Case Digest (G.R. No. 190837)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. SPO1 Alexander Estabillo y Palara, G.R. No. 252902, June 16, 2021, Supreme Court Second Division, Lazaro‑Javier, J., writing for the Court.The accused‑appellant is SPO1 Alexander Estabillo y Palara (appellant). He was charged in two separate Informations dated July 13, 2010 with violations of Sections 5 and 11 of Republic Act No. 9165 (the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002): Criminal Case No. 17172‑D‑PSG for alleged possession of two bricks of cocaine, and Criminal Case No. 17173‑D‑PSG for alleged sale of two bricks of cocaine to a poseur‑buyer. On arraignment he pleaded not guilty; trial ensued before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 151, Pasig City.
The prosecution’s case rested on a buy‑bust operation initiated after a confidential informant identified “Alex” as a PNP member selling cocaine. A test‑buy yielded positive results, then on June 15, 2010 poseur‑buyer SPO2 Leonardo Taldo met appellant, was handed an Otto shoebox containing two bricks which he examined, and paid boodle money dusted with ultraviolet powder; upon the prearranged signal the buy‑bust team arrested appellant and recovered two more bricks behind the driver’s seat. The items were marked, photographed, inventoried (in the presence of barangay and media witnesses but without a DOJ representative), turned over through investigators to the PNP Crime Laboratory, and tested positive for cocaine per Chemistry Report No. D‑43‑10. Prosecution witnesses included the poseur‑buyer, arresting and investigating officers, and the forensic chemist PSI Mark Alain B. Ballesteros.
Appellant testified denying ownership, describing being accosted by unidentified men and media at the scene. The RTC, by Decision dated December 7, 2015, convicted him of illegal sale (Sec. 5) and illegal possession (Sec. 11) of dangerous drugs, sentenced him to life imprisonment and P10,000,000.00 fine for each count, and found the chain of custody sufficiently established; reconsideration was denied on February 4, 2016.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA‑G.R. CR‑HC No. 08244 affirmed the RTC in a Decision dated April 26, 2019 and denied reconsideration on October 9, 2019. Appellant then brough...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did appellant waive his right to challenge the legality of his warrantless arrest?
- Were the elements of illegal sale (Section 5, RA 9165) and illegal possession (Section 11, RA 9165) proven beyond reasonable doubt?
- Did the prosecution establish an unbroken chain of custody for the seized drugs under Section...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)