G.R. No. 216754 - People vs. Galuken y Saavedra

The accused, Havib Galuken y Saavedra, was charged with violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, as amended).
The charge pertained to the alleged sale of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (shabu) on May 26, 2009 at a location beside the MCI Commercial Building, Purok 9, Barangay Poblacion, Tacurong City, Sultan Kudarat.

At about 3:00 in the afternoon of May 26, 2009, I03 Adrian AlvariAo (PDEA Provincial Director) briefed the team including IO1 Llano and IO1 Falle.
The designated poseur-buyer was I01 Falle, who was given a five hundred peso bill marked “RPF” for the transaction.

The team assembled at a Caltex Station near Tacurong City Fit Mart where the accused was waiting.
A confidential informant initiated the encounter by introducing I01 Falle as his cousin seeking to purchase shabu.
The accused then produced two transparent plastic bags containing the alleged shabu after being urged to expedite the transaction due to a possible presence of PDEA agents.
The transaction proceeded with the money exchange, and the seizure of the drugs was effected.

The buy-bust team executed the seizure, marking and photographing the evidence.
The drugs were initially in the custody of IO1 Falle and were later processed through inventory receipts and laboratory examination which confirmed the substance as methamphetamine hydrochloride.

The accused maintained that he was in Tacurong City to purchase a T-shirt and subsequently went for lunch, suggesting an unrelated presence near the terminal.
The defense contended that the apprehension by unknown persons lacked the framework of a bona fide buy-bust operation, thereby challenging the prosecution’s narrative and the credibility of the buy-bust team’s testimonies.

The RTC convicted Havib for Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs instead of the charged offense of Illegal Sale due to insufficient evidence to prove a sale.
The judgment sentenced the accused to an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment ranging from 10 years to 17 years and 4 months, along with a fine of ₱300,000.
The RTC noted the absence of the actual poseur-buyer and inconsistencies in evidence handling, yet concluded that possession was established.

The CA reversed the RTC’s mode of conviction by finding Havib guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs.
The appellate decision modified the penalty to life imprisonment and a fine of ₱500,000, emphasizing that all elements of the offense of illegal sale were satisfied.
The CA relied heavily on the testimonies of IO1 Falle and IO1 Llano, considering minor inconsistencies as trivial and not affecting the overall evidence of the transaction.

A central matter in the case was the adherence to the mandatory procedures under Section 21 of RA 9165 regarding the chain-of-custody of confiscated drugs.
The practice during the operation, including the location and manner of inventory, marking, and photographing of the seized items, became a focal point in the appellate review.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in convicting the accused of Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs despite the discrepancies and the RTC’s conviction for Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs.
Whether the prosecution satisfactorily proved the corpus delicti of the offense by complying with the mandatory procedural requirements under Section 21 of RA 9165 concerning the chain-of-custody of the seized drugs.
Whether the deviations in procedure—including the failure to have the required witnesses present at the scene of the seizure and proper inventorying at the place of arrest—undermined the evidentiary integrity of the confiscated drugs.