Title
People vs. Tandoy y Lim
Case
G.R. No. 80505
Decision Date
Dec 4, 1990
Accused-appellant convicted for selling marijuana in a 1986 buy-bust operation; Supreme Court upheld life imprisonment, affirming prosecution's evidence and credibility of arresting officers.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 80505)

Facts:

Mario Tandoy y Lim was charged by the People of the Philippines by information alleging that on May 27, 1986 in Solchuaga Street, Barangay Singkamas, Municipality of Makati, Metro Manila, he willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sold pieces and crushed flowering tops of marijuana, a prohibited drug, for P20.00. Upon arraignment the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented testimony that at about 3:30 p.m. police officers from the Makati Anti-Narcotics Unit conducted a buy-bust operation in which Det. Pablo R. Singayan posed as buyer, was approached by three men including the accused, and after an offer and acceptance an exchange was made for two rolls for marked money, whereupon the police arrested the accused, recovered from his person the marked money and additional rolls and crushed leaves, and submitted the seized specimens to the NBI forensic chemist who tested positive for marijuana; the accused was informed of his constitutional rights and remained silent. The accused testified that he had been playing "cara y cruz" with others, that he grabbed bet money when arrests were announced and that the bills taken from him were game money, and that he was manhandled and forced to implicate others; his account was uncorroborated. The Regional Trial Court, Branch 133, Makati, rendered judgment on October 13, 1987 finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating Rep. Act No. 6425 and sentenced him to life imprisonment, imposed a fine of P20,000.00 and ordered forfeiture of the confiscated marijuana; the accused appealed on grounds of insufficiency of evidence of sale and improper admission of a xerox copy of the marked bill (Exh. E-2-A).

Issues:

Did the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mario Tandoy y Lim sold marijuana to the poseur-buyer?; Did the trial court err in admitting the xerox copy of the marked P10.00 bill (Exh. E-2-A) in violation of the best evidence rule?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.