Case Digest (G.R. No. 209338)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Bienvenido Miranda y Feliciano, G.R. No. 209338, June 29, 2015, Supreme Court Third Division, Villarama, Jr., J., writing for the Court.The prosecution filed two Informations dated July 14, 2003 charging appellant Bienvenido Miranda y Feliciano with violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II, of R.A. No. 9165 (sale and possession of methylamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu). Criminal Case No. DC-03-317 charged illegal sale of approximately 0.0363 gram of shabu for P200.00; Criminal Case No. DC-03-316 charged possession of approximately 0.0759 gram of shabu. Appellant pleaded not guilty.
At pre-trial the parties stipulated as to appellant’s identity and alias, that the seized substances were submitted to the PNP Crime Laboratory at the request of PDEA Region III, that the PNP Crime Laboratory issued Chemistry Report No. D-324-2003 (dated July 12, 2003), and that the report was positive for methylamphetamine hydrochloride. Trial ensued.
Prosecution witnesses—Police Chief Inspector Manuel Chica (P/CI Chica) of PDEA Region III and Barangay Chairman Marcelino Cruz—testified to a buy-bust operation on July 11, 2003 initiated after a tip from an informant. P/CI Chica acted as poseur-buyer, used two marked P100 bills, and alleged that appellant handed him a sachet of shabu in exchange for the marked money; upon a prearranged signal the team arrested appellant, recovered another sachet from his person, marked the sachets (MCC BFM Exhibit A and MCC BFM B), prepared a Receipt of Property Seized/Confiscation and a Request for Laboratory Examination, and sent the specimens to the PNP Crime Laboratory through PO2 Lambino. The Chemistry Report confirmed both specimens as shabu.
Appellant’s defense was denial: he claimed he had just come from work, that he was only seen by the officers at a street corner, that bystanders were intimidated and would not testify, and that he was later detained in a PDEA safehouse. He contested the authenticity/chain of custody of the seized sachets and noted the lack of testimony by PO2 Lambino on his handling of the items; he also pointed to supposed noncompliance with marking/photograph requirements under Section 21 of the IRR of R.A. No. 9165.
On May 13, 2010, the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 57, Angeles City, convicted appellant of illegal sale (DC-03-317: life imprisonment and fine P500,000) and illegal possession (DC-03-316: reclusion temporal of 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and fine P300,000), finding the prosecution witnesses credible and the elements of the offenses established.
The Court of Appeals (CA), in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 04547, affirmed the RTC in a May 16, 2013 decision, holding that inconsistencies urged by the defense were minor and that the prosecution established the elements of sale and possession,...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the guilt of accused-appellant Bienvenido Miranda y Feliciano proven beyond reasonable doubt for violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (illegal sale and possession ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)