Case Digest (G.R. No. 241631)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Rodel Tomas y Orpilla, G.R. No. 241631, March 11, 2019, Supreme Court Second Division, Reyes, Jr., J., writing for the Court.The prosecution charged accused-appellant Rodel Tomas y Orpilla with violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (illegal sale of dangerous drugs) in an Information dated May 9, 2011, alleging that on May 8, 2011 Tomas sold two heat-sealed plastic sachets containing a total of 7.69 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride ("shabu") to a poseur-buyer in Brickstone Mall, Tuguegarao City. Tomas pleaded not guilty and trial followed.
The prosecution presented PDEA agents and personnel involved in the buy-bust operation (IO1 Benjamin D. Binwag, IO1 Juneclide D. Cabanilla, IA3 Allan Lloyd B. Leano), a barangay chairman who later signed an inventory, a police chemist who tested the seized items, and other witnesses. Their account was that a confidential informant arranged the sale, IO1 Binwag acted as the poseur-buyer, marked money was handed to Tomas, and the agents arrested him after he delivered the two sachets; marking, inventory, photographing and laboratory submission were done later at the PDEA office where Barangay Chairman Pagulayan signed the inventory.
Tomas testified that he was accosted in civilian clothing, forcibly taken and mauled, and that the seized sachets came from the pocket of IO1 Binwag; he presented a physician's certificate describing contusions and abrasions. He also claimed that the marking, inventory and photographing were not done at the place of arrest and that no Department of Justice (DOJ) representative or media representative were present as required by law, rendering the seized items inadmissible as fruits of an illegal arrest or as the product of a frame-up.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 5, Tuguegarao City, convicted Tomas on December 3, 2014, finding the elements of illegal sale established and sentencing him to life imprisonment and a P400,000 fine; the RTC ordered forfeiture of the seized drugs to the government. Tomas appealed; the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 07245 affirmed the RTC decision on May 31, 2017 with modification increasing the fine to P500,000, upholding the integr...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the prosecution sufficiently establish the identity and integrity of the seized drugs (the corpus delicti) by compliance with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 and its IRR, thereby making the seized substances admissible in evidence?
- Were the remaining elements of illegal sale (that a sale occurred and that buyer and seller were identified) proved beyond reasonable doubt such that conviction should s...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)