G.R. No. 228002 - People vs. Gabriel Jr.

Two Informations were filed against accused-appellant Oscar Pedracio Gabriel, Jr. under Criminal Case Nos. 03-25992 and 03-25993.
The charges alleged that on or about June 27, 2003, in Antipolo City, Gabriel unlawfully sold and possessed illegal drugs (shabu, or methamphetamine hydrochloride) in violation of Sections 5 and 11 of Republic Act No. 9165.

The operation was initiated after the police received a tip-off regarding illegal drug activities at Gabriel’s residence in Barangay Cupang, Antipolo City.
The buy-bust team was formed, composed of:

The team coordinated with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), prepared marked buy-bust money, and executed the operation systematically.
During the operation, PO1 Gangan knocked on the door of Gabriel’s house, handed over the marked money, and received a plastic sachet containing shabu from Gabriel; a pre-arranged signal then prompted the rest of the team to apprehend him.

In Criminal Case No. 03-25992, a plastic sachet containing 0.03 gram of shabu was bought from Gabriel. In Criminal Case No. 03-25993, an additional sachet containing 0.019 gram was found in his possession, along with seven other sachets recovered from his pocket after his arrest.
The seizure procedure involved marking the sachet bought (as “JR”) and the additional sachets (marked “OG-1” to “OG-7”).
Critical procedural lapses included:

Failure to conduct the required physical inventory and photographing of the seized items at the scene of arrest, as mandated by Section 21 of RA 9165.
The absence of the three mandatory witnesses—a representative from the Department of Justice, a media representative, and an elected public official—during the inventory and documentation of the evidence.
The inventory and marking of the evidence were conducted later at the police station without justification as to why they could not be performed immediately on scene.

Gabriel claimed he was merely walking near his residence and was caught off guard when several men approached him.
He alleged that he was chased, apprehended without a proper warrant, and that the conduct of the arresting officers was questionable.
He disputed the testimony of the police and maintained that his “self-serving” statements were not the basis for his conviction.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Gabriel guilty in both cases and imposed a sentence of reclusion perpetua for one charge and a term of imprisonment along with a fine for the other.
The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision, relying on the presumption of regularity in police conduct despite acknowledged procedural lapses, particularly regarding the inventory and documentation of the seized evidence.

Relying on the presumption of regularity in the performance of police duties despite evident procedural lapses.
Overlooking the strict mandates of Section 21 of RA 9165 regarding the immediate inventory and photographing of seized drugs at the scene.
Failing to require the presence of the three mandatory witnesses (DOJ, media, and an elected official) during the seizure and inventory process.
Allowing the police officers’ testimonies to prevail over the lack of compliance with the detailed procedural requirements meant to safeguard the integrity of the evidence and the presumption of innocence.