Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Watamama y Esil
Case
G.R. No. 194945
Decision Date
Jul 30, 2012
A buy-bust operation led to the arrest of Alex Watamama for alleged shabu sale, but the Supreme Court acquitted him due to procedural lapses in the chain of custody.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 194945)

Facts of the Case

On the morning of September 25, 2005, an informant alerted SPO2 Dante Nagera about someone named "Alex" selling drugs in Barangay Payatas. In response, Nagera and his team, including PO1 Peggy Lynne Vargas designated as the poseur buyer, prepared for a buy-bust operation. At noon, Vargas approached the accused, Watamama, at his residence, posed as a buyer, and completed a transaction for P200 worth of shabu. Following the transaction, the buy-bust team arrested Watamama, recovering two marked bills as evidence.

Procedures Following Arrest

After the arrest, the confiscated shabu was brought to the police station where it was marked and logged by investigator Alex A. Jimenez. The evidence was then forwarded to the PNP Crime Laboratory for testing. Forensic chemist Leonard Jabonillo confirmed that the substance tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu).

Accused's Defense

Watamama claimed that his arrest was unlawful, asserting that he was apprehended without a warrant by individuals whom he alleged were civilian operatives. He stated that no evidence was found on his person during the police search and contended that upon his arrest, he was pressured to divulge the identity of a supposed drug supplier.

Trial Court Decision

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Watamama of illegal sale of shabu, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000. On appeal, Watamama alleged that the prosecution did not adhere to the procedural requirements under Section 21(1) of Republic Act No. 9165, particularly regarding the marking and inventory of confiscated items.

Court of Appeals Findings

The Court of Appeals upheld the RTC decision, finding that the prosecution substantiated the chain of custody for the evidence and stated that the procedurally inadequate marking and inventory at the police station did not impede the prosecution's case. They noted that marking could occur at the apprehending team's nearest office if it preserved the integrity of the evidence.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody, which is essential for proving the identity and integrity of the narcotics. There was insufficient evidence detailing the handling of the seized shabu beyond its initial seizure by the arresting officer. The prosecution's reliance solely on Vargas’ testimony without corroborating

...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.