People v. Wisco
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Accused-appellant Nomer Wisco y Failano (Wisco) was charged with illegal sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) under Section 5, Article II of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165. The Information alleged that on November 2, 2013, Wisco sold two sachets of shabu for P1,000.00 to a police poseur-buyer. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 19, Bangui, Ilocos Norte, found Wisco guilty beyond reasonable doubt and imposed life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's decision. Wisco appealed to the Supreme Court. The Petition: Wisco appealed his conviction, arguing, among other things, that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly concerning the chain of custody of the seized drugs.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution sufficiently established the chain of custody of the seized dangerous drugs. Whether the guilt of the accused-appellant for illegal sale of dangerous drugs was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Ruling
The Supreme Court granted the appeal, reversed and set aside the decision of the Court of Appeals, and acquitted Nomer Wisco y Failano of the crime charged for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. He was ordered immediately released from detention unless legally confined for another cause.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of the chain of custody: The Court found that the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody over the seized dangerous drugs. Specifically, the first link was compromised by the absence of required witnesses (DOJ representative, media representative) during the physical inventory and photographing of the seized drugs, and the failure to provide justifiable reasons for their absence. The Court noted that Barangay Chairman Aguinaldo, who signed the inventory, denied witnessing the marking or photographing of the drugs. The second and third links were weakened by conflicting testimonies of PO3 Bulosan regarding the turnover of the seized drugs and the failure to present PO2 Bacud to clarify these discrepancies. The fourth link was also found to have a gap due to the absence of testimony from PO3 Padayao, the evidence custodian, regarding his handling of the seized drugs after they were examined by the forensic chemist. These gaps cast serious doubt on the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti. On the issue of proof beyond reasonable doubt: Given the established deficiencies in the chain of custody, the Court concluded that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were compromised. The corpus delicti, which is vital for a conviction in dangerous drug cases, could not be definitively established as the same substance seized from the accused. Consequently, the prosecution failed to prove Wisco's guilt beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The Court also noted that while two sachets were seized, only one was allegedly sold, and the other was found in Wisco's possession, which should have been charged as illegal possession, but this was not done by the prosecution.
Main Doctrine
The prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody over the seized dangerous drugs due to significant gaps and inconsistencies in the testimonies of the apprehending officers and the absence of required witnesses during the inventory and photographing of the seized items, thereby compromising the integrity and evidentiary value of the corpus delicti, warranting acquittal.