Facts:

• Accused-appellant Carlito Mateo y Patawid was found guilty of violating the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
• He was caught selling and possessing dangerous drugs in a buy-bust operation.
• Two informations were filed against him for violating Section 5 and Section 11, Article II of the law.
• Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges.
• The prosecution presented witnesses who testified to the events of the buy-bust operation.
• The defense presented the lone testimony of the accused.
• The trial court found accused-appellant guilty and sentenced him to imprisonment and a fine.
• The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

1. The court ruled that accused-appellant's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

• The prosecution presented witnesses who testified to the buy-bust operation and the sale of the dangerous drugs.
• The shabu subject of the sale was presented and identified in court.
• The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were consistent and corroborated each other.
• The defense's bare denial was not enough to overcome the positive and affirmative testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

2. The court ruled that the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were minor and insignificant.

• Such inconsistencies do not affect their credibility and may even guarantee truthf...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The court held that the guilt of accused-appellant was proven b...continue reading