Title
People vs. Ternida y Munar
Case
G.R. No. 212626
Decision Date
Jun 3, 2019
Rolando Ternida acquitted as prosecution failed to prove chain of custody for seized shabu, violating RA 9165 procedures, casting reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 212626)

Charges and Initial Proceedings

An Information was filed against Ternida alleging that he sold 0.0402 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as "shabu." The substance was reportedly sold to a police operatives' poseur-buyer using marked money. Ternida pleaded not guilty upon arraignment, and the trial proceeded through pre-trial and merits hearings.

Prosecution's Version of Events

The prosecution presented its case stating that on November 12, 2009, a confidential informant alerted the San Fernando City Police about Ternida’s impending drug sale. A buy-bust operation was organized, leading to Ternida's arrest on November 17, 2009. The police claimed that they seized a heat-sealed plastic sachet containing shabu during the transaction, which was later subjected to forensic examination confirming the identity of the substance.

Defense's Claims

Ternida contested the buy-bust operation's legitimacy, asserting that he was simply arrested without any actual drug sale occurring. His argument hinged on the lack of photographic evidence of the seized drugs and alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of the arresting officers regarding the presence of witnesses during the operation. Ternida also pointed out that there was no coordination with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) prior to his arrest, contrary to required protocols.

Trial Court's Decision

On July 6, 2011, the Regional Trial Court found Ternida guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine of Php500,000. Ternida subsequently appealed the decision.

Appellate Arguments

Ternida contended that the prosecution did not adequately preserve the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti, particularly highlighting procedural failures such as the absence of evidence indicating the drugs were photographed upon seizure. The defense maintained that essential witnesses were not presented, and the prosecution failed to establish a proper chain of custody.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals upheld the Regional Trial Court's decision on October 30, 2013, stating that despite lapses in procedure, the elements of the crime were met.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court reviewed the circumstances surrounding Ternida's conviction, focusing on the prosecution's failure to comply with the chain of custody requirements outlined in Article II, Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165. It emphasized that immediate inventory and photography of seized items are mandated to ensure evidence integrity and address doubt regarding the identity of the controlled substance.

Failure to Establish Compliance

The prosecution could not provide justification for not photographing the seized ite

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.