FIRST DIVISION
G.R. No. 203028, January 15, 2014
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSELITO BERAN Y ZAPANTA @ “JOSE”, Respondents.
D EC I S I O N
REYES, J.:
The undersigned accuses JOSELITO BERAN y ZAPANTA @ JOSE of Viol. of Sec. 5, Art. II of Rep. Act No. 9165, committed as follows:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
That on or about August 26, 2003, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused, not having been authorized by law to sell, trade, deliver or give away any dangerous drug, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and knowingly sell or offer for sale to a poseur buyer
one (1) pc. plastic sachet containing ZERO POINT ZERO THREE ZERO (0.030) gram of white crystalline substance known as SHABU containing meth[yl]amphetamine hydrochloride, which is a dangerous drug.
Contrary to law.3
THEREFORE, premises considered and the prosecution having established to a moral certainty the guilt of the accused JOSELITO BERAN y ZAPANTA @ JOSE of the crime charged, this Court in the absence of any aggravating circumstance hereby sentences the Accused to LIFE IMPRISONMENT and to pay the fine of five hundred thousand pesos ([P]500,000.00), without any subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
In the service of his sentence, the actual confinement under detention during the pendency of this case shall be deducted from the said prison term in accordance with Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code.
The evidence presented is ordered transferred to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) for destruction.
SO ORDERED.9
I.
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING [BERAN] DESPITE THE ILLEGALITY OF HIS ARREST AND THE INADMISSIBILITY OF THE ALLEGED CONFISCATED PROHIBITED DRUG.II.
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING [BERAN] GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT DESPITE THE PROSECUTION’S FAILURE TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE PROHIBITED DRUG.III.
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING [BERAN] DESPITE THE POLICE OFFICERS’ NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 21 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165.10
============================
DIRECT EXAMINATION
CONDUCTED BY
ACP LIBERTAD RASA ON WITNESS
PO3 KNOWME SIA
============================
x x x x Q: How did you know that there was that informant who arrived at your office giving information about drugs activities of a certain Beran? A: PO3 Rodolfo Enderina formed a team in DAID office, ma’am. Q: Did you know why Enderina formed a group at DAID? A: He relayed to us that we have [an] Anti-Illegal [D]rugs [O]peration, ma’am. Q: That you will have [an] Anti-Illegal Drugs Operation, where and against whom? A: Against one Joselito Beran alias Jose, ma’am. Q: Where? A: In the area of San Antonio Street, Tondo, Manila. Q: Was there anytime that you saw them in front at your office when he relayed the information to Enderina? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: What time of the day or the night was that? A: Between 3-4 pm of August 26, 2003, ma’am. Q: And what did your team leader Rodolfo Enderina do as soon as he receive[d] that information? A: He formed his men and then he directed all of us and place[d] the confidential information for interrogation, ma’am. Q: As a ma[t]ter of standard operating procedure, what does [an] operative of SAID or DAID do before launching a buy-bust operation? A: First, there must be an information to be received, [then] there was a plan [of] operation and then the documents are required to [be] accomplished prior to [the] conduct [of] a buy-bust operation, ma’am. Q: What documents, if any, were you required to prepare prior to your operation? A: Our dispatch record. Q: Do you have a copy of this dispatch record? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: Can you show it to the Court? A: It is [with] the custodial of DAID, ma’am. x x x x ACP Rasa: Q: Aside from the [dispatch] record, what other documents did you prepare? A: The buy-bust money, ma’am. Q: Do you have the buy-bust money with you? A: I will bring it on the next hearing, ma’am. Q: How much buy-bust money did you prepare? A: [P]100.00, ma’am. Q: Who supplied that [P]100.00 buy-bust money? A: Our team leader, ma’am. Q: Who is your team leader? A: PO3 Rodolfo Enderina, ma’am. Q: Aside from the [dispatch] record, the buy-bust money, what other preparations did you do before launching on the operation of buy-bust against one Joselito Beran alias Jose? A: There was a preparation of Pre-Operation Report and Coordination Sheet, however, we cannot fax to the PDEA because the PDEA [fax] at that time was not fully operational, ma’am. Q: What other documents aside from those already mentioned did you prepare? A: That’s all, ma’am. Q: And what were the other instructions given to you by the team leader, Rodolfo Enderina? A: During our briefing, I was then chosen as the designated poseur-buyer, ma’am. Q: What else? A: The marked money was marked by me and then during the briefing, it was agreed that the pre-arranged signal was to touch my hair as indication that the deed was done, ma’am. x x x x Q: What time did you proceed to San Antonio? A: Around 5:00 of August 26, 2003, ma’am. Q: How many vehicles [did you use]? A: We utilized one (1) owner type jeep and [the] other[s] were on their respective motorcycle or scooter, ma’am. Q: And the other[s] were [a]board on scooter[s]? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: Who were inside the owner type jeep? A: PO3 Rodolfo End[e]rina, the confidential informant and PO1 (sic) Delos Santos, ma’am. Q: And who took their scooters? A: PO3 Benito Decorion and PO2 Ernie Reyes, ma’am. Q: One scooter? A: Two (2) scooter[s] ma’am. Q: Where did you park your vehicle? A: We parked in the area of Gat Andres Hospital, ma’am. x x x x Q: As soon as you [had] parked your vehicles, what else happened? A: When we parked our vehicle, PO3 Enderina grouped us and told us that [at] the area where we [were] going, the vehicles [could] not enter San Antonio Street and after that, the confidential informant was the first who proceeded [to] the target place, ma’am. Q: You already said that you already parked your vehicles. So how did you arrive at San Antonio Street? A: [On] foot, ma’am. Q: How did you scout or identify your target person? A: Upon arrival in the area of San Antonio, the confidential informant was the first who arrived and then in a few minutes later, the confidential informant pointed [to] one (1) male person in the area of San Antonio, ma’am. Q: You were saying that, the confidential informant went ahead of you? A: No, ma’am. We were together, ma’am. Q: Where did you first notice the presence of the accused? A: Near the alley, ma’am, in the middle of San Antonio where there is a “poso”. Q: When pointed to you, how far were you from the accused or your target? A: Approximately 8-10 meters, ma’am. Q: What was the accused doing when he was pointed at by the confidential informant to you? A: He was spotted standing, ma’am. Q: Standing only? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: What happened after you saw him standing? A: The CI went ahead of me to approach the suspect, ma’am. Q: When you said the CI was ahead of you, about how far away were you following him? A: 3-4 meters, ma’am. Q: What else happened? A: After that, ma’am, the CI and the subject were conversing. Q: Did you hear what the conversation was all about? A: No, ma’am. Q: After that conversation, what happened next? A: The CI signaled to me to come close to them, ma’am. Q: As soon as you were already with the group or with the CI and the target person, what else did you do? A: I approached them, ma’am, then the CI introduced me as the buyer of the prospected illegal drugs. Q: What was the reply or the action of Beran? A: He told the CI “magkano ba”, ma’am. Q: And what did the CI say? A: The CI told him “piso lang”. “Piso” means One Hundred Pesos, ma’am. Q: After knowing that you were only interested to buy “piso”, what happened after? A: After that Beran took out something from his pocket, ma’am. Q: What was that? A: Beran showed me and the CI [a] small plastic sachet, ma’am. Q: After showing to you, what else did Beran do with the plastic? A: The subject handed to me one (1) plastic sachet, ma’am. Q: What did you do after it was handed to you? A: I discretely examined the contents of the plastic sachet and after that, the subject person demanded for the payment of said stuff, ma’am. Q: What did you do? A: I gave the marked buy-bust money, ma’am. Q: What happened after that? A: After that, the pre-arranged signal was executed, ma’am. Q: What was the pre-arranged signal agreed upon? A: Touching of the hair, ma’am. Q: Who was able to recover that buy-bust money? A: Me, ma’am. Q: What happened next? A: The other back-up operatives arrived and PO2 Delos Santos was the first to respond x x x and I gave the suspect to him for custody, ma’am. Q: What did you do with that plastic that you bought from the accused Beran? A: I immediately placed him (sic) in my custody, ma’am, and later on it was marked and forwarded to WPD Drug Laboratory Office for laboratory examination, ma’am. Q: Who brought that plastic sachet for the laboratory examination? A: Me, ma’am. Q: Who placed the marking on that plastic sachet? A: Me, ma’am. Q: What marking did you place? A: JB, ma’am. Q: Where did you place the marking? A: At the office, ma’am. Q: If shown that plastic sachet, will you be able to identify it? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: Why? A: I recognized the markings, ma’am. Q: What did you use to mark it? A: I think it was a pentel pen, ma’am. Q: Aside from this drugs (sic) which you said they requested and [you] personally brought for examination at the WPD Crime Laboratory, what other things did you do as soon as you arrived at the office? A: It was recorded it (sic) in our police blotter, ma’am, and the pertinent documents were prepared. Q: Do you have a copy of the police blotter? A: Yes, ma’am, but it’s in the office. Q: The buy-bust money and the dispatched report are also at your office. Can you bring all of those? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: What was the result of the laboratory examination which you said you personally brought to the laboratory? A: It turned out to be positive for Meth[yl]amphetamine Hydrochloride, ma’am. Q: What happened next after the examination? A: After preparing the documents, we presented the case before the inquest fiscal, ma’am. Q: Did you subject the accused for drug test? A: I cannot remember, ma’am. Q: You did not prepare a request for drug test? A: I prepared the request for drug test, ma’am. Q: And what was the result of the drug test? A: I do not know the result, ma’am. Q: Can you bring the result of [the] drug test? A: “Sa Crime Lab na lang po”, ma’am. x x x x.12
==================================
CONTINUATION OF DIRECT EXAMINATION CONDUCTED BY:
FISCAL PURIFICACION A. BARING-TUVERA
==================================
FISCAL TUVERA: x x x x Q: Mr. Witness, during your testimony on August 8, 2006, you were asked by former Prosecutor Rasa if you will be able to identify the specimen which you said you bought from accused Joselito Beran, do you remember having said that? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: Will you still be able to identify the specimen if it will be shown to you again? A: Yes, ma’am. I was the one who. . . (interrupted) Q: Will you be able to identify it? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: And how will you be able to identify it, Mr. Witness? A: I was the one who placed the marking on the alleged shabu. Q: And what were the markings [that] you place[d] on the plastic sachet? A: It was marked JB ma’am. Q: J? A: JB. Q: And will you kindly tell us who placed the markings JB on the plastic sachet? A: I was the one who marked the specimen. Q: And where did you place the markings Mr. Witness? A: On the plastic sachet. Q: At what time did you place the markings on the plastic sachet? A: After the arrest of the suspect when he was brought to our office for investigation. Q: In other words, when did you place the markings? A: After 5 pm of August 23, 2003. Q: And at what place Mr. Witness? A: At the office. Q: I am showing you Mr. Witness a plastic sachet, by the way, how many plastic sachets did you [buy] from the accused? A: One (1) plastic sachet. Q: One plastic sachet only, Mr. Witness, I am showing you a plastic sachet with markings JB, will you kindly tell us if that is the same plastic sachet that you bought from the accused and subsequently marked at the police station? A: This is the plastic sachet subject of the sale, I marked JB on the said plastic sachet. FISCAL TUVERA: We manifest Your Honor that [t]he plastic sachet was already marked as Exhibit B-1 for the prosecution. Q: What did you use Mr. Witness in buying this shabu? A: We utilized [P]100 bill. Q: Do you have the genuine [P]100 bill with you now Mr. Witness? (pause) Q: Nasa iyo ba yung [P]100 bill? A: I have it in my custody. Q: You have it in your custody? A: But I did not bring it today. Q: Why did you not bring it today Mr. Witness? A: I only knew ma’am that I have my hearing on Joselito Beran but I forgot to bring it, next scheduled hearing nalang po. Q: Mr. Witness, before you used that buy-bust money to buy shabu from the accused Mr. Witness, did you place markings on the [P]100 bill? A: Yes ma’am Q: And what were these markings did you place on the [P]100 bill? A: I marked DAID at the left po[r]tion of the buy-bust money. Q: And what else did you do aside from placing markings on the [P]100 bill? A: The said money was then xeroxed for five (5) pieces and then the original was kept in our custody. x x x x.13 (Continuation of Direct-Examination of Witness PO3 Knowme Sia by ACP Baring-Tuvera) x x x x ACP BARING-TUVERA Q: Mr. Witness, you are here today for the continuation of your direct-examination. May we know if you already brought with you the buy-bust money in connection with this case? THE WITNESS A: Yes, ma’am. ACP BARING-TUVERA Q: Will you kindly bring it out and show it to this Honorable Court so that the Court may be able to appreciate it? THE WITNESS A: Here, ma’am. COURT: Q: The money is attached to a blank sheet of paper. Will you write something about it, the case number? THE WITNESS A: Yes, your Honor. ACP BARING-TUVERA: Q: May I just have this identified, your Honor? Mr. Witness, you said that you were the one who placed the markings on this One Hundred Peso ([P]100.00) bill. Will you kindly tell us on what part of this money did you place the markings? THE WITNESS A: I marked DAID at the left center portion of the buy-bust money. x x x x ACP BARING-TUVERA Q: Mr. Witness, you said that you were the one – you were the poseur-buyer in this case. If you will be shown the item again, will you be able to identify it again Mr. Witness? THE WITNESS A: Yes, ma’am. Q: I am showing to you Mr. Witness – and how will you be able to identify it? A: I was the one who marked it. Q: And what markings did you place on the plastic sachet? A: JB, ma’am. x x x x ACP BARING-TUVERA Q: And who were present when you marked this plastic sachet at the office? THE WITNESS A: The arresting officers ma'am, my companions in the conduct of the buy-bust operation, ma’am. THE COURT: Q: Who? THE WITNESS A: PO3 Rodolfo Enderina, PO2 Hipolito Francia. THE COURT: Q: In the presence of your fellow officers? THE WITNESS A: Yes, Your Honor. ACP BARING-TUVERA Q: How about the police investigator, was he also present when you place this markings? THE WITNESS A: In that case ma’am, I was also the investigator. Q: You were also the investigator. And after you placed the markings on that plastic sachet Mr. Witness, the plastic sachet containing shabu, what else did you do? A: We prepared the laboratory examination, ma’am. Q: Who prepared the request for laboratory examination? A: I prepared it, ma’am. Q: Okay. And after you prepared the request for laboratory examination, what else happened? A: And then we submitted the said specimen to the crime laboratory for laboratory examination. Q: Was the laboratory examination actually conducted on the plastic sachet that you submitted? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: And what was the result of the laboratory examination that was conducted on the specimen that you submitted? A: It yielded positive result for Methylamphetamine hydrochloride, ma’am. x x x x ACP BARING-TUVERA Q: After you have arrested or after the buy-bust operation Mr. Witness, do you remember having executed any document? THE WITNESS A: I executed the Affidavit of Poseur-Buyer. I also prepared the Referral for Inquest, the Request for Drug Test and the Booking Sheet and Arrest Report. x x x x.14
“By the very nature of anti-narcotics operations, the need for entrapment procedures, the use of shady characters as informants, the ease with which sticks of marijuana or grams of heroin can be planted in pockets or hands of unsuspecting provincial hicks, and the secrecy that inevitably shrouds all drug deals, the possibility of abuse is great.” Thus, the courts have been exhorted to be extra vigilant in trying drug cases lest an innocent person is made to suffer the unusually severe penalties for drug offenses. Needless to state, the lower court should have exercised the utmost diligence and prudence in deliberating upon accused-appellants’ guilt. It should have given more serious consideration to the pros and cons of the evidence offered by both the defense and the State and many loose ends should have been settled by the trial court in determining the merits of the present case.
“In evidence, the one who offers real evidence, such as the narcotics in a trial of drug case, must account for the custody of the evidence from the moment in which it reaches his custody until the moment in which it is offered in evidence, and such evidence goes to weight not to admissibility of evidence. Com. V. White, 353 Mass. 409, 232 N.E.2d 335.”24
“Chain of Custody” means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court for destruction. Such record of movements and custody of seized item shall include the identity and signature of the person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and time when such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping and use in court as evidence, and the final disposition[.]
The dangerous drug itself, the shabu in this case, constitutes the very corpus delicti of the offense and in sustaining a conviction under Republic Act No. 9165, the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti must definitely be shown to have been preserved. This requirement necessarily arises from the illegal drug’s unique characteristic that renders it indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily open to tampering, alteration or substitution either by accident or otherwise. Thus, to remove any doubt or uncertainty on the identity and integrity of the seized drug, evidence must definitely show that the illegal drug presented in court is the same illegal drug actually recovered from the accused-appellant; otherwise, the prosecution for possession under Republic Act No. 9165 fails.27 (Citation omitted)
x x x x (a) The apprehending officer/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;x x x x.28
(On Cross-examination [of PO3 Francia] by Atty. Anne Geraldine Agar) x x x x Q: And what was your participation in this case, Mr. Witness? A; I acted as “alalay” or back-up, ma’am. Q: Did you act as “alalay” on that day? A; Yes, ma’am. COURT: Did you see what happened while you were acting as “alalay” or back-up? WITNESS: None, your Honor. “Malayo po kasi ako.” COURT: “Wala pala, eh... ATTY. AGAR: Nothing further, your Honor. FISCAL: Redirect, Your Honor. COURT: Proceed Fiscal. Q: PO3 Francia, you were one of those appointed to form a team? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: And you said, you were only as “alalay”? A: Yes, back-up, ma’am. Q: What does an “alalay” or back-up do? A: We are there to prevent any intruder that may prevent our operation, ma’am. Q: How far were you positioned from the poseur-buyer? A: More than 5-7 meters, ma’am. Q: Was there any incident or intruder that stopped you from arresting the accused? A: None, ma’am. Q: From where you were, were you able to see the pre-arranged signal by the poseur-buyer? x x x x A: No, I did not see, ma’am. Q: As a back-up, when did you come to see that the deal was consummated? A: When my companions moved to Knowme Sia to assist him, ma’am. Q: And what was you[r] last act at that time? A: “Umalalay,” ma’am.31
“Physical inventory and photograph
requirement under Section 21
vis-a-vis “marking” of seized evidence
While the first sentence of Section 21(a) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 9165 states that “the apprehending officer/team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same,” the second sentence makes a distinction between warrantless seizures and seizures by virtue of a warrant, thus:“(a) x x x 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.”Thus, the venues of the physical inventory and photography of the seized items differ and depend on whether the seizure was made by virtue of a search warrant or through a warrantless seizure such as a buy-bust operation.
In seizures covered by search warrants, the physical inventory and photograph must be conducted in the place where the search warrant was served. On the other hand, in case of warrantless seizures such as a buy-bust operation, the physical inventory and photograph shall be conducted at the nearest police station or office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable; however, nothing prevents the apprehending officer/team from immediately conducting the physical inventory and photography of the items at the place where they were seized, as it is more in keeping with the law’s intent of preserving their integrity and evidentiary value.
What Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 and its implementing rule do not expressly specify is the matter of “marking” of the seized items in warrantless seizures to ensure that the evidence seized upon apprehension is the same evidence subjected to inventory and photography when these activities are undertaken at the police station rather than at the place of arrest. Consistency with the “chain of custody” rule requires that the “marking” of the seized items—to truly ensure that they are the same items that enter the chain and are eventually the ones offered in evidence—should be done (1) in the presence of the apprehended violator (2) immediately upon confiscation. This step initiates the process of protecting innocent persons from dubious and concocted searches, and of protecting as well the apprehending officers from harassment suits based on planting of evidence under Section 29 and on allegations of robbery or theft.45 (Citations omitted and emphases in the original)
RA 9165 is silent on when and where marking should be done. On the other hand, its implementing rules provide guidelines on the inventory of the seized drugs, thus: “the physical inventory x x x shall be conducted at the place where the search warrant is served; or at the nearest police station or at the office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable, in case of warrantless seizures” (Section 21(a) of Implementing Rules and Regulations). In People v. Sanchez (G.R. No. 175832, 15 October 2008, 569 SCRA 194), we drew a distinction between marking and inventory and held that consistent with the chain of custody rule, the marking of the drugs seized without warrant must be done "immediately upon confiscation" and in the presence of the accused.
The concern with narrowing the window of opportunity for tampering with evidence found legislative expression in Section 21(1) of RA 9165 on the inventory of seized dangerous drugs and paraphernalia by putting in place a three-tiered requirement on the time, witnesses, and proof of inventory by imposing on the apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drugs the duty to “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.” Although RA 9165 is silent on the effect of non-compliance with Section 21(1), its implementing guidelines provide 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.” We have interpreted this provision to mean that the prosecution bears the burden of proving “justifiable cause” (People v. Sanchez, id.; People v. Garcia, G.R. No. 173480, 25 February 2009, 580 SCRA 259).48
Endnotes:
1 Penned by Associate Justice Leoncia R. Dimagiba, with Associate Justice Hakim S. Abdulwahid and Marlene Gonzales-Sison, concurring; CA rollo, pp. 96-123.
2 Issued by Acting Presiding Judge Cicero D. Jurado, Jr.; records, pp. 159-163.
3 Id. at 1.
4 But a second prosecution witness, PO3 Hipolito Francia, said on cross-examination that the time was more or less 2:00 p.m.; TSN, April 26, 2005, p. 3.
5 CA rollo, pp. 68-71.
6 Id. at 39.
7 Records, p. 137.
8 Id. at 159-163.
9 Id. at 163.
10 CA rollo, p. 35.
11Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 164580, February 6, 2009, 578 SCRA 147, 152.
12 TSN, August 8, 2006, pp. 3-16.
13 TSN, pp. 3-6, July 15, 2008.
14 TSN, July 16, 2008, pp. 3-10.
15 Id. at 13.
16People v. Gonzales, 430 Phil. 504, 513 (2002).
17People v. Abdul, G.R. No. 186137, June 26, 2013.
18People v. Morales, G.R. No. 172873, March 19, 2010, 616 SCRA 223, 235.
19 G.R. No. 179029, August 9, 2010, 627 SCRA 308.
20 Id. at 322.
21 401 Phil. 259 (2000).
22 G.R. No. 186137, June 26, 2013.
23 Supra note 19, at 322.
24 Id. at 323.
25People v. Dela Rosa, G.R. No. 185166, January 28, 2011, 640 SCRA 635, 653.
26 G.R. No. 189980, April 6, 2011, 647 SCRA 431.
27 Id. at 437.
28 The entire Section reads:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
“Sec. 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 precurses and essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated and/or surrendered, for proper disposition in the following manner:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary(a) 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;29 G.R. No. 185166, January 26, 2011, 640 SCRA 635.
(b) 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;
(c) A certification of the forensic laboratory examination results, which shall be done under oath by the forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued within twenty-four (24) hours after the receipt of the subject item/s: Provided, That when the volume of the dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals does not allow the completion of testing within the time frame, a partial laboratory examination report shall be provisionally issued stating therein the quantities of dangerous drugs still to be examined by the forensic laboratory: Provided, however, that a final certification shall be issued on the completed forensic laboratory examination on the same within the next twenty-four (24) hours;
(d) After the filing of the criminal case, the Court shall, within seventy-two (72) hours, conduct an ocular inspection of the confiscated, seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals, including the instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment, and through the PDEA shall within twenty-four (24) hours thereafter, proceed with the destruction or burning of 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 DOJ, civil society groups and any elected public official. The Board shall draw up the guidelines on the manner of proper disposition and destruction of such item/s which shall be borne by the offender: Provided, That those item/s of lawful commerce, as determined by the Board, shall be donated, used or recycled for legitimate purposes: Provider, further, that a representative sample, duly weighed and recorded is retained;
(e) The Board shall then issue a sworn certification as to the fact of destruction or burning of the subject item/s which, together with the representative sample/s in the custody of the PDEA, shall be submitted to the court having jurisdiction over the case. In cases of seizures where no person is apprehended and no criminal case is filed, the PDEA may order the immediate destruction or burning of sized dangerous drugs and controlled precursors and essential chemicals under guidelines set by the Board. In all instances, the representative sample/s shall be kept to a minimum quantity as determined by the Board;
(f) The alleged offender or his/her representative or counsel shall be allowed to personally observe all of the above proceedings and his/her presence shall not constitute an admission of guilt. In case the said offender or accused refuses or fails to appoint a representative after due notice in writing to the accused or his/her counsel within seventy-two (72) hours before the actual burning or destruction of the evidence in question, the Secretary of Justice shall appoint a member of the public attorney's office to represent the former;
(g) After the promulgation and judgment in the criminal case wherein the representative sample/s was presented as evidence in court, the trial prosecutor shall inform the Board of the final termination of the case and, in turn, shall request the court for leave to turn over the said representative sample/s to the PDEA for proper disposition and destruction within twenty-four (24) hours from receipt of the same; and
(h) Transitory Provision:h.1) Within twenty-four (24) hours from the effectivity of this Act, dangerous drugs defined herein which are presently in possession of law enforcement agencies shall, with leave of court, be burned or destroyed, in the presence of representatives of the Court, DOJ, Department of Health (DOH) and the accused and/or his/her counsel; and
h.2) Pending the organization of the PDEA, the custody, disposition, and burning or destruction of seized/surrendered dangerous drugs provided under this Section shall be implemented by the DOH.”
30 Id. at 653.
31 TSN, April 26, 2005, pp. 4-6.
32 Supra note 18.
33 G.R. No. 173480, February 25, 2009, 580 SCRA 259.
34 Id. at 269.
35 594 Phil. 158 (2008).
36 G.R. No. 179213, September 3, 2009, 598 SCRA 92.
37 G.R. No. 171732, August 14, 2009, 596 SCRA 257.
38 G.R. No. 182418, May 8, 2009, 587 SCRA 809.
39 G.R. No. 177220, April 24, 2009, 586 SCRA 647.
40 589 Phil. 259 (2008).
41 576 Phil. 576 (2008).
42 Id. at 587.
43 G.R. No. 206738, December 11, 2013.
44 590 Phil. 214 (2008).
45 Id. at 240-241.
46People v. Almorfe, G.R. No. 181831, March 29, 2010, 617 SCRA 52, 61-62.
47 G.R. No. 182528, August 14, 2009, 596 SCRA 350.
48See Footnote 16 in People v. Coreche, id. at 358.
49 Supra note 44, at 232.
50 Supra note 46, at 60.
51 G.R. No. 186498, March 26, 2010, 616 SCRA 652.
52 Id. at 662.
53 Records, p. 142.