Case Digest (G.R. No. 246461)
Facts:
In People of the Philippines v. Rosendo LeaAo y LeaAo (G.R. No. 246461, July 28, 2020), the respondent-appellant, Rosendo LeaAo y LeaAo, was charged with violations of Section 5 (sale) and Section 11 (possession) of Article II of Republic Act No. 9165, as amended by RA 10640. On July 1, 2016, at around 8 PM in Balanga City, Bataan, a confidential informant alerted PO1 Paul Nemen Pajarin that “Totong” was selling methamphetamine hydrochloride (“shabu”). A buy-bust operation ensued with PO1 Pajarin as poseur-buyer; appellant was arrested after allegedly selling one sachet (0.0628 g) and being found in possession of two more sachets (0.0951 g). The items were marked “PMP,” “PMP-1,” and “PMP-2,” inventoried and photographed at the police station, and submitted to the crime laboratory. Forensic Chemist PCI Vernon Rey Santiago confirmed the samples as shabu; appellant’s urine also tested positive. At the Regional Trial Court (Branch 92, Balanga City), appellant was found guilty on JulCase Digest (G.R. No. 246461)
Facts:
- Case Background
- Appellant Rosendo Leaão y Leaão was charged in two Informations before RTC-Branch 92, Balanga City:
- Criminal Case No. 16058 for violation of Section 5, Article II of RA 9165 (sale of 0.0628 g shabu).
- Criminal Case No. 16059 for violation of Section 11, Article II of RA 9165 (possession of 0.0951 g shabu).
- On arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges.
- Buy-Bust Operation and Arrest
- Prosecution’s Version
- On July 1, 2016, at 5:30 PM, PO1 Pajarin—designated poseur-buyer—received a tip from a confidential informant that “Totong” was selling shabu in Barangay Sibacan, Balanga City.
- With P500 marked money, Pajarin and the informant met appellant at a Petron station. After handing over marked money, Pajarin received one sachet of white crystalline substance. Signal was given, and PO1 Berdonar effected arrest.
- Upon frisking, two additional sachets were recovered inside a Marlboro box. Pajarin marked the three sachets (“PMP,” “PMP-1,” “PMP-2”) and retained them in his pockets. The items and appellant were brought to the police station, inventoried, photographed before a DOJ representative and a barangay kagawad, then submitted for laboratory examination. Forensic Chemist Santiago tested the seized items and appellant’s urine; all yielded positive results for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
- Prosecution offered sworn statements of arresting officers, coordination forms, spot report, inventory receipt, photographs, chemistry reports, marked money, sachets, and cigarette box.
- Defense’s Version
- Appellant testified he went to buy vitamins and food, parked near the Petron station, and was allegedly accosted by four men in a Toyota Innova, beaten, robbed of cash, ID, cell phone, and forced into a “safe house.”
- At the police station the next morning, he was shown three sachets and other items he denied owning, claiming they were planted to frame him. He presented no medical proof of his alleged injuries.
- Lower Court Decisions
- RTC (July 12, 2017) convicted appellant:
- Life imprisonment and ₱500,000 fine for sale (Sec. 5, Art. II).
- 15 years & 1 day to 20 years imprisonment and ₱300,000 fine for possession (Sec. 11, Art. II).
- Court of Appeals (Sept. 14, 2018) affirmed, ruling that procedural lapses in inventory and marking were minor, non-fatal, and did not affect the identity and integrity of the seized items.
Issues:
- Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction despite procedural deficiencies in the handling of the seized drugs, specifically breaches in the chain of custody under Section 21, RA 9165.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)