Case Summary (G.R. No. L-19344)
Applicable Law
The legal basis for the prosecution arises from Republic Act No. 9165, known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Specifically, the accused was charged under Section 5, Article II (selling of dangerous drugs) and Section 11, Article II (illegal possession of dangerous drugs).
Procedural History
Benjamin Amansec was charged on June 18, 2003, with two counts related to shabu. He pleaded not guilty on August 7, 2003, and the trial proceeded thereafter. The RTC decided on August 30, 2006, finding him guilty of the sale of illegal drugs (Criminal Case No. Q-03-118187) and not guilty for illegal possession (Criminal Case No. Q-03-118186). Amansec appealed this ruling, which led to a review by the Court of Appeals, resulting in an affirmation of the RTC’s decision on April 15, 2008.
Evidence Presented
The prosecution primarily relied on the testimonies of police officers involved in a buy-bust operation. Officer Alfredo Mabutol, Jr. acted as the poseur-buyer, and his partner, Officer Ronald Pascua, provided backup. The operation resulted in Amansec being caught selling shabu to Mabutol and was substantiated by the recovery of the drugs along with the buy-bust money used during the transaction. A forensic chemist confirmed that the substances recovered tested positive for methylamphetamine hydrochloride.
Defense Arguments
Amansec's defense rested on claims of being framed and that the police officers lacked substantial and credible evidence. He argued that there were significant irregularities in how the buy-bust operation was conducted, questioning the credibility of the police testimonies, absence of prior surveillance, lack of presentation of the informant, and issues regarding the chain of custody for the seized evidence.
Court Findings and Conclusions
The RTC found that the prosecution sufficiently established the elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, emphasizing the clear identification of Amansec by the police officers and corroborative evidence from the lab tests on the recovered substances. The defense's assertions regarding planting evidence were dismissed due to lack of proof and supporting evidence.
Chain of Custody
A crucial point of contention in Amansec's appeal was the alleged violation of the chain of custody requirements under Section 21 of RA No. 9165. The appellate court noted that while the police procedures were not strictly followed, the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items had been preserved, thus not rendering them inadmissible. The prosecution effectively demonstrated t
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-19344)
Case Background and Charges
- Benjamin Amansec y Dona was charged before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 95, for violation of Sections 11 and 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002).
- Two separate cases were filed: one for illegal possession of 0.09 gram of methylamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) and the other for illegal sale of the same quantity of shabu on June 15, 2003.
- Amansec pleaded not guilty to both charges upon arraignment.
- The cases were consolidated for trial, though Amansec was acquitted in the illegal possession case.
Summary of the Buy-Bust Operation
- On June 15, 2003, police operatives from La Loma Police Station's Drug Enforcement Unit conducted a buy-bust operation.
- PO1 Alfredo Mabutol Jr. served as poseur-buyer; PO2 Ronald Pascua and PO1 Roderick Valencia served as back-up.
- Police Inspector Oliver Villanueva led the operation, after receiving confidential information from an informant.
- Mabutol was given a marked P100.00 bill as buy-bust money; the bill was initialed by Mabutol and its serial number recorded.
- The team approached Amansec's residence in Quezon City; Mabutol introduced as drug addict intending to buy shabu.
- During the transaction, another buyer, Jerome Pintis, also bought shabu from Amansec.
- Amansec sold one plastic sachet to Mabutol and another to Pintis; after signaling, the police arrested Pintis and Amansec.
- Searches yielded plastic sachets containing white crystalline substances and marked money.
Evidence Presentation and Laboratory Examination
- The seized substances were immediately sent to the Central Police District Crime Laboratory.
- Forensic chemist Engr. Bernardino M. Banac Jr. conducted qualitative tests, yielding positive results for methylamphetamine hydrochloride.
- Chemistry Report No. D-472-03 dated June 16, 2003, confirmed the identity of the substances as illegal drugs.
- The plastic sachets were marked with initials of operatives who personally retrieved them.
- The P100.00 buy-bust money was also recovered and marked.
Defense Testimony and Arguments
- Amansec denied the charges, claiming:
- The police planted evidence and framed him.
- He was at home when police searched his residence unannounced.
- Police officers requested names of big-time pushers ("pamalit-ulo") which he could not provide.
- No ill motive was attributed to arresting officers; he only met them after arrest.
- He questioned the credibility of prosecution witnesses and regularity of the buy-bust operation.
Trial Court's Findings and Decision
- The RTC found Amansec guilty beyond reasonable doubt of selling illegal drugs (Section 5, Article II, RA 9165).
- The RTC acquitted Am