Title
People vs. Bolado y Naval
Case
G.R. No. 227356
Decision Date
Oct 16, 2019
Marvin Bolado acquitted as prosecution failed to comply with chain of custody rule under RA 9165, compromising drug evidence integrity.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-7905)

Applicable Law

The applicable law for this case is Republic Act No. 9165 (RA 9165), regarding the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, specifically Section 5, Article II, which penalizes the illegal sale of dangerous drugs.

Charge and Proceedings Before Trial Court

The appellant was charged with the illegal sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride, known as shabu, on July 5, 2012. The Information dated July 9, 2012, detailed the unlawful transaction wherein the appellant was accused of selling 0.06 grams of shabu to PO2 Jeffray Mejalla in exchange for Php 300.00. The case was assigned to the RTC for trial, where the appellant pleaded not guilty.

Prosecution's Version

Witnesses, including PO2 Mejalla and Forensic Chemist Beaune Villaraza, testified that Mejalla, upon receiving a tip about illegal drug transactions in Barangay Pag-asa, conducted a surveillance operation. They positively identified the appellant during this surveillance. A buy-bust operation was subsequently executed, where Mejalla acted as a poseur buyer. The appellant was arrested after handing over a sachet of shabu in exchange for marked money. The seized substance tested positive for methamphetamine.

Defense's Version

The defense positioned that the appellant was not involved in any illicit drug sale, providing an alibi that he was at the police station after an accident involving a police officer. The defense called witnesses supporting this claim; however, the trial court found the testimonies unpersuasive against the credible accounts of the police officers.

Trial Court's Ruling

On November 30, 2013, the trial court rendered a guilty verdict against the appellant, accepting the testimony of the police officers and concluding that the integrity of the seized drugs was maintained according to the chain of custody requirements.

Court of Appeals Proceedings

The appellant appealed the decision, citing flaws in the buy-bust operation, including the absence of the confidential informant as a witness and irregularities in the handling of evidence that allegedly compromised the integrity of the chain of custody. In defense, the Office of the Solicitor General maintained that all elements of the crime were established and defended the procedural adherence.

Court of Appeals' Ruling

On August 28, 2015, the CA affirmed the trial court's ruling, stating that the prosecution sufficiently proved compliance with the chain of custody despite the claimed deficiencies.

Core Issue

The central issue in the appeal was whether the prosecution had adequately established the chain of custody for the evidence presented against the appellant.

Ruling

The Supreme Court granted the appeal and acquitted the appellant. The decision emphasized that although there were procedures laid out in Section 21 of RA 9165 regarding the handling of seized drugs, the prosecution had failed to demonstrate full compliance with those requirements. Specifically, the physical inventory and photographs were not conducted in the presence of a Department of

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.