Case Digest (G.R. No. 184606) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
The case involves Calexto Duque Fundales, Jr. (appellant) against the People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee) with the decision rendered by the Supreme Court on September 5, 2012 (G.R. No. 184606). In this case, the appellant was charged with multiple violations of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Republic Act No. 9165). On December 8, 2003, appellant was accused of three offenses: illegal sale of shabu (a dangerous drug) in Criminal Case No. 03-1425, illegal possession of shabu in Criminal Case No. 03-1426, and illegal possession of drug paraphernalia in Criminal Case No. 03-1427. The accusations stemmed from an operation conducted on December 2, 2003, when Police Superintendent Alfredo Valdez received information from a confidential informant about illegal activities by the Fundales brothers. A buy-bust operation was executed wherein an officer acted as a poseur-buyer, successfully purchasing five sachets of shabu from the appellant for ₱500. Following th
Case Digest (G.R. No. 184606) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Factual Background and Charging
- On December 8, 2003, appellant Calexto Duque Fundales, Jr. was charged with:
- Violation of Section 5 (illegal sale of dangerous drugs)
- Violation of Section 11 (illegal possession of dangerous drugs)
- Violation of Section 12 in relation to Section 14 (illegal possession of drug paraphernalia) of Article II, RA No. 9165
- The Informations detailed:
- In Criminal Case No. 03-1425, the accused was alleged to have sold 0.10 gram of shabu on December 2, 2003, in ParaAaque City.
- In Criminal Case No. 03-1426, he was alleged to have possessed 0.02 gram of shabu.
- In Criminal Case No. 03-1427, he was charged together with co-accused for possessing equipment intended for the administration of dangerous drugs.
- The Buy-Bust Operation (Prosecution’s Version)
- On the evening of December 2, 2003:
- The Chief of the Intelligence Unit of the ParaAaque City Police, Police Superintendent Alfredo Valdez, received an information from a confidential informant regarding the Fundales brothers' drug dealing.
- A buy-bust team was constituted including officers: PO1 Ariel Ilagan, PO1 Cesarie SoquiAa, PO1 Emmanuel Salvaloza, PO3 Regalado Adriatico, and CE Ronald Tangcoy.
- The operation details:
- The team proceeded to 008 Jordan Street, Sitio Nazareth, Barangay San Isidro.
- Around 9:00 p.m., PO1 SoquiAa, designated as the poseur-buyer, along with the informant, went to the appellant’s house.
- At the house, after introduction by the informant, the appellant handed over five plastic sachets containing a white crystalline substance upon receiving P500.00 marked money from PO1 SoquiAa.
- PO1 SoquiAa signaled the consummation of the transaction by lighting a cigarette. Backup police then arrived and arrested the appellant along with his co-accused (Jerico, Ricardo, Chulo, and Joel) who were present and engaged in a pot session.
- The seized items (sachets and drug paraphernalia) were inventoried and subsequently sent for forensic examination, which confirmed the presence of Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride (shabu).
- Version of the Defense
- The appellant testified that:
- He was at home repairing a washing machine with co-accused Ricardo, Chulo, Joel, and Jerico.
- At around 4:30 p.m., a group of eight persons wearing civilian clothing and carrying weapons and handcuffs forcibly entered his home.
- He was detained at the Coastal Police Station for two days thereafter.
- The defense contended that:
- There was no clear identification or police presence as the men did not obviously appear as law enforcement officers.
- The buy-bust operation, as alleged by the prosecution, was fictitious.
- Trial Court Proceedings and Decisions
- On March 18, 2006, the RTC rendered its decision:
- Found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the illegal sale of shabu (Criminal Case No. 03-1425).
- Dismissed the charges for illegal possession of dangerous drugs (Criminal Case No. 03-1426) and for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia (Criminal Case No. 03-1427) for insufficiency of evidence.
- Sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of P500,000.00.
- Directed the Clerk of Court and Jail Warden on relevant post-decision actions (transfer to New Bilibid Prisons and release of certain co-accused where applicable).
- Appellate Proceedings
- The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision.
- The appellant raised several issues on appeal, namely:
- Questioning the sufficiency of evidence proving his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- Challenging the credibility and weight given to prosecution evidence.
- Asserting that no buy-bust operation occurred.
- Contesting the presumption of regularity accorded to the official performance of the arresting officers.
Issues:
- Main Issue
- Whether the appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating Section 5, Article II of RA No. 9165 (illegal sale of dangerous drugs).
- Sub-Issues Raised by the Appellant
- Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused based solely on the evidence presented.
- Whether undue weight was given to the prosecution’s evidence while the defense was disregarded.
- Whether there was any mishandling of evidence, particularly regarding the non-presentation of the forensic chemist.
- Whether the buy-bust operation was legitimately conducted, including the coordination (or lack thereof) with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and compliance with procedural safeguards under RA No. 9165.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)