Case Digest (G.R. No. 228550)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Glen Piad y Bori, Renato Villarosa y Platino and Nilo Davis y Artiga, G.R. No. 213607, January 25, 2016, the Supreme Court Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court.The People prosecuted Glen Piad (Piad) for illegal sale (Section 5, Art. II, R.A. No. 9165) and illegal possession (Section 11, Art. II) in Criminal Cases Nos. 14086‑D and 14087‑D. Renato Villarosa, Agustin Carbo, and Nilo Davis (collectively the other accused‑appellants) were charged with illegal possession of dangerous drugs during a party (Section 13, Art. II) and possession of drug paraphernalia during a party (Section 14, Art. II) in Criminal Cases Nos. 14088‑D and 14089‑D.
The prosecution’s witnesses recounted a buy‑bust on April 23, 2005: a confidential informant and poseur‑buyer PO1 Arevalo purchased a sachet of white crystalline substance from Piad at P150.00; PO1 Arevalo arrested Piad after the transaction and, during the arrest, Piad produced a metal box containing two additional sachets. Back‑up officers entered the house and observed Villarosa, Carbo and Davis seated on the floor surrounded by three sachets, aluminum foil, a tooter and lighters. The seized items were marked at the scene, brought to the Pasig City Police Station, and submitted to the Eastern Police District Crime Laboratory where PSI Stella Ebuen tested them positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
The defense testified that on April 23, 2005 the accused were celebrating a birthday when armed men in civilian clothes suddenly entered the house, handcuffed and brought them to the police station; the accused also alleged extortion demands by officers. At trial Piad, Villarosa, Carbo and Davis pleaded not guilty (Davis was not arraigned initially because he had jumped bail but was later arrested and arraigned in 2008). The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 164, Pasig City, in a Joint Decision dated September 24, 2009 convicted Piad of illegal sale and possession and convicted Villarosa, Carbo and Davis of possession during a party and possession of paraphernalia, imposing the penalties stated in the decision and ordering the seized items turned over to PDEA for destruction.
Piad, Villarosa and Davis appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). Carbo later withdrew his appeal. In CA-G.R. CR‑HC No. 04780 the CA, in a Decision dated January 22, 2014, affirmed the RTC, holding that the elements of the crimes were proven and that the prosecution substantially complied with the chain of custody under Section 21, IRR of R.A. No. 9165. The case was brought to the Supreme Court by the accused‑appellants (petition for review from the CA decision), after which the Court required supplemental...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did Nilo Davis lose his standing to appeal by jumping bail and failing to submit to the Court’s jurisdiction?
- Did the prosecution substantially comply with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21, IRR of R.A. No. 9165, so that the seized items were admissible?
- Were the elements of the crimes charged against Glen Piad (illegal sale and possession) and against Renato Villarosa, Agustin Carbo, and Nilo Davis (possession during a party and possess...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)