Case Digest (G.R. No. 240596)
Facts:
In People of the Philippines vs. Novo Tanes y Belmonte (G.R. No. 240596, April 03, 2019), respondent Novo Tanes y Belmonte was charged under Section 5, Article II of R.A. 9165 for allegedly selling one sachet containing 0.0296 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride to a poseur buyer on December 14, 2010, at around 8:20 P.M. in DARBCI Subdivision, National Highway, General Santos City. An Information was filed on April 6, 2011. Tanes pleaded not guilty and, on April 10, 2015, moved for bail. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 23, General Santos City, conducted three hearings on October 7 and November 4, 2015, and February 3, 2017. On March 31, 2017, the RTC granted bail at ₱200,000, finding the evidence of guilt not strong due to lapses in the chain of custody and citing People v. Jehar Reyes. The People’s motion for reconsideration was denied on June 27, 2017. The Court of Appeals (CA), Cagayan de Oro City, in CA-G.R. SP No. 08305-MIN, likewise denied relief in its February
...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 240596)
Facts:
- Filing of Information and Charged Offense
- On April 6, 2011, an Information was filed against Novo Tanes y Belmonte for violating Section 5, Article II of R.A. 9165, alleging that on December 14, 2010 at about 8:20 P.M. in DARBCI Subdivision, National Highway, General Santos City, he willfully and unlawfully sold to a poseur buyer one sachet containing 0.0296 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride for Five Hundred Pesos (₱500.00).
- Tanes pleaded not guilty.
- Bail Application and RTC Proceedings
- On April 10, 2015, Tanes filed a petition for bail before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 23, General Santos City.
- The RTC conducted three hearings on October 7, 2015; November 4, 2015; and February 3, 2017.
- RTC Orders on Bail
- On March 31, 2017, the RTC granted bail in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱200,000.00), ruling that the evidence of guilt was not strong due to alleged breaks in the chain of custody—specifically, that media, DOJ, and an elected official were not present during the actual buy-bust operation and seizure, but only called to sign the inventory sheet.
- On June 27, 2017, the RTC denied the prosecution’s motion for reconsideration.
- Court of Appeals Proceedings
- On February 21, 2018, the Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed the petition for certiorari and affirmed the RTC’s bail grant, finding that the chain of custody lapses justified a finding that the evidence was not strong.
- On July 11, 2018, the CA denied the prosecution’s motion for reconsideration, leading to the present Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the RTC’s order granting bail to Tanes.
- Whether the RTC deprived the People of due process by failing to include a summary of the prosecution’s evidence in its bail order.
- Whether the RTC and CA extended the requirements of R.A. 9165 by mandating the presence of media, DOJ, and an elected official during the buy-bust operation itself rather than only during the inventory.
- Whether the lapses in the chain of custody of the seized drugs negated a finding of strong evidence of guilt, thus justifying the grant of bail.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)