People v. Cerdon
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The case involves the conviction of Alfredo Cerdon y Sanchez for violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (illegal sale of shabu) following a buy-bust operation. The Information alleged that on July 12, 2003, in Mabalacat, Pampanga, Cerdon sold and delivered one heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet containing methylamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) weighing 0.0538 grams to a poseur-buyer for ₱200.00. The prosecution presented PO1 Michael Yusi as the poseur-buyer and PO3 Henry Laxamana as a back-up operative. PO1 Yusi testified that he was introduced to "Fred" (appellant) by an asset, and after inquiring about buying shabu, appellant went inside his house and returned with a sachet of shabu, which he exchanged for ₱200.00. PO1 Yusi then made a pre-arranged signal, after which PO3 Laxamana and PO3 Agustin rushed to the scene. PO1 Yusi identified himself as a police officer, and PO3 Laxamana confiscated the marked money and a Caliber 22 magnum with ammunition from appellant. Appellant was brought to the barangay hall where a confiscation receipt was prepared, and then to the police station. The confiscated shabu was marked by PO1 Yusi and later brought to the crime laboratory. Appellant, in his defense, denied the charge, claiming that the police officers entered his house, searched his room, and planted the alleged confiscated gun. He stated that a commotion ensued before the barangay chairman arrived. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Angeles City, Pampanga, Branch 57, convicted appellant Alfredo Cerdon y Sanchez for violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of ₱500,000.00. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's decision on November 10, 2011. Appellant appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court. The Petition: Appellant maintained that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the corpus delicti of the offense and to establish the crucial links in the chain of custody of the shabu. He also argued that the police officers failed to comply with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 regarding the inventory and photography of seized items in the presence of required witnesses.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution sufficiently proved the illegal sale of dangerous drugs beyond reasonable doubt. Whether the chain of custody of the seized illegal drug was properly established. Whether the non-compliance with the procedural requirements of Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 renders the seizure and custody of the illegal drug void and inadmissible.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, upholding the conviction of Alfredo Cerdon y Sanchez for violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. The Court found that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the elements of the illegal sale of shabu, established an unbroken chain of custody, and that any procedural lapses in the inventory and photography of the seized items did not affect the integrity and evidentiary value of the corpus delicti.
Ratio Decidendi
On the sufficiency of proof for illegal sale of dangerous drugs: The Court reiterated that the elements of illegal sale of shabu are the identity of the buyer and seller, the object and consideration, and the delivery of the thing sold and payment therefor. In this case, these elements were duly established through the positive testimony of PO1 Yusi, the poseur-buyer, who identified appellant as the seller and described the transaction. PO3 Laxamana corroborated the testimony regarding the exchange of the sachet of shabu for marked money. The laboratory examination confirmed the substance to be methylamphetamine hydrochloride. The Court found that appellant was caught in flagrante delicto during a buy-bust operation. On the chain of custody of the seized illegal drug: The Court found that the prosecution sufficiently established an unbroken chain of custody. PO1 Yusi received the sachet from appellant, marked it "MVY" at the barangay outpost, and a confiscation receipt was prepared. The sachet was then turned over to the Mabalacat Municipal Police Station, where a request for laboratory examination was prepared. PO1 Yusi personally delivered the sachet and the request to the PNP Regional Crime Laboratory Office 3 for examination. The Court noted that the marking of the seized item at the police station in the presence of the accused, as done in this case, is considered sufficient compliance with the rules on chain of custody, as marking upon immediate confiscation contemplates even marking at the nearest police station. The non-presentation of the forensic chemist was deemed not fatal, as the chemist's report enjoys the presumption of regularity and the corpus delicti is the drug itself. On the non-compliance with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165: The Court acknowledged that the police officers did not strictly comply with the requirements of Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 regarding the inventory and photography of the seized items in the presence of the accused, a media representative, and a DOJ representative. However, the Court emphasized the proviso in the implementing rules stating that non-compliance under justifiable grounds does not render the seizure and custody void as long as the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved. The Court found that the integrity and evidentiary value of the shabu were preserved, as evidenced by the unbroken chain of custody and the positive laboratory result. Therefore, the procedural lapses did not invalidate the seizure.
Main Doctrine
The failure to strictly comply with the procedural requirements of Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, particularly the conduct of inventory and photography in the presence of required witnesses, does not automatically render the seizure and custody of illegal drugs void and invalid, provided that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved.