SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 229212, September 04, 2019
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, v. GERARDO LABINI Y GRAJO @ "JERRY," APPELLANT.
D E C I S I O N
CARPIO, J.:
Criminal Case No. 11-2601Appellant filed a Motion for Judicial Determination of Probable Cause dated 9 January 2012. The trial court denied the motion in its Order of even date. Upon arraignment, appellant entered separate pleas of not guilty to the charges against him.
On the 19th day of August 2011, in the City of Makati, the Philippines, accused, not being authorized by law, and without the corresponding license or prescription, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously sell, deliver, and distribute zero point zero three (0.03) gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug, in consideration of Php300.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Criminal Case No. 11-2602
On the 19th day of August 2011, in the City of Makati, the Philippines, accused, not being lawfully authorized to possess or otherwise use any dangerous drug and without the corresponding prescription, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have in his possession, direct custody and control a total of zero point zero two (0.02) gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug, in violation of the above-cited law.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Criminal Case No. 11-2603
On the 19th day of August 2011, in the City of Makati, the Philippines, accused, not being lawfully authorized by law to possess or use dangerous drug, and without the corresponding prescription, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously use methamphetamine (sic), a dangerous drug, as shown in a confirmatory test conducted on him after he was arrested, in violation of the above-cited law.
CONTRARY TO LAW.4
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:Appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court's decision.
1. In Criminal Case No. 11-2601, finding the accused Gerardo Labini y Grajo, GUILTY of the charge for violation of Section 5, Article II of RA 9165 and sentencing him to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (Php500,000.00) without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency; and
2. In Criminal Case No. 11-2602, finding the accused Gerardo Labini y Grajo, GUILTY of the charge for violation of Section 11, Article II of RA 9165 and sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to fifteen (15) years of imprisonment and to pay a fine of FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (Php400,000.00) without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
3. In Criminal Case No. 11-2603, finding the accused Gerardo Labini y Grajo NOT GUILTY of the charge for violation ofSectionl5ofRA9165.
SO ORDERED.6
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DENIED for lack of merit. The Decision dated 05 May 2014 of the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 64 finding accused-appellant Gerardo Labini y Grajo @ Jerry guilty beyond reasonable doubt for violations of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine in the amount of Php500,000.00 without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency in Criminal Case No. 11-2601, and the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to fifteen (15) years of imprisonment and to pay a fine of Php400,000.00 without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency in Criminal Case No. 11-2602 are AFFIRMED.Appellant appealed from the Court of Appeals' decision.
SO ORDERED.7 (Italicization in the original)
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:The implementing rule for Section 21 of RA 9165 states:
(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;x x x x (Emphasis supplied)
On 15 July 2014, RA 10640 amended Section 21 of RA 9165, as follows: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 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 the disposition in the following manner: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;
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:Since the alleged commission of the offense took place on 19 August 2011, the applicable provision is Section 21 of RA 9165. Section 21 requires the apprehending team to conduct a physical inventory of the seized items and the photographing of the same immediately after seizure and confiscation. Under the IRR, if the immediate physical inventory and photographing are not practicable, the buy-bust team should conduct the same as soon as it reaches the nearest police station, or the nearest office of the apprehending officer or team. The inventory must be done in the presence of the accused or his representative or counsel, a representative of the DOJ, the media, and an elected public official, who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof. Clearly, the three required witnesses should be physically present at the time of the apprehension of the accused or immediately thereafter, a requirement that the buy-bust team can easily comply with because a buy-bust operation, by its nature, is a planned activity.9 This means that the buy-bust team has enough time and opportunity to bring with them, or immediately after the buy-bust operation, the said witnesses.10
(1) The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, conduct a physical inventory of the seized items and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the persons from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, with an elected public official and a representative of the National Prosecution Service or the media 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, finally, That noncompliance [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 and custody over said items.x x x x (Emphasis supplied)
(1) their attendance was impossible because the place of arrest was a remote area; (2) their safety during the inventory and photograph of the seized drugs was threatened by an immediate retaliatory action of the accused or any person/s acting for and in his/her behalf; (3) the elected officials] themselves were involved in the punishable acts sought to be apprehended; (4) earnest efforts to secure the presence of a DOJ or media representative and an elected public official within the period required under Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code prove futile through no fault of the arresting officers, who face the threat of being charged with arbitrary detention; or (5) time constraints and the urgency of the anti-drug operations, which often rely on tips of confidential assets, prevented the law enforcers from obtaining the presence of the required witnesses even before the offenders could escape.14In this case, the prosecution only explained why the apprehending officers failed to mark the seized evidence and conduct the inventory of the items at the place where the buy-bust operation took place. The prosecution explained that the side street where the buy-bust operation took place was quickly filled by people after the incident, and the team needed to secure the items they seized from appellant. The prosecution also explained that the barangay hall where they took appellant was just 30 meters away from the street where the buy-bust operation transpired. However, there was no explanation why only Chairperson Ureña was present during the inventory, which constitutes non-compliance with the three-witness rule.
Endnotes:
* Designated additional member per Raffle dated 2 September 2019.
1Rollo, pp. 2-24. Penned by Associate Justice Celia C. Librea-Leagogo, with Associate Justices Amy C. Lazaro-Javier (now a member of this Court) and Melchor Q.C. Sadang concurring.
2 CA rollo, pp. 63-69. Penned by Judge Gina M. Bibat-Palamos.
3 Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
4Rollo, pp. 3-4.
5 Also referred to in the records as Mark Jonel Aquino.
6 CA rollo, p. 69.
7Rollo, p. 23.
8 An Act to Further Strengthen the Anti-Drug Campaign of the Government, Amending for the Purpose Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, Otherwise Known as the "Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002."
9People v. Cadungog, G.R. No. 229926, 3 April 2019.
10 Id.
11 G.R. No. 231989, 4 September 2018.
12 G.R. No. 224290, 11 June 2018.
13People v. Cadungog, supra note 9.
14People v. Orcullo, G.R. No. 229675, 8 July 2019.
15People v. Tampus, G.R. No. 221434, 6 February 2019.
16 Id.