Case Digest (G.R. No. 242025)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Norin Sendad y Kundo a.k.a. "Nhorain Sendad y Kusain", G.R. No. 242025, November 20, 2019, the Supreme Court Second Division, Perlas‑Bernabe, J., writing for the Court.The case arose from two criminal complaints (Criminal Case Nos. 3637‑T and 3638‑T) filed against Norin Sendad for violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002). The prosecution alleged that during a buy‑bust operation at about 1:00 p.m. on January 11, 2013, police recovered two plastic sachets containing suspected shabu after a poseur‑buyer purchased from Sendad; a subsequent bodily search allegedly produced four more sachets (total weight 0.2613 gram). PO3 Relyn Gonzales marked the six sachets and PO1 Emmanuel Europa marked Sendad’s cellphone; Senior Police Officer 1 John Bacea conducted the inventory and photography at the police station in the presence of Sendad, Barangay Kagawad Randy L. Casama (an elected official), and Leo Diaz (a media representative). No Department of Justice (DOJ) representative was present. The seized items were kept by PO3 Gonzales until turned over the next day to the crime laboratory, which reported a positive result for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
Sendad denied the charges, testifying that she was at Kimsan Plaza to buy supplies when unknown men seized and brought her to the police station; she denied selling drugs and claimed money and her cellphone were taken. Two defense witnesses (a roving guard and the head of security of Kimsan Plaza) testified there was no commotion or reported apprehension in the grocery section on the alleged date.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 20, Tacurong City, rendered judgment on April 28, 2016 convicting Sendad of illegal sale (Crim. Case No. 3637‑T) and illegal possession (Crim. Case No. 3638‑T), imposing life imprisonment (no parole) plus fines for the sale count and a term of 8 years 0 months 0 days to 14 years 4 months 1 day plus fine for the possession count. The RTC found the prosecution had established identity and chain of custody of the seized drugs beyond reasonable doubt and deemed the police witnesses credible despite collateral contradictions; it discounted defense alibi and the delay in testimony of the plaza witnesses.
Sendad appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). In a Decision dated June 21, 2018 (CA‑G.R. CR‑H.C. No. 01626‑MIN), the CA affirmed the RTC’s conviction but modified the penalty in Criminal Case No. 3638‑T to 12 years and 1 day to 20 years. The CA agreed that the prosecution proved the elements of the offenses and that the chain of custody was intact; it also upheld the credibility of the police witnesses.
...(Subscriber-Only)Issues:
- Did the prosecution comply with the chain of custody and the required‑witnesses rule under RA 9165, as amended by RA 10640, and related IRR provisions, such that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved?
- Were the elements of Illegal Sale and Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs under RA 9165 proved beyond reasonable doubt given the handling ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)