Title
People vs. Cantalejo y Manlangit
Case
G.R. No. 182790
Decision Date
Apr 24, 2009
Appellant acquitted as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; procedural lapses in drug seizure and credible frame-up defense led to reversal.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 182790)

Legal Proceedings

Following the filing of an Information against the appellant, he pleaded not guilty during arraignment. The prosecution's case relied on testimonies from police officers involved in the operation, while the defense presented testimonies from the appellant and his family. The prosecution established that the apprehension took place after a planned buy-bust operation, with police assets reporting illegal drug activities involving the appellant.

Prosecution's Case

The prosecution outlined that two police assets reported the appellant's drug dealings, prompting an entrapment team led by SPO4 Celso Jeresano to intervene. Evidence was presented detailing how the poseur-buyer, PO2 Paul Acosta, engaged with the appellant, resulting in the alleged sale of a plastic sachet of shabu, a form of methamphetamine. This purported transaction was supported by further evidence of the marked buy-bust money recovered from the appellant.

Defense's Argument

In contrast, the defense contended that no drug sale occurred. The appellant described an intruding group of armed men, who forcefully entered their home and searched for drugs. The defense established a narrative suggesting that the police acted without a warrant and resorted to coercion, thus framing the appellant and conducting an unlawful search.

Trial Court's Decision

The Regional Trial Court of Quezon City subsequently found the appellant guilty, sentenced him to life imprisonment, and imposed a fine, asserting that the prosecution sufficiently proved the necessary elements of the crime charged.

Appellate Review

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling, highlighting that the constitutional presumption of innocence had been overridden by the prosecution's evidence. The appellant argued that the trial court ignored significant elements of reasonable doubt and procedural violations regarding search and seizure.

Supreme Court Findings

The Supreme Court convened to evaluate the merits of the appeal and found the need for a more thorough examination of the evidence presented at trial. The decision underscored that the prosecution had failed to meet the burden of proof required, noting that the testimonies from the police lacked corroborative details, particularly regarding the chain of custody of the seized drugs. Additionally, no rebuttal evidence was provided by the prosecution to counter the defense's claims of a frame-up.

Circumstantial Evidence and Doubt

The Court emphas

...continue reading

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