THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 215937, November 09, 2016
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GENER VILLAR Y POJA, Accused-Appellants.
D E C I S I O N
PEREZ, J.:
The subject of this appeal is the 24 January 2014 Decision1 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00476, affirming the 20 December 2005 Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bacolod City, Branch 47, finding appellant Gener Villar y Poja guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sections 5 and 12, Article II of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165.
Appellant was charged with the crimes of violation of Sections 5 and 12, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, in two (2) Informations, both dated 1 September 2004, which respectively read as follows:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Upon arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges.Criminal Case No. 04-26973
That on or about the 26th day of August 2004, in the City of Talisay, Province of Negros Occidental, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, not being authorized by law to sell, trade, dispense, deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in transit or transport any dangerous drugs, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell, deliver, give away to a police confidential asset in a buy-bust operation a pack of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) weighing 0.06 gram, a dangerous drug, in exchange for a price of P500 in marked money bill with serial number KJ464115, in violation of the aforementioned law.3Criminal Case No. 04-26974
That on or about the 26th day of August 2004, in the City of Talisay, Province of Negros Occidental, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, not being authorized by law to possess equipment, instrument, apparatus and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession and under his custody and control three (3) empty plastic packets, one (1) improvised tooter, one (1) orange plastic straw all containing traces of white crystalline substance (shabu), one (1) piece colored red "kahita" and one disposable lighter fit or intended for smoking, consuming, ingesting, or introducing methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous drug, into the body, in violation of the aforementioned law.4ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Bawi-in was eventually dropped from the charge when he was found negative to a drug test.
- One (1) heat-sealed transparent plastic packet marked "J" containing white crystalline substance weighing 0.03 gram.
- Three (3) unsealed transparent plastic packets marked "J1" through "J3" each containing traces of white crystalline substance.
- One (1) improvised tooter marked "J5" containing traces of white crystalline substance.
- One (1) orange, plastic straw marked "J4" containing traces of white crystalline substance.9
WHEREFORE, finding accused Gener Villar y Poja guilty beyond reasonable doubt for Violation of Section 5 of R.A. No. 9165 (Sale of Dangerous Drugs) and of Section 12 of the same law (Possession of Equipment x x x and other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs), judgment is hereby rendered imposing upon him the penalty of Life Imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00 in Criminal Case No. 04-26973 (Sale of Dangerous Drugs), and an indeterminate penalty of Six (6) months and one (1) day, as minimum, to Two (2) years and Eight (8) months, as maximum, in Criminal Case No. 04-26974 (Possession of equipment and other paraphernalia for Dangerous Drug). He is also to suffer the accessory penalty provided by law. Costs against accused.Appellant filed an appeal before the Court of Appeals. In his Brief,13 appellant alleged the non-compliance with the chain of custody rule when the prosecution failed to present all persons who have possibly handled the evidence in court. Appellant argues that the .police officers failed to comply with Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165, specifically on the absence of barangay official or media men during the buy-bust operation and the lack of date, time and signature of the officer who made the markings on the specimen submitted for examination. Appellant essentially claims that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt the corpus delicti of the case.
The 0.06 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu (Exh. "F-8"), being a dangerous drug; and the red wallet containing the paraphernalia for dangerous drugs (Exh. "F-1"), the orange straw (Exh. "F-2"), the improvised tooter (Exh. "F-3"), the lighter (Exh. "F-4"), and the three (3) empty sachets with traces of shabu (Exhs. "F-5" to "F-7"), which are equipment or paraphernalia for dangerous drugs, are hereby ordered confiscated and/or forfeited in favor of the Government, and are to be forthwith turned over to [the] PDEA (Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency) Provincial Office for immediate destruction.
The immediate commitment of the accused to the national penitentiary is also hereby ordered.12ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Section 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, Seized, and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals, Instruments/Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment. - The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered, for proper disposition in the following manner:Section 21 (a) and (b) of the Implementing Rules and Regulation of R.A. No. 9165 pertinently provides:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(1) The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof;chanrobleslaw
(2) Within twenty-four (24) hours upon confiscation/seizure of dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment, the same shall be submitted to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and quantitative examination;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
(a) The apprehending office/team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof: Provided, that the physical inventory and photograph shall be conducted at the place where the search warrant is served; or at the nearest police station or at the nearest office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable, in case of warrantless seizures; Provided, further that non-compliance with these requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryFirst, there is nothing in the Rules which require the police officer who marked the seized items to indicate the date, time and signature on the specimen to be submitted for examination. Second, it is clear that noncompliance with the enumerated requirements in Section 21 does not automatically exonerate the accused. Upon proof that noncompliance was due to justifiable grounds and that the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, the seizure and custody over said items are not, by the noncompliance, rendered void. This is the "chain of custody" rule.
The accused-appellant was immediately brought to the Talisay City Police Station for proper documentation. PO2 Venus marked the sachet of shabu sold by the accused-appellant, weighing 0.06 grams, with letter "J" which stands for Jovencio the first name of PO2 Venus. The latter said that after pictures were taken of the confiscated items, he prepared the Letter Request for Laboratory Examination. When PO2 Venus brought the letter request to the PNP Crime Laboratory together with PO1 Santillan, he also brought with him the accused-appellant and Jude Alyn Bawi-in for examination. Per Chemistry Report No. D-341-2004 conducted by Police Chief Inspector Rea Abastillas Villavicencio, who also testified in court, the specimen submitted for examination gave a positive result to Methamphetamine Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug. Police Officers Venus and Santillan identified the plastic sachet of shabu presented in court as Exhibit "F" as the one that was brought from the accused-appellant during the buy-bust operation.The defense of frame-up deserves scant consideration for failure of appellant to show any motive on the part of the police officers to falsely charge and/or testify against him.
We are convinced that this sachet of shabu was that which was sold by the accused-appellant to the poseur-buyer. The police had marked it before bringing it to the crime laboratory. Consequently, this sachet of shabu was examined by the forensic chemist and presented in court as evidence to prove the existence and identity of the shabu sold during the buy-bust operation. The sequence of events would show that the chain of custody has been established. In the case before Us, there was clearly no gap or missing link in the chain of custody. The integrity and the evidentiary value of the confiscated items were properly preserved by the prosecution. These circumstances when considered are adequate to prove corpus delicti of the crime of sale and delivery of dangerous drug.19ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Endnotes:
** Acting Chairperson per Special Order dated 19 October 2016.
*** Additional Member per Raffle dated 2 November 2016.
1Rollo, pp. 4-19; Penned by Associate Justice Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap with Associate Justices Gabriel T. Ingles and Ma. Luisa C. Quijano-Padilla concurring.
2 Records, Vol. I, pp. 96-117; Presided by Judge Edgar G. Garvilles.
3 Id. at 1.
4 Records, Vol. II, p. 1.
5 TSN, 3 February 2005, pp. 3-8.
6 TSN, 9 June 2005, pp. 16-19.
7 Records, Vol. I, p. 64.
8 TSN, 9 June 2005, p. 32.
9 Records, Vol. I, p. 6.
10 TSN, 20 September 2005, pp. 3-7.
11 TSN, 8 November 2005, pp. 4-25.
12 Records, Vol. I, pp. 116-117.
13 CA rollo, pp. 70-88.
14People v. Montevirgen, 723 Phil. 534, 542 (2013).
15People v. Mariano, 698 Phil. 772, 785 (2012).
16 576 Phil. 576, 587 (2008).
17People v. Bulotano, 736 Phil. 245, 257 (2014).
18People v. Salvador, 726 Phil. 389, 405 (2014).
19Rollo, pp. 14-15.