Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Policarpio y Natividad
Case
G.R. No. 227868
Decision Date
Jan 20, 2021
Ely Policarpio was acquitted of drug and gun charges after the Supreme Court ruled the prosecution failed to comply with chain-of-custody requirements, casting doubt on the evidence's integrity.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 75954)

Petitioner

People of the Philippines

Respondent

Ely Policarpio y Natividad alias “Dagul”

Key Dates

• April 11, 2007 – Issuance of Search Warrant No. 0085 by RTC Branch 35, Santiago City
• April 12, 2007 – Implementation of search warrant at respondent’s residence
• October 15, 2013 – RTC Decision convicting respondent of drug and gun‐ban violations
• August 18, 2016 – Court of Appeals Decision affirming drug convictions, acquitting on COMELEC gun‐ban charge
• April 5, 2017 – Supreme Court Resolution adopting CA ruling on drug convictions
• January 20, 2021 – Supreme Court Resolution on Motion for Reconsideration

Applicable Law

• 1987 Constitution, Article III (Search and Seizure)
• Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, Section 261(q) (COMELEC gun ban)
• Republic Act No. 9165, Sections 11 & 12, Article II (Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs and Paraphernalia)
• R.A. 9165, Section 21(1) and its IRR (Chain of Custody)

Facts

A PDEA team secured and executed Search Warrant No. 0085 at respondent’s home in Barangay Malvar, Santiago City. They confiscated nine sachets of shabu (21.07 g), drug paraphernalia, cash, deposit slips, and a .45-caliber Colt pistol. Respondent was arrested on the spot and charged with:

  1. Illicit possession of shabu (R.A. 9165, Secs. 11 & 12);
  2. Possession of drug paraphernalia (R.A. 9165, Secs. 11 & 12);
  3. Violation of the COMELEC gun‐ban (BP 881, Sec. 261[q]).

Prosecution’s Evidence

• Testimony of IO3 Asayco and Agent Sanchez: Proper reading and service of warrant; marking and turnover of seized items; presence of barangay officials and media during inventory; instant arrest and rights advisement.
• Forensic Chemist Agcaoili (stipulated): Chemical report confirming methamphetamine hydrochloride in seized sachets.
• Search Warrant, Inventory Receipts signed by respondent and barangay officials.

Defense’s Evidence

Respondent denied signing confiscation receipts, claimed irregularity in warrant reading, absence of household members during inventory, and no knowledge of seized items.

Trial Court Decision

RTC Branch 35 found search warrant valid, admitted evidence, and convicted respondent of all three charges: life imprisonment and fine for shabu possession; six months–one day and fine for paraphernalia; one‐year imprisonment for gun‐ban violation.

Court of Appeals Decision

The CA affirmed convictions for illegal possession of shabu and paraphernalia, citing unbroken chain of custody and valid warrant. It acquitted respondent of the COMELEC gun‐ban violation.

Issues on Appeal

Whether:

  1. Search Warrant No. 0085 was fatally defective in description of place and items;
  2. Prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody under R.A. 9165, Sec. 21(1) and IRR.

Supreme Court Ruling

  1. Validity of Search Warrant
    – Under the 1987 Constitution, particularity is measured by whether officers can, with reasonable effort, identify the place and things described.
    – Although the warrant cited “Purok 4, Malvar, Santiago City” and “undetermined quantity of shabu; several drug paraphernalia,” the deponents and barangay officials guided the team unerringly to respondent’s house.
    – The description of narcotics and paraphernalia was sufficiently particular as directly related to the offense.
  2. Chain of Custody Lapses
    – No evidence that seized shabu and paraphernalia were phot




...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.