Case Digest (G.R. No. 208093)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Salim Ismael y Radang, G.R. No. 208093, February 20, 2017, the Supreme Court First Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.The prosecution, People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee), charged Salim Ismael y Radang (accused-appellant) in two Informations dated August 25, 2003: Criminal Case No. 5021 (19952) for unlawful sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) in violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (RA 9165); and Criminal Case No. 5022 (19953) for unlawful possession of shabu in violation of Section 11, Article II of RA 9165.
The factual account at trial was that, following a confidential tip, a Culianan Police Station buy‑bust team used SPO1 Roberto A. Santiago as a poseur buyer who allegedly bought one small sachet from Salim for a marked P100 bill; arresting officer SPO1 Eduardo Rodriguez reportedly found two additional sachets in Salim’s left front pocket. The items and marked money were said to have been brought to the police station, initially turned over to a desk officer (PO3 Floro Napalcruz), and then to investigator PO2 Rodolfo Dagalea Tan, who purportedly placed his initials on the items; forensic chemist PCI Mercedes Diestro reported the specimens positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride the same day.
Salim pleaded not guilty and testified in his own defense, denying the sale and possession, claiming arrest by persons in civilian clothes, denial of seeing the alleged shabu until trial, and alleging that police took only his money. At the close of trial the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 12, Zamboanga City, rendered judgment on August 31, 2010 convicting Salim of both offenses and imposing life imprisonment and fines for the illegal sale count and a separate term and fine for illegal possession; the RTC ordered confiscation of the seized drugs. The RTC credited the testimonies of SPO1 Santiago and SPO1 Rodriguez and rejected Salim’s frame‑up defense.
Salim appealed to the Court of ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the accused’s guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt?
- Did the prosecution establish an unbroken chain of custody and comply with Section 21, Article II of RA 9165 and its IRR in handling the se...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)