Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Arellano y Navarro
Case
G.R. No. 231839
Decision Date
Jul 10, 2019
Accused acquitted due to police irregularities, inconsistent testimonies, and failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in drug case.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 231839)

Charges and Legal Framework

Michael Ryan Arellano y Navarro faced charges under three criminal cases:

  1. Criminal Case No. 15491: Illegal possession of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu).
  2. Criminal Case No. 15492: Illegal sale of shabu.
  3. Criminal Case No. 15493: Illegal possession of paraphernalia.

All charges were based on violations of Sections 5, 11, and 12 of Republic Act No. 9165. The incidents took place on April 18, 2013, in Laoag City.

Procedural Background

Upon his arrest, the accused pleaded not guilty to all charges. The prosecution's case commenced with a buy-bust operation, where a confidential informant tipped off authorities about Arellano’s drug activities. The police conducted the operation in coordination with the informant, resulting in the recovery of shabu and paraphernalia from the accused's possession during the operation at Farmside Hotel.

Evidence Presentation

During the trial, the prosecution presented testimonial evidence from the poseur-buyer and other law enforcement officers involved in the buy-bust operation. Forensic analysis confirmed the identity of the seized substances as illegal drugs through laboratory examination. Conversely, the defense rested on Arellano's testimony, claiming he was falsely accused, insisting on a supposed frame-up by the police.

RTC's Judgment

On September 11, 2015, the RTC found Arellano guilty on all counts and imposed several penalties, including life imprisonment for illegal sale and long prison terms for possession charges, along with substantial fines.

Appeal and Court of Appeals Findings

Arellano appealed, disputing the integrity of the prosecution's case, particularly the chain of custody and the officers' credibility. However, the CA upheld the RTC's conviction, recognizing that the prosecution sufficiently established its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Supreme Court's Review

Upon review, the Supreme Court adhered to the principle of presumption of innocence, emphasizing that any doubt regarding the accused's guilt must favor him. The Court noted inconsistencies in the testimonies of law enforcement witnesses, particularly concerning the presenc

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.