G.R. No. 179475 - People vs. Sibunga y Agtoca

Daniel Sibunga y Agtoca (appellant) was charged with violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act).
The specific charge pertained to the alleged willful, unlawful, and felonious sale, distribution, and/or delivery of a medium heat-sealed plastic sachet containing white crystalline substance (shabu) weighing approximately 2.01 grams.

On September 26, 2003, a tip was received by PO3 Albert Lag-ey while on surveillance at People’s Park, Baguio City.

The tip involved information that "Marty" and "Daniel" were looking for prospective buyers of shabu.
The informant facilitated a meeting arrangement between the police and the alleged suspects.

The police, including PO2 Vincent Lagan and SPO4 Malateo, coordinated with Inspector Melchor Nawi Ong and the PDEA.

A Pre-operation Report was submitted ahead of the operation.
Inspector Ong provided the team with P8,000.00 designated as "show money" to be used during the operation.

At approximately 7:15 p.m., the team, including SPO4 Malateo, PO3 Lag-ey, and the informant, proceeded on Bonifacio Street to meet the suspects near a designated location (U Need Lumber adjacent to Baguio Central University).
Upon arrival, the informant introduced the officers as prospective buyers of shabu to the suspects ("Marty" and "Daniel").

During the encounter, the appellants engaged in a dialogue regarding the quantity of shabu.
SPO4 Malateo initially indicated the purchase of “isang bulto lang” (one bundle), although later testimony revealed an inconsistency regarding whether two grams or “isang bulto” was intended.

During the interaction, one of the suspects (identified as appellant) demanded payment for the shabu.
SPO4 Malateo and PO3 Lag-ey identified themselves as police officers and subsequently arrested both individuals.
The arrested individuals were taken to the Drug Enforcement Unit of the Baguio City Police Office for further documentation.

A crime laboratory later confirmed that the seized sachet (Exhibit "K") contained methamphetamine hydrochloride.

Both SPO4 Malateo and PO3 Lag-ey testified in court, identifying appellant as one of those apprehended during the operation.
Despite minor inconsistencies in their testimonies—such as the exact weight/quantity of the drug and the denomination details of the "show money" provided—the substance of their statements consistently established the essential elements of the crime.
Appellant’s version of events claimed that he was merely present during a billiard game in a local hall before being "framed" during an unexpected police raid.

The trial court convicted Daniel Sibunga y Agtoca, sentencing him to life imprisonment and imposing a fine of P500,000.00.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision, giving credence to the testimonies of the police officers and dismissing appellant’s claims of a frame-up.

Whether the seeming inconsistencies in the testimonies of SPO4 Malateo and PO3 Lag-ey—specifically regarding the quantity of shabu negotiated (i.e., “isang bulto” versus “two grams”)—were significant enough to question their credibility.
Whether the officers’ lapse in recalling the denomination of the P8,000.00 "show money" affected the integrity of their overall testimonies.

Whether the absence of an actual, simultaneous exchange of marked money and the drug invalidates the claim of a consummated sale of dangerous drugs.
Whether the presentation of the seized drug (Exhibit "K") at the trial court suffices as evidence of a sale despite no money being exchanged during the operation.

Whether appellant’s claim of being framed was supported by any clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity in the police officers’ conduct during the operation.
The extent to which collateral inconsistencies in the officers’ accounts could be used to establish a defense of frame-up.