Title
Uy y Sayan vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 217097
Decision Date
Feb 23, 2022
Petitioner acquitted due to prosecution's failure to comply with chain of custody rule under RA 9165, rendering seized drugs inadmissible as evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 91486)

Key Dates

– April 6, 2004: Stop, arrest, and seizure of 248 g of marijuana from petitioner’s motorcycle.
– May 28, 2004: Information filed for illegal possession of dangerous drugs (RA 9165, Sec. 11).
– November 17, 2010: RTC of Malaybalay Conviction.
– August 8, 2014 & February 9, 2015: CA Decision and Resolution affirming conviction with penalty modifications.
– February 23, 2022: Supreme Court Decision granting petition.

Applicable Law

– 1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 2 (right against unreasonable searches and seizures).
– Rules of Court, Rule 113, Section 5 (warrantless arrests).
– RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002): Section 11 (possession offense) and Section 21 (chain of custody).
– IRR of RA 9165 (inventory, marking, photographing, and handling of seized drugs).
– Jurisprudence on checkpoint searches, in flagrante delicto, and chain of custody (e.g., Caballes v. People; People v. del Rosario).

Factual Background

During a routine afternoon checkpoint inspection, officers requested petitioner’s motorcycle CR/OR. Upon his failure to produce documents, they inspected his vehicle, discovering bundles of suspected marijuana in the tool compartment and under the driver’s seat. The seized substance and petitioner’s urine tested positive for marijuana. Petitioner denied ownership and alleged coercion.

Procedural History and Rulings Below

– RTC: Found lawful arrest and justified warrantless search; convicted petitioner under RA 9165 Sec. 11, imposed life imprisonment plus fine; ordered destruction of drugs.
– CA: Held petitioner waived arrest–search legality by failure to object before arraignment; struck down evidence of use (urinalysis) based on Social Justice Society v. DDB; reduced penalty to 12 years + 1 day to 18 years 9 months and fine of ₱300 000.

Issue

Whether the warrantless arrest and search, and the chain of custody of the seized drugs, complied with constitutional and statutory requirements, thus sustaining conviction for illegal possession of dangerous drugs.

Warrantless Arrest and Search Analysis

– Constitution requires judicial warrant based on probable cause, with limited exceptions (search incidental to lawful arrest; in flagrante delicto; checkpoint searches subject to strict requirements).
– Checkpoint searches are lawful when limited to routine inspection or when extended by probable cause.
– Petitioner’s failure to produce OR/CR raised reasonable suspicion of stolen vehicle, justifying extended search.
– Discovery of marijuana in plain view during search incidental to lawful arrest rendered seizure lawful.

Chain of Custody Analysis

– RA 9165 Sec. 21 and IRR mandate immediate marking, physical inventory, and photographing of seized drugs in the presence of the accused (or counsel), media, DOJ representative, and elected official.
– Records showed no inventory report, no marking or photographing in petitioner’s presence, and absence of required witnesses and DOJ/media repres



...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.