SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 210878, July 07, 2016
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JONALYN ABENES Y PASCUA, Accused-Appellant.
R E S O L U T I O N
DEL CASTILLO, J.:
Assailed in this appeal is the August 22, 2013 Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 04923, which affirmed the February 14, 2011 Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 61, Baguio City, finding Jonalyn Abenes y Pascua (appellant) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 5 (illegal sale of dangerous drugs) and Section 11 (illegal possession of dangerous drugs), Article II of Republic Act (RA) No. 9165 or The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
The parties' respective version of the incident was summarized by the CA as follows:
Version of the Prosecution
On July 4,2009, at around 5:00 in the afternoon, SPO1 Reynaldo Badua [SPO1 Badua] received a tip from a female informant that appellant involved in the sale of shabu. An hour later, after the informant was able to contact appellant, SPO1 Badua, PO1 Albert Lag-ey [PO1 Lag-ey] and [PO1 Geliza Moyao] PO1 Moyao prepared a buy-bust operation. As arranged by the informant, she and SPO1 Badua, the designated poseur-buyer, was to meet with appellant in front of Leisure Lodge, Upper Magsaysay Avenue, Baguio City to buy P1,000.00 worth of shabu.
At around 6:30 in the evening, the buy-bust team proceeded to the target area. After about 30 minutes from arrival, appellant approached SPO1 Badua and the informant. The informant introduced SPO1 Badua to appellant as the interested buyer. SPO1 Badua then handed to appellant the buy-bust money; the latter handed in turn a plastic sachet containing while crystalline substance.
Upon seeing that the exchange had already taken place, PO1 Lag-ey and PO1 Moyao, who were strategically positioned some two meters away, approached appellant and placed her under arrest. Appellant was informed of her constitutional rights and was subjected to a body search. Another plastic sachet containing white crystalline substance was found on appellant's person.
Thereafter the two plastic sachets were marked on site. Appellant was then brought to the police station where the arresting officers likewise prepared their affidavit, Inventory, Booking Sheet, Qualitative Examination Request and Urine Request.
The confiscated specimen tested positive for the presence of methylamphetamine hydrochloride.
Version of the Defense
At around 3:00 o'clock in the afternoon of July 4, 2009, JONALYN ABENES traveled from their home in La Trinidad, Benguet to Magsaysay Avenue in Baguio City where she has been working as a GRO together with her friend Jing Jing since the year 2004. Upon reaching the place, she headed to the room being occupied by Jing Jing at the Leisure Lodge. She asked her friend to go with her if she knows someone who sells shabu. After Jing Jing answered that she does not know of anybody selling shabu, [a] woman invited her to Katipunan Inn located at the back of Center Mall. Jing Jing acceded and the two of ihem went with this woman to Katipunan Inn where they got a room. Inside, the woman brought out shabu which the three of them consumed.
Thereafter, the accused was told by Jing Jing and the woman to return to the overpass. Accused left the duo, but instead of going to the overpass, she went to leisure Lodge to freshen up at Jing Jing's room. As she was freshening up, someone knocked at the door. She opened the door and saw a man and woman who were looking for Jing Jing. She told the two that Jing Jing was not in the room. They asked her who she was and after she gave her name, the two introduced themselves as police officers and informed her that they have arrested Jing Jing and that she is being pointed to by [Jing jing] as the source of shabu. She angrily told the police officers that the shabu taken from Jing Jing did not come from her but the police officers would not believe her. They handcuffed her and brought her down from the Leisure Lodge. As they were going downstairs, she saw Jing Jing asking for forgiveness for pointing to her as the shabu source.3
WHEREFORE, judgment is rendered finding the accused GUILTY, as follows:
a) In Criminal Case No. 29607-R, she is hereby sentenced to suffer a prison term of Twelve (12) Years and One (1) day to Twenty (20) Years and to pay a fine of Three Hundred Thousand (P300,000.00) Pesos, and
b) In Criminal Case No. 29608-R, she is hereby sentenced to Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of One Million (P1,000,000.00) Pesos.
The dangerous drugs subject of these cases are ordered destroyed in accordance with law.
SO ORDERED.4
WHEREFORE, the Decision appealed from, being in accordance with law and the evidence, is hereby AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.5cralawred
Prosecution witness SPO1 Reynaldo Badua consistently testified that he had the initial control of the sachet of shabu subject of the illegal sale case. He also stated that he marked the same with "RCB" he, together with the sachet subject of the illegal possession case personally brought the two (2) sachets of shabu to the crime laboratory for qualitative examination x x x.10
Q I have with me a brown envelope, Mr. witness, with markings, and inside this envelope are two plastic sachets. Will you please go over these two and tell this Court which of these two are handed to you by Jonalyn? A This is the one, Ma' am. Q Why do you say that this is the sachet that was handed to you by Jonalyn? A Because my initial RCB is there. xxxx Q Who arrested the subject, Mr. witness? A PO3 Lag-ey and PO1 Moyao. Q Now, after arresting Jonalyn what did they do? A Officer Lag-ey narrated to her her constitutional rights and POl Moyao frisked her. Q PO1 Moyao is a female? A Yes, Ma'am. Q And what did she say [sic] in the person of Jonalyn if you know? A She was able to seize one transparent sachet. Q How about you what did you do with that sachet which was sold to you by Jonalyn? A I marked, Ma'am. xxxx Q What did officer Moyao do with that sachet? A After he retrieved the sachet he marked at the site.11
On cross-examination, SPO1 Lag-ey testified:cralawred
Q Was Jonalyn Abenes subjected to a body searched? A Yes, Ma'am. Q Who did that? A PO1 Moyao, Ma'am. Q And what did [she] find on the person of Jonalyn Abenes? A She recovered another item. Q And what did she do with this item? A After PO 1 Moyao marked it she turned over to PO3 Badua.12
Q Now, another item was allegedly seized by Officer Moyao? A Yes sir. Q And according to you, it was marked by Officer Moyao at the place of operation? A Yes, sir. Q And do you know what Officer Moyao did with that item which he seized from Jonalyn Abenes? A His initials, sir.13
Endnotes:
*Per Special Order No. 2357 dated June 28,2016.
1 CA rollo, pp. 80-92; penned by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan and concurred in by Associate Justices Rebecca L. De Guia-Salvador and Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr.
2 Records, pp. 155-159; penned by Judge Antonio C. Reyes.
3 CA rollo, pp. 83-84.
4 Records, p. 159.
3 CA rollo, pp. 83-84.
4 Records, p. 159.
5 CA rollo, p.91.
6 People v. Rusiana, 618 Phil. 55, 63 (2009).
7 REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165, Article II, 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 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:
(1) The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drug 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.
x x x x
8People v. Domado, 635 Phil. 74, 86 (2010).
9 People v. Amarillo, 692 Phil. 698, 711 (2012).
10 CA rollo, p. 87.
11 TSN, March 10, 2010, pp. 15-19.
12 TSN, January 26, 2010, pp. 14-15.
13 TSN, March 9,2010, pp. 15-16.
14People v. Obmiramis, 594 Phil. 561, 569-570 (2008).
15Cacao v. Prieto, 624 Phil. 634, 649 (2010).