC” and the date of arrest 04/16/13; pictures were taken while marking was done.
- The team brought the accused to the barangay hall of Brgy. Gulod Labac, evidenced by an entry in the barangay blotter.
- SPO1 de Chavez called up SPO1 Adelantar and Fiscal Bien Patulay for inventory; he tried to call a media representative but none arrived.
- Upon arrival of SPO1 Adelantar and the DOJ representative, the inventory and pictures were taken during the inventory.
- A Certificate of Inventory was prepared by SPO1 Adelantar and signed by SPO1 de Chavez, Fiscal Bien Patulay (DOJ representative), and Brgy. Councilor Danilo Alcones (elected public official).
- PO1 Carandang had possession of the sachet from confiscation until turnover to SPO1 Adelantar after inventory.
- PO1 Carandang and SPO1 Adelantar signed the Chain of Custody Form to record turnover.
- The team returned to the police station; arrival was recorded under Entry No. 013027 by PO2 Adora.
- SPO1 Adelantar prepared the request for laboratory examination and drug test; documents and the confiscated item marked “RBC 04/16/13” were delivered to the Batangas Provincial Crime Laboratory Office.
- SPO3 Lito Vargas received the letter request and specimen, and immediately turned the specimen over to Forensic Chemist PCI Herminia Llacuna.
- Chemistry Report No. BD 204-2013 showed the specimen tested positive for Methamphetamine Hydrochloride.
- Defense version: denial and circumstances of arrest
- Garry testified that on April 16, 2013 between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., he was at home.
- His mother asked him to buy viand; he went to the carinderia in front of their house, stayed, and ate.
- Police officers Chavez and Yap arrived and handcuffed him while looking for Garry’s neighbor “Ranie,” who was then in Mindoro.
- Garry was brought to the police station where he learned he had been charged under R.A. 9165.
- Garry stated that he knew SPO1 de Chavez and SPO1 Yap because they were seen at the cockpi...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Primary issue on criminal liability
- Whether Garry’s guilt for violating Section 5 of R.A. 9165 was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
- Core evidentiary requirement for conviction under dangerous drugs law
- Whether the prosecution proved an unbroken chain of custody and established the identity and integrity of the seized shabu with moral certainty, considering alleged lapses in compliance with Section 21, Article II of R.A. 9165.
- Significance of procedural lapses and presumption of regularity
- Whether the buy-bust team’s non-strict com...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)