Title
People vs. Posing y Alayon
Case
G.R. No. 196973
Decision Date
Jul 31, 2013
A buy-bust operation led to Ruper Posing's arrest for selling and possessing shabu. Despite minor procedural lapses, the Supreme Court upheld his conviction, affirming the integrity of evidence and prosecution's proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 89376)

Facts of the Case

On August 13, 2003, while at the Station Anti-Illegal Drugs (SAID) in Quezon City, police officer SPO1 Purisimo Angeles received information from an informant regarding the illegal activities of Ruper Posing, a known drug pusher in the area. Following this, a buy-bust operation was initiated, in which a marked P100 bill was provided to SPO1 Angeles as part of the operation to facilitate the purchase of shabu. SPO1 Angeles, accompanied by police officers and the informant, proceeded to Makabayan Street, where he engaged Posing in a drug transaction. After the exchange, the other police officers apprehended Posing, recovering the buy-bust money and an additional sachet of shabu during a frisk.

Criminal Charges

The prosecution filed two charges against Posing: (1) for violating Section 5 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (R.A. No. 9165) concerning the illegal sale of dangerous drugs, and (2) for violating Section 11 of the same Act regarding illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Posing pleaded not guilty during his arraignment on December 2, 2003.

Trial Court Proceedings

The trial court found Posing guilty on both charges on December 2, 2008, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000 for the sale of shabu. For possession, he received an indeterminate sentence of 12 years and one day to 14 years, with a fine of P300,000.

Appeal and Legal Arguments

Posing contested the trial court's ruling on appeal, arguing that the police failed to follow proper procedures regarding the handling and custody of the drugs, thereby compromising the chain of custody. He also claimed the absence of prior surveillance and coordination with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), and invoked his presumption of innocence.

Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling, asserting that non-compliance with the procedural requirements, while noted, did not necessitate acquittal. The appellate court upheld the presumption of regularity in the conduct of the police officers, determining that the prosecution sufficiently demonstrated the elements of illegal sale and possession of drugs.

Preservation of Evidence and Chain of Custody

Posing's arguments regarding lapses in the chain of custody were evaluated against the requirements laid out in Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165. The appellate court found that despite some procedural shortcomings, the prosecution established the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items. Testimonies confirmed that the drugs were appropriately marked, transferred, and examined, fulfilling the necessary evidentiary standards.

Elements of the Offense

For a suc

...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.