SECOND DIVISION
|
PEOPLE OF
THE Plaintiff-Appellee, -versus- JEROME
PALER, Accused-Appellant. |
G.R. No. 188103 Present: CARPIO,J., Chairperson, BRION,
PEREZ, SERENO, and REYES, JJ. Promulgated: March 7, 2012 |
x
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
D E C I S I O N
PEREZ, J.:
The prosecution charged Jerome Paler
(appellant Paler) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), 10th
Judicial Region, Branch 12,
That
on or about the 22nd day of June 2004, at 6:00 oclock in the
afternoon, in Barrientos Street, Barangay Layawan, Oroquieta City, Philippines,
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, without
being authorized by law, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously sell, deliver and give away
to a poseur-buyer one (1) sachet of shabu in consideration of a marked
100-peso bill with serial number HW 257588 which was actually handed to and
received by the said accused, and on the occasion of such buy-bust operation
confiscated further from the possession of the accused another three (3)
sachets of shabu placed in an empty
pack of Winston cigarette which buy-bust operation resulted to the confiscation
of a total of four (4) sachets of shabu all
weighing 0.0565 gram.[1]
(Emphasis supplied)
The Facts
It was
Minutes passed. The police informant brought out a P100.00 bill
from his left pocket and handed it to the appellant who took a sachet of white
substance from a cigarette pack in exchange for the money.[3]
Then, the police asset ceremoniously
scratched his head,[4]
long enough for the policemen to notice it. In seconds, the police emerged from the car,
raced to the appellant and surrounded him. It was a buy-bust operation.
Commotion followed. PO3 Rico Balbutin (PO3 Balbutin) met the police
informant who acted as poseur-buyer
retrieving the sachet of white crystalline substance; PO3 Balbultin then ran to
the appellant to bodily search him. He
recovered the marked P100.00 bill tacked in the appellants pocket and
three (3) other sachets of suspected shabu
hidden in the empty pack of Winston cigarettes.[5]
Meanwhile, a certain PO2 Ramirez
handcuffed the appellant, explained why he was being arrested and informed him
of his constitutional rights.
PO3 Balbutin handed the confiscated items to PO1 Clint Jill Gula (PO1
Gula), the PACTs evidence custodian, who brought them along with the appellant
to the PACTs headquarters in
At around
On
Pursuant to
Section 21 of RA 9165, a physical [inventory] and
photographing of the items described below that were confiscated from the
possession and control of one Jerome Paler y Lanit, 34 years old, married and
resident of Barrientos Street, Barangay layawan, Oroquieta City during the buy
bust operation conducted on or about 221800H June 2004 at the aforementioned
place by elements of this office, to wit:
1.)
One
(1) deck of shabu with marking BB1 which was bought during the buy bust
operation.
2.)
Three (3) decks of suspected shabu with markings
JP2 to JP4 placed in an empty pack of Winston cigarette which were
confiscated from his possession and control of said suspect.
3.)
One (1) piece of one hundred peso bill with serial
number HW257588 as marked money which was confiscated from his (Jerome)
possession and control.
The said physical
inventory and photographing were conducted at this office on or about 220830H
June 2004 in the presence of the suspect/offender, from the media, from the
Department of Justice and elected Public Official of said place.[9]
(Emphasis supplied)
All of the witnesses signed the inventory report which was done in the
presence of the appellant who was furnished with a copy thereof.
The appellant pleaded not guilty when arraigned. This is his version:
The appellants Golden Heart Videoke
Bar was to re-open on
The appellant and PO3 Balbutin proceeded to the latters office, also at
the headquarters, while Alvarico tailed them. The appellant sat in front of PO3 Balbutins
table, who put the pack of Winston cigarette on the table (now with three
sticks of cigarette) while Alvarico stood beside him. The two police officers asked him about Debbie
Amils warrant of arrest and informed him that he was to undergo drug testing. At that time, he claimed to have already
stopped using drugs after completing in the previous year his rehabilitation from
drug use.
Before proceeding to the crime laboratory, PO3 Balbutin asked for the
pack of Winston which the appellant was carrying; PO3 Balbutin pulled out from
the pack of Winston three (3) sachets of shabu
to the surprise of the appellant. He
denied any knowledge about the shabu
and claimed the sachets were planted.
The appellants urine sample tested positive for drug use, and the
chemistry report revealed that all the sachets of white crystalline substance
confiscated from the appellant were Methamphetamine
Hydrocloride or shabu.
The RTC found the appellant guilty of violation of Section 5 of Republic Act
No. 9165, a decision which the Court of Appeals affirmed in toto. Thus:
WHEREFORE,
premises considered, the appealed June 7, 2006 Decision of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC), 10th Judicial Region, Branch 12, Oroquieta City, in
Criminal Case No. 1672, entitled People
of the Philippines v. Jerome L. Paler of Barrientos St., Layawan, Oroquieta
City, is hereby AFFIRMED in toto.[12]
Hence, this appeal on the following grounds:
a.
In giving full weight and credence to the
unbelievable testimonies of the prosecution witnesses; and
b.
In convicting the appellant of the crime charged
despite failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.[13]
The appellant contends that the prosecutions case against the
accused-appellant is weak because the evidence does not measure up to the
required quantum of proof to convict in criminal cases.[14]
The Courts Ruling
We affirm the Decision of the Court of Appeals.
The appellant was convicted for violation of Section 5 of Republic Act
No. 9165, which reads:
Section 5. P500,000.00 ) to Ten
million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who,
unless authorized by law, shall sell, trade, administer, dispense, deliver,
give away to another, distribute, dispatch in transit or transport any
dangerous drug, including any and all species of opium poppy regardless of the
quantity and purity involved, or shall act as a broker in any such transaction.
The elements necessary for the prosecution of illegal sale of drugs are
(1) the identities of the buyer and the seller, the object, and consideration;
and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. What is material to the prosecution for
illegal sale of dangerous drugs is the proof that the transaction or sale
actually took place, coupled with the presentation in court of evidence of corpus delicti.[15]
The delivery of the illicit drug to the poseur-buyer
and the receipt by the seller of the marked money successfully consummate the
buy-bust transaction. The testimonial
and the documentary pieces of evidence adduced by the prosecution in support of
its case against the appellant establish the presence of these elements.
First, the identity of the seller was duly established. The police officers, PO3
Balbutin and PO1 Gula, positively identified appellant Paler as the same person
from whom their asset purchased the sachet of shabu. PO3 Balbutin and PO1 Gula
were both present at the entrapment and they witnessed the transaction between
the poseur-buyer and the appellant.
Second, the police officers saw the appellant handing the sachet to the poseur-buyer in exchange of the P100.00
peso bill that the appellant earlier received from the poseur-buyer. Not only did
the police retrieve the shabu which
was the object of the illegal sale, they also recovered three more sachets of shabu from the same empty pack of
Winston cigarette, a fact which bolsters the prosecutions claim that the
appellant indeed sold shabu to the poseur-buyer.
To cast doubt as to the identity and integrity of the shabu, the appellant claims that the
police officers failed to account for the chain of custody of the seized item
alleged to be shabu.
Contrary to the appellants defense, there is no break in the chain of
custody of the seized item found to be shabu
from the time the police asset turned it over to PO3 Balbutin, to the time it
was turned over to PO1 Gula, the PACTs evidence custodian, up to its
presentation to and photographing before the media, Department of Justice,
public official, and up to the time that the shabu was brought to the forensic chemist at the PNP Crime
Laboratory for laboratory examination.
The procedure for the custody and disposition of confiscated, seized,
and/or surrendered dangerous drugs, among others, is provided under Section 21,
paragraph 1 of Article II of Republic Act No. 9165, as follows:
Section 21, paragraph 1,
Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 reads:
(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. (Emphasis supplied)
Section 21(a), Article II of the Implementing
Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 9165, reads:
(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. (Emphasis supplied)
The testimony of PO3 Balbutin outlines the chain of custody of the
confiscated items, i.e., sachet of shabu:[16]
Q: And what if anything did you find on the
body of Jerome Paler as a result of the search you made?
A: I recovered the P100.00 bill
marked money and one (1) empty Winston cigarette pack containing three (3)
sachets of shabu.
Q: At that time, were you already sure that
was shabu?
A: We just suspected that was a dangerous
drug or shabu.
Q: You said, you recovered from the
possession of the accused the marked money, how was that marked money related
which you recovered from the possession of the accused during the search to the
marked money which you gave to your poseur buyer purposely to buy shabu in the
entrapment operation?
A: That was the same marked money sir.
Q: And what did you do with the marked
money and the empty pack of Winston cigarette containing three (3) sachets of
shabu?
A: I immediately confiscated it.
x x x x
Q: And in going to the PACT Office, who
among the members of the team was in custody of the items confiscated?
A: It is in the custody of PO1 Gula who is
our evidence custodian.
Q: At the PACT Office, what if anything you
did therein in relation to the incident?
A: The incident was being reflected in the
log book.
Q: Who recorded it?
A: Me.
Q: Do you have your log book with you now?
A: Yes sir.
x x x x
Q: I have here an empty pack of winston
cigarette, will you please examine this and inform this Honorable Court what
relation has this empty pack of winston cigarette in relation to the empty pack
of winston cigarette which you recovered from the possession of the accused,
Jerome Paler during the incident?
A: The same pack sir.
x x x x
Q: I noticed that in these sachets of shabu
there are markings BB1, JP2, JP3 and JP4, who wrote these markings?
A: PO1 Gula sir.
Court
Q: Why do you know that it was he who
marked it?
A: It is his customary duty, your honor
that whatever evidence confiscated the evidence custodian will mark it.
Q: And what if anything did PO1 Gula do at
the PACT office?
A: He made a request for urine test for the
two arrested persons.
Q: What else?
A: He likewise put markings on the evidence
confiscated sir.
Q: After the investigation, entering the
incident in the PACT blotter, where did you bring Jerome Paler?
A: We brought him to the Provincial Crime
Laboratory for drug testing.
x x x x
Q: And from the Misamis Occidental
Provincial Crime Laboratory Office, where did PO1 Gula and other members of the
PACT together with Jerome Paler and Debbie Amil go?
A: They went back to PACT Office.
Q: From the PACT Office, where did they go?
A: From the PACT Office, we proceeded to
Oroquieta City Police Station in order to turn over them.
Q: On the following day, that was
A: He prepared an inventory of the items confiscated
and likewise the other members of the team contacted the supposed witness for
the inventory.
Court: Will the defense counsel admit the existence
of the inventory?
A: We already admitted the existence of the
inventory, your Honor. I think it was stated in the pre-trial order, your
honor. Only the existence, your honor.
x x x x
Q: And when the representatives of the
different sectors arrived at your office, the PACT Office, what did they do
there?
A: PO1 Gula withdrew the evidence confiscated
and placed it on the table and in the presence of the witness, the items
confiscated were being inventoried.
x x x x
Q: Did the representatives and you sign the
inventory of the items confiscated?
A: Yes sir.
Q: After the signing of the inventory of
the items confiscated, what followed next at your office?
A: x x x [T]the photographer took a
picture.
Plainly, the prosecution established the crucial links in the chain of
custody of the sold and seized sachet of shabu,
from the time it was first seized from the appellant, until it was brought
for examination and presented in court. The
identity, quantity and quality of the illegal drugs remained untarnished and
preserved; hence, the integrity of the drugs seized remained intact.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Court AFFIRMS the assailed Decision of
the Court of Appeals.
SO ORDERED.
|
|
JOSE
|
WE CONCUR:
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
Chairperson
ARTURO D.
BRION MARIA
Associate Justice Associate Justice
BIENVENIDO L.
REYES
Associate Justice
A T T E S T A T I O N
I attest that the conclusions in the
above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to
the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division.
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
Chairperson
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the
Constitution, and the Division Chairpersons Attestation, it is hereby
certified that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in
consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the
Courts Division.
RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice
[1] CA rollo, p. 8.
[2] Rollo, pp. 4-5.
[3] Testimony of PO3 Rico B.
Balbutin. TSN,
[4]
[5]
[6] Rollo, p. 8.
[7] The PACTs log book, page 31-32,
entry number 0101 contains the circumstances of the arrest of the appellant and
was marked as exhibit G-1 until G-2. TSN,
[8] Jose Adlaon represented the Department
of Justice; Ernesto Quiros represented the media; Lydon Mutia, the public
official; and, Carmelita Calamba was the photographer. TSN,
[9] Records, p. 6.
[10] Testimony of the accused-appellant. TSN,
[11]
[12] CA rollo, p. 22.
[13]
[14]
[15] People
v. Naquita, G.R. No. 180511,
[16] TSN,