G.R. No. L-68523-24 - People vs. Eslabon y Martinez

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-68523-24)

Factual Background

On the evening of July 18, 1983, Capt. Teocencio T. Abrigo, then Commanding Officer of the 117th PC Company stationed at Punta, Aparri, Cagayan, instructed two enlisted men, CSC Rodrigo de la Cruz and CSC Reynaldo Cabangbang, to conduct a “test-buy operation” on WILLIAM, who had been under surveillance for alleged prohibited drug activity. Capt. Abrigo supplied them with a marked twenty-peso bill bearing Serial No. RE-509575 (Exhibit “F”). The undercover team, with CSC Nestor Santos, went to the Eslabon residence at around 7:30 P.M.

Upon arrival, they observed WILLIAM with WILSON and BITAUAG. The undercover men pretended to buy marijuana worth P20.00. WILLIAM then instructed BITAUAG to get five sticks of marijuana from a room inside the house and to give them to CSC Cabangbang in exchange for P20.00, which WILSON received. During this transaction, WILSON held a gun. After the undercover men and the accused handled the purchased sticks, the accused also provided two additional sticks of marijuana before the raiding party left, and all parties took turns in sampling.

After leaving the house, De la Cruz, Cabangbang, and Santos returned to their headquarters and reported to Capt. Abrigo that the accused were indeed engaged in selling illegal drugs. A raiding team led by Capt. Abrigo moved to the Eslabon house within about forty-five minutes. Capt. Abrigo identified himself. At that point, WILLIAM ran upstairs and went inside his room, pursued by De la Cruz and Santos. The pursuers could not get close because WILLIAM pointed a “grease gun” (a sub-machine gun) at them. The men urged him to surrender peacefully. After conferring with his wife, WILLIAM came down and voluntarily surrendered.

A search of the house followed, allegedly in the presence of the Barangay Captain and WILLIAM’s wife. The search yielded twenty-four (24) additional sticks of marijuana cigarettes from the same room where BITAUAG had retrieved the five sticks used in the “test-buy.” The search also allegedly produced a sub-machine gun, one hand grenade, six live ammunitions for a carbine, and live bullets for cal. .38 and .357 handguns. The marked P20.00 bill used in the buy was also confiscated (Exhibit “F”). The raiding operatives seized these items after the undercover purchase had taken place.

On July 19, 1983, the undercover agents De la Cruz, Cabangbang, and Santos executed a Joint Affidavit recounting the purchase, the raid, and the items seized. On the same day, the Chief Investigator of the PC filed separate Criminal Complaints for Drug Pushing and Illegal Possession of Firearms before the Municipal Trial Court of Aparri. After preliminary examination and a finding of probable cause, the Municipal Judge on August 29, 1983 forwarded the records to the Provincial Fiscal for the filing of the proper Informations. The five purchased sticks initially submitted to the PC laboratory were later lost when the Crime Laboratory building was gutted by fire on September 26, 1983.

Trial Court Proceedings

At trial, the Regional Trial Court tried the accused jointly for the firearms and drug charges. The five sticks originally forwarded for laboratory examination had been lost due to the fire. On motion of the prosecution, with the defense’s conformity, the trial court ordered another five (5) sticks from the remaining twenty-four (24) seized sticks (Exhibit “H”) to be subjected to laboratory examination.

The chemistry report (Exhibit “I”) gave positive results for marijuana. The trial court’s final judgment acquitted all three accused of Illegal Possession of Firearms because it found the search illegal for lack of a search warrant. However, the same court convicted all three accused of Drug Pushing and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua, ordering a fine of P20,000.00 and payment of costs.

The Parties’ Contentions

The defense challenged the conviction by assigning two main errors. First, the accused argued that the trial court erred in holding that marijuana cigarettes obtained during the raid—conducted without a search warrant—were admissible in evidence. Second, they contended that the trial court should not have believed the prosecution witnesses because the evidence was allegedly planted to counter alleged violations of the raiding team’s human rights.

On credibility and the circumstances of the raid, the defense presented evidence from neighbors of the Eslabons. These witnesses testified, in substance, that BITAUAG did not reside in the Eslabon house; that when the raid occurred in the evening of July 18, 1983, Capt. Abrigo ordered the occupants of the house to go down and thereafter ordered his men to search; that the witnesses heard raiding personnel report “negative, sir”; that the witnesses did not see any raiding-team member carry a plastic bag or envelope after the raid; and that the accused were thereafter taken to headquarters. WILLIAM corroborated aspects of the neighbors’ account by testifying that Capt. Abrigo ordered his men to go up the house while Capt. Abrigo stayed outside with the occupants during the search. WILLIAM also claimed that when he was asked where the marijuana and firearms were, he said he did not know, and he added that at headquarters he suffered maltreatment described as “electric shock.” WILSON did not testify. BITAUAG testified that he did not reside with the brothers; that on the evening in question he was in front of the Eslabon house because he could not get a ride; that uniformed men suddenly arrived, poked an armalite at his stomach, and took him to headquarters, where he was also maltreated; and that he knew nothing about the cases filed against him and the Eslabon brothers.

The prosecution, in response, relied on the undercover “test-buy” account and the raid that immediately followed, together with the laboratory findings and the recovery of the marked buy money.

Appellate Issues

On appeal, the accused specifically attacked (1) the trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of the marijuana cigarettes seized during the raid without a search warrant, and (2) the trial court’s credibility assessment of the prosecution witnesses, alleging that the evidence was planted.

Legal Basis and Reasoning

The Court held that the conviction was supported by evidence showing that all three accused directly participated in selling marijuana to the undercover agents. It found it established that WILLIAM had been under surveillance prior to the incident and that, when the undercover men approached the Eslabon house, WILLIAM ordered BITAUAG to retrieve five sticks of marijuana from a room inside the house and to deliver them as part of the sale. It likewise noted that WILSON stood by holding a gun and that the accused and the undercover operatives even took turns sampling the marijuana, while the marked purchase money was involved in the transaction.

The Court rejected the contention that evidentiary issues and the warrantless character of the search undermined the proof of guilt for Drug Pushing. It considered the five sticks of marijuana used in the “test-buy” as the decisive items. It explained that the five sticks originally submitted to the PC laboratory were not part of the items seized during the raid because they were the ones bought by the PC men and turned over to their headquarters. It further found that the defense did not object to the trial court’s order for a substitute laboratory examination of five sticks taken from the remaining seized sticks after the original laboratory samples were lost in the fire.

The Court found evidentiary support for the substitution. It held that there was evidence showing that

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-68523-24)

Parties and Procedural Posture

People of the Philippines appeared as plaintiff-appellee, while William Eslabon y Martinez, Wilson Eslabon y Martinez, and Roman Bitauag y Lacangan appeared as defendants-appellants.
The Regional Trial Court of Aparri, Cagayan, Branch VIII tried the accused jointly after two separate Informations were filed against them.
The trial court acquitted the accused of Illegal Possession of Firearms but convicted them of Drug Pushing under the Dangerous Drugs Act (R.A. No. 6425, as amended).
The trial court imposed reclusion perpetua, ordered a fine of P20,000.00, and taxed the costs.
The appealed decision reached the Court, where the appellants challenged the admissibility of evidence and the trial court’s credibility findings.

Key Factual Allegations

The Information for Drug Pushing alleged that on or about July 18, 1983, and for some time prior thereto, in Aparri, Cagayan, the accused conspired and sold and delivered marijuana cigarettes to ready buyers without legal authority.
The alleged “buyers” were team members of the Philippine Constabulary in civilian clothes who pretended to purchase marijuana cigarettes and were apprehended after the buy-bust.
The prosecution evidence described a test-buy operation initiated by Capt. Teocencio T. Abrigo, who supplied a marked twenty-peso bill with Serial No. RE-509575.
The undercover operatives arrived at the Eslabon residence at about 7:30 P.M., found William with Wilson and Bitauag, and pretended to buy marijuana worth P20.00.
William allegedly directed Bitauag to obtain five sticks of marijuana from inside a room and deliver them to CSC Cabangbang, for which Wilson allegedly received the consideration.
During the buy, Wilson allegedly held a firearm, and the operatives allegedly took turns sampling two additional sticks offered by the accused.
The operatives immediately reported to Capt. Abrigo that the accused were selling illegal drugs and a raiding team moved to the residence within about forty-five (45) minutes.
During the raid, William allegedly ran upstairs, was pursued, and ultimately surrendered after being pursued by operatives who could not approach due to William pointing a firearm.
After surrender, a search allegedly conducted in the presence of the Barangay Captain and William’s wife yielded twenty-four (24) additional sticks of marijuana cigarettes from the same room, plus firearms and ammunition, including a sub-machine gun, a hand grenade, and live ammunition.
The marked P20.00 bill allegedly used in the purchase was also confiscated.
On July 19, 1983, the buying operatives executed a Joint Affidavit, and separate criminal complaints for Drug Pushing and Illegal Possession of Firearms were filed after a preliminary examination.
The five sticks of marijuana originally submitted for laboratory examination were allegedly lost in a fire that gutted the PC Crime Laboratory on September 26, 1983.
During trial, the prosecution—with defense conformity—obtained an order to test another five sticks from the remaining confiscated marijuana, and the chemistry report later showed positive results for marijuana.

Issues Raised on Appeal

The appellants contended that the trial court erred in holding that the marijuana cigarettes taken during the raid without a search warrant were admissible in evidence.
The appellants also contended that the trial court erred in not giving credibility to the claim that evidence was planted to counter alleged violations by the raiding team.
The case posture narrowed, because the trial court had already acquitted the accused of Illegal Possession of Firearms on the ground of illegal search for lack of a search warrant.

Defense Theory and Evidence

The accused denied selling marijuana to the undercover agents.
The defense challenged the search and seizure as not covered by any warrant and alleged illegality in the seizure process.
The defense assailed the prosecution for failing to present in evidence the confiscation receipt that Capt. Abrigo allegedly prepared in the presence of the Barangay Captain and gave to William.
The accused argued that the firearms and drugs presented at trial were planted.
Neighbor witnesses testified that Bitauag did not reside in the Eslabon house and that during the raid they heard the raiders report “negative, sir” and did not see any raiding member carrying a plastic bag or envelope after the raid.
William corroborated portions of these accounts, s