Title
People vs. Fayo y Rubio
Case
G.R. No. 239887
Decision Date
Oct 2, 2019
Jeffrey Fayo acquitted due to prosecution's failure to comply with mandatory drug seizure protocols, compromising evidence integrity.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 190359)

Facts:

  • Overview of the Case
    • Jeffrey Fayo y Rubio, also known as “Jeff,” was charged with violating Sections 5 and 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, as amended).
    • The charges involve two separate criminal cases:
      • Illegal sale of shabu (Criminal Case No. 20349-D)
      • Illegal possession of shabu (Criminal Case No. 20350-D)
  • Alleged Criminal Acts and Incident Details
    • Illegal Sale of Shabu (Case No. 20349-D)
      • On May 27, 2015, in Pasig City, Fayo allegedly sold a heat-sealed sachet containing 0.41 gram of a white crystalline substance (tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride) to PO1 Jonathan Bueno y Pintuan, a police officer acting as a poseur-buyer.
      • The transaction involved a marked one thousand-peso bill and an agreed pre-arranged signal (the poseur-buyer scratching his head) to indicate the consummation of the deal.
    • Illegal Possession of Shabu (Case No. 20350-D)
      • On the same day and in the same locale, Fayo was accused of possessing multiple sachets (totaling 8.03 grams) of the same drug, which had been found positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
      • The items were discovered during the buy-bust operation, and further seized upon Fayo’s arrest.
  • Procedural and Evidentiary Developments
    • Arrest and Buy-Bust Operation
      • The buy-bust was meticulously planned: Police Chief Inspector Renata B. Castillo and other operatives, including PO1 Bueno and PO1 Randy S. Sanoy, coordinated with a confidential informant to lure Fayo into a drug transaction.
      • During the operation, after the pre-arranged signal was given, Fayo was apprehended. During the arrest, additional items—a gun, a grenade, and extra sachets—were discovered.
      • The marking, inventory, and photographing of the seized drugs were conducted later at the Barangay Hall of Manggahan rather than at the scene of the seizure or the nearest police station.
    • Chain of Custody and Evidence Handling
      • The seizure of evidence and subsequent processing included the preparation of a Chain of Custody Form, Request for Laboratory Examination, and Request for Drug Test.
      • Forensic Chemist PSI Vicente conducted tests on the subject specimens at the Mandaluyong City Laboratory.
      • It was established that certain procedural requirements mandated by law—specifically those set forth in Section 21 of RA 9165—were not strictly complied with.
  • Testimonies and Arguments
    • Prosecution’s Version
      • Witnesses included police operatives (PO1 Bueno, PO1 Sanoy, and others) who testified about the buy-bust operation, the handling of seized items, and the subsequent inventory and marking of the evidence.
      • The Office of the Solicitor General summarized the events and testified that the buy-bust operation was conducted in accordance with established procedures, although acknowledging lapses in proper witness presence during the inventory.
    • Defense’s Version
      • Fayo denied the charges, claiming he was on his way to collect rental money and earnings for his employer when he was intercepted.
      • He described a scenario wherein a traffic altercation and a subsequent series of events—including alleged police misconduct—led to his arrest.
      • Fayo’s version highlighted inconsistencies and deficiencies in the police procedure, particularly questioning the integrity of the chain of custody.
  • Lower Court Decisions
    • Regional Trial Court (RTC) Decision (January 23, 2017)
      • The RTC found Fayo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of both illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs.
      • The sentencing included life imprisonment and fines, along with the confiscation of the seized drug sachets ordered for destruction.
    • Court of Appeals (CA) Decision
      • The CA affirmed the RTC’s conviction with a modification to the penalty, stating that Fayo’s actions met the elements of the offenses charged.
      • Notably, the CA accepted the justification offered by the police regarding the conduct of the inventory despite lapses in witness presence.

Issues:

  • Whether the RTC and CA erred in convicting Fayo for violating Sections 5 and 11, Article II of RA 9165.
    • Specific focus on whether the procedural requirements under Section 21 of RA 9165—pertaining to the inventory and photographing of seized dangerous drugs—were sufficiently observed.
    • Whether the failure to secure the presence of a representative from the National Prosecution Service or the media, as mandated by law, compromised the integrity of the evidence.
  • Whether the lapses in the chain-of-custody process and deviations from prescribed procedures created reasonable doubt as to the integrity of the evidence (the corpus delicti).
    • Analysis of whether the justifications provided by the police (such as the insistence of the Barangay Captain to use the Barangay Hall) are sufficient under the law.
    • Consideration of the presumption of innocence in light of procedural irregularities during the buy-bust operation and evidence inventory.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.