Title
People vs. Aranda y Doria
Case
G.R. No. 100985
Decision Date
Sep 17, 1993
Teresita Aranda acquitted of drug charges due to inconsistent testimonies, lack of proof of delivery, and insufficient evidence establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 100985)

Background of the Case

The appellant, Teresita Aranda, was charged with violating Section 15, Article III of the Dangerous Drugs Act (R.A. No. 6425 as amended) for allegedly selling and delivering methamphetamine hydrochloride (commonly known as "shabu") to Benito Villanueva. The information, lodged as Criminal Case No. C-35532, detailed the alleged sale occurring on or about August 17, 1990, which led to a joint trial with a related case against Villanueva.

Proceedings and Evidence Presented

Following the indictment, Aranda pleaded "not guilty" on September 3, 1990. Law enforcement officers, including Pfc. Alexander Corpuz, established surveillance based on an informant's tip regarding Villanueva's planned purchase of drugs from Aranda. Upon witnessing the alleged transfer of plastic bags containing drugs, the officers intervened, resulting in the discovery of methamphetamine in Aranda's possession and Villanueva's bag.

The prosecution's case relied heavily on the testimonies of the apprehending officers and the recovered evidence, including the confiscated plastic bags which allegedly contained the drug.

Defense's Argument and Testimony

Aranda's defense established an alternative narrative where she was merely a passenger on the tricycle and claimed ignorance of any drug transaction. She asserted that the arrest was unlawful as it lacked a warrant, and she described the circumstances of her apprehension where no clear information was provided to her regarding the reasons for her detention. Aranda also highlighted her lawful employment during the time of her arrest, mitigating her connection to the drug trade.

Trial Court's Findings

On June 13, 1991, the trial court found Aranda guilty based on the weight of the prosecution's evidence and sentenced her to life imprisonment, along with a fine. The court noted the delivery of the substance as proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Errors Assigned on Appeal

In her appeal, Aranda identified multiple errors, asserting that the trial court placed undue weight on contradictory testimonies from the prosecution’s witnesses and that the evidence failed to establish any sale of prohibited drugs.

Assessment of Evidence on Appeal

Upon review, the appellate court noted significant inconsistencies in the testimonies of the apprehending officers, undermining their credibility. The testimonies concerning who investigated the arrest fluctuated and the chain of custody for the confiscated drugs was not adequately established. Furthermore, Villanueva's own testimony failed to implicate Aranda directly, stating he did not receive anything from her.

L

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.