Case Digest (G.R. No. 109250)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Noriel Lacerna y Cordero & Marlon Lacerna y Aranador, G.R. No. 109250, September 05, 1997, Supreme Court Third Division, Panganiban, J., writing for the Court.The People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee) charged Noriel Lacerna y Cordero and Marlon Lacerna y Aranador (accused; Marlon is the appellant) by Information dated September 16, 1992 alleging that on or about September 12, 1992 in Manila they unlawfully “sell, deliver or give away to another” eighteen (18) blocks of marijuana (total weight 18.235 kilograms) in violation of Section 4, R.A. No. 6425, as amended. When arraigned appellant and co-accused appeared without counsel; a Public Attorney (Atty. Libatique) was provisionally appointed for arraignment and assisted them when their retained counsel failed to appear.
At trial the prosecution presented police officers (PO3 Carlito Valenzuela, PO3 Rafael Melencio) and NBI Forensic Chemist Aida Pascual. The prosecution’s version was that while on patrol the officers stopped the taxi occupied by the accused after observing suspicious conduct; with the occupants’ assent the officers searched the luggage, discovered a sealed blue plastic bag containing 18 newspaper-wrapped bricks that emitted the smell of marijuana after an officer poked a hole, and turned the bricks over to the NBI which confirmed the substance as marijuana.
Appellant’s defense was denial: he asserted the blue bag had been entrusted to him by an uncle for shipment to Iloilo and that he did not know its contents; he also alleged maltreatment and coercion at the station and contested the voluntariness of statements or booking papers. The trial court (Regional Trial Court, Manila, Branch 16, presided by Judge Ramon O. Santiago) found Marlon guilty of violating Section 4 (givi...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was appellant’s right against warrantless search and seizure violated?
- Did appellant commit the offense of “giving away to another” a prohibited drug under Section 4 of R.A. 6425?
- May appellant be convicted instead for illegal possession of a prohibited drug under Se...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)