Case Digest (A.C. No. 7399)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Sitti Domado, G.R. No. 172971, June 16, 2010, the Supreme Court Third Division, Brion, J., writing for the Court.The appellant, Sitti Domado y Sarangani, was charged with violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) for allegedly delivering/transporting approximately 12 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) on December 31, 2003 in Sto. Tomas, La Union. The Information accused Domado and co-accused Jehan Sarangani of conspiring to deliver the drugs. Both pleaded not guilty.
The operative facts, as established at trial, involved an entrapment operation initiated after the arrest of an intermediary, Augustus D’Vince Castro, who told Police Senior Inspector Reynaldo L. Lizardo that he could contact his source. PSI Lizardo staged a meet at Damortis where Augustus and a police team boarded a van. Three women approached the van; the appellant sat in front, Jehan and Violeta Fernandez sat behind. One of the women handed an envelope containing three heat-sealed sachets to Augustus; PSI Lizardo inspected the sachets, locked the van, announced his authority and arrested the three. They were taken to Camp Diego Silang where PSI Lizardo marked the sachets with his initials, prepared an inventory (signed by a barangay kagawad and two media representatives), and forwarded the items to the PNP Crime Laboratory. Forensic Chemist Police Inspector Valeriano P. Laya II tested the samples and reported a positive result for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
At trial the defense witnesses (the appellant and Jehan) admitted delivering an envelope but denied knowledge of its contents; there was a factual dispute about which woman handed the envelope to Augustus and whether the appellant knew what it contained. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 31, Agoo, La Union, convicted the appellant on July 28, 2004 for transporting shabu and imposed life imprisonment and a P500,000 fine. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeals (docketed CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00432), which affirmed the RTC in a February 28, 2006 decision. The Court of Appeals applied established deference to factual findings of the trial court, gave weight to the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the prosecution establish the integrity and admissibility of the seized drugs despite alleged procedural lapses in the chain of custody under R.A. No. 9165 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations?
- Did the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the crime of delivering/transporting shabu under Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165?
- Is the penalty imposed by the RTC and affirmed by...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)