Case Digest (G.R. No. 208472)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Eduardo Lacdan y Perez @ "Edwin" and Romualdo Vierneza y Bondoc @ "Ulo", G.R. No. 208472, October 14, 2019, First Division, Carandang, J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff-appellee is the People of the Philippines; the accused-appellants are Eduardo Lacdan y Perez and Romualdo Vierneza y Bondoc charged with illegal sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride ("shabu") under R.A. 9165.On February 11, 2004, an Information was filed charging the accused-appellants with violation of Section 5, in relation to Section 26 of R.A. 9165, for the sale of 10.03 grams of shabu. The prosecution alleged that a confidential informant negotiated a buy-bust with the accused; a PDEA buy-bust team executed the operation on February 10, 2004 at the San Pedro Town Center. PO3 Marino Garcia acted as the poseur-buyer, carrying marked genuine P500 bills and "boodle" money (newspaper cut-outs) sandwiched between them. After the accused purportedly delivered a heat-sealed sachet of white crystalline substance and accepted the money, the team arrested them and brought them to the PDEA office at Camp Vicente Lim in Calamba City, where the sachet was initialed by the poseur-buyer, inventoried in the presence of an elected official and a media representative, and later tested positive for shabu at the crime laboratory.
The defense presented alibi/coercion testimony: Lacdan said he was taken by armed men and brought to another place where several persons were also arrested; Vierneza claimed he was forced into a vehicle at gunpoint and overheard the captors say the person taken was not the intended target. Two other defense witnesses corroborated Vierneza. The trial court (Regional Trial Court, Branch 31, San Pedro, Laguna) on November 25, 2008 found the accused-appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt, crediting police testimony over the accusedes' accounts, and sentenced them to life imprisonment and a P500,000 fine each.
The accused appealed to the Court of Appeals; on January 16, 2012 the CA in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 03717 affirmed the RTC decision, finding the elements of illegal sale proven and the chain of custody observed. The accused-appellants then filed an ordinary appeal to the Supreme Court. In their supplemental brief before the Court, they argued non-compliance with Section 21(a) of the Implementing Rules and Regulatio...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in upholding the conviction of the accused-appellants for violation of Section 5 of R.A. 916...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)