Case Digest (G.R. No. 191730)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Mylene Torres y Cruz, G.R. No. 191730, June 05, 2013, Supreme Court Second Division, Perez, J., writing for the Court. The criminal case arose from an Information dated 19 January 2007 charging Mylene Torres y Cruz (accused‑appellant) with violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (illegal sale of a dangerous drug), alleging that on 17 January 2007 she sold one heat‑sealed transparent plastic sachet containing 0.04 gram of a white crystalline substance that tested positive for methylamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) to PO1 Jayson Rivera, a police poseur‑buyer.On arraignment the accused pleaded not guilty. At pretrial the parties stipulated to the existence and execution of the Request for Laboratory Examination and the Forensic Chemist Report, the Joint Affidavit of Arrest, and that the specimen described in the Request for Laboratory Examination was the same specimen submitted to the crime laboratory, while reserving the defense’s qualification that the substance was not taken from appellant or was illegally obtained if it was.
The prosecution proved up a buy‑bust operation conducted on 17 January 2007 by a DAIDSOTF team with PO1 Rivera as poseur‑buyer and PO1 Jeffrey Male as immediate back‑up; the buy‑bust money (two P100 bills) was delivered to the appellant at her house, the agreed hand signal (scratching the head) was given, appellant was seized by police, and PO1 Rivera retained the sachet which he later taped and initialed before turning it over to the investigator. The specimen was submitted to the PNP crime laboratory and tested positive for methylamphetamine hydrochloride. The defense presented appellant and Flordeliza De Vera who testified to a contrary version: that police barged into the house, arrested appellant while she was sleeping, searched without finding anything, and later subjected her to an unknown drug test.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasig City, Branch 154, rendered judgment on 17 August 2007 finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal sale of shabu under RA 9165, Sec. 5, and sentenced her to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P1,000,000.00. Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 03454), which in a Decision dated 11 February 2010 affirmed the RTC in toto, ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the failure to comply with the physical inventory and photographing requirement of Section 21, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 fatal to the prosecution?
- Did the prosecution prove the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt for illegal sale of shabu (i.e., were the elements of sale and the corpus delicti established and the...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)