People v. Tamundi
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The case involves an accusation against Nadjera Tamundi y Pamlian for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs, specifically 295.53 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as shabu. The alleged transaction occurred on January 10, 2015, in Quezon City, Philippines. The prosecution contends that Tamundi, not being authorized by law, willfully, unlawfully, and knowingly sold, dispensed, delivered, transported, distributed, or acted as a broker in the said transaction. 2. Procedural History: Following the alleged incident, an Information was filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 103, charging Tamundi with the crime. The RTC, in a Decision dated September 17, 2018, found Tamundi guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced her to life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00. Tamundi appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA, in a Decision dated June 29, 2020, affirmed the RTC's ruling, upholding the conviction. 3. The Petition: Tamundi filed an ordinary appeal before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA's decision. The core of her appeal challenges her conviction for illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. The arguments likely revolve around the alleged procedural infirmities in the buy-bust operation, particularly concerning the chain of custody of the seized drugs and the proper conduct of inventory and photography, as well as the validity of her identification as the seller. The Supreme Court is tasked with determining whether the prosecution has sufficiently proven all the elements of the crime and whether the procedural requirements were met.
Issue(s)
Whether Tamundi is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165; and whether the chain of custody of the confiscated shabu was unbroken, despite a slight deviation from the strict requirements of Section 21 of RA 9165, as amended by RA 10640.
Ruling
The appeal is without merit. The Decision dated June 29, 2020, of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 11879 is AFFIRMED. Accused-appellant Nadjera Tamundi y Pamlian is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, as defined and penalized under Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. She is sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and ordered to pay the fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱500,000.00).
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of guilt for illegal sale of dangerous drugs and the chain of custody: The Court affirmed Tamundi's conviction, holding that all elements of the crime were established. The elements require proof of the identity of the buyer and seller, the object and consideration of the sale, and the delivery of the thing sold and payment. In this case, PO3 Dela Cruz positively identified Tamundi as the seller, and the corpus delicti, the shabu weighing 295.53 grams, was presented in court. The prosecution successfully proved the actual exchange of the illegal drug for the buy-bust money. The presence and use of marked money were sufficiently established through the testimony of PO3 Dela Cruz and SPO2 Calimlim, including the preparation of the buy-bust money with UV dusting and its subsequent recovery from Tamundi. The marked money also tested positive for UV powder. The Court reiterated that the positive identification by the poseur-buyer, coupled with the presentation of the corpus delicti, is sufficient for conviction. Tamundi's denial was unavailing as it was not substantiated with clear and convincing evidence, unlike the positive testimonies of the police officers who enjoy the presumption of regularity in the performance of their duties. The Court found no reason to doubt the prosecution's evidence establishing the sale transaction. The Court found that the chain of custody of the confiscated shabu was unbroken, despite a slight deviation from the strict requirements of Section 21 of RA 9165, as amended by RA 10640. The buy-bust operation occurred after the amendment, which requires inventory and photography in the presence of the accused or their representative, an elected official, and a DOJ representative or media representative. The police officers secured the presence of media representative Vega and Barangay Kagawad Battung, Jr. They also attempted to contact a DOJ representative, but none was available due to the early hour of the operation. Although Vega refused to sign the inventory receipt due to his company's policy, his presence during the inventory and photography was established by the testimonies of PO3 Dela Cruz and SPO2 Calimlim, and corroborated by the inventory receipts which bore his name with an annotation "RTS" (Refused to Sign). The Court considered these circumstances as sufficient justification for the deviation, as the police officers intended to comply with the law but were thwarted by justifiable reasons. The presence of Vega, even without his signature, ensured that the integrity and evidentiary value of the confiscated shabu were preserved. The Court emphasized that the police cannot force a witness to sign, and their efforts to comply with the law were evident. The subsequent steps in the chain of custody—turnover to the investigating officer, submission for laboratory examination, and presentation in court—were all accounted for and testified to by the respective officers involved, thus establishing an unbroken chain.
Main Doctrine
The elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 are the identity of the buyer and seller, the object and consideration, and the delivery of the thing sold and payment. Compliance with the chain of custody procedure is crucial, but deviations may be justified under certain circumstances if the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs are preserved.