People v. Paguinto
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Mark Anthony Paguinto was charged with illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs. A confidential informant reported that a certain 'alias Bornok' was selling illegal drugs. An entrapment team was formed, with PO2 Ronel Agsawa designated as the poseur-buyer. During the buy-bust operation, PO2 Agsawa approached 'Bornok' (identified as Mark Anthony Paguinto), agreed to buy 'one-fourth' of shabu for P2,500.00, and handed over the marked money. Mark Anthony gave PO2 Agsawa a plastic sachet of shabu from his left pocket. PO2 Agsawa arrested Mark Anthony and recovered the buy-bust money and three additional sachets of shabu from his left pocket. The seized items were marked, inventoried, and photographed in the presence of witnesses. The specimens tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 156, Marikina City, found Mark Anthony guilty of illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00 for the sale, and an indeterminate prison term of 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and a fine of P300,000.00 for the possession. The RTC ordered the penalties to be served simultaneously. Mark Anthony appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA affirmed the conviction but deleted the directive for simultaneous service of penalties. Mark Anthony then appealed to the Supreme Court. The Petition: Mark Anthony argued for his acquittal due to the non-presentation of the confidential informant and an alleged broken chain of custody. The People of the Philippines, through the Solicitor General, countered that all elements of the crimes were proven and the chain of custody was unbroken.
Issue(s)
Whether the failure to allege the quantity or weight of the dangerous drugs in the Information is fatal to the prosecution's case. Whether the prosecution sufficiently established the elements of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Whether the chain of custody of the seized dangerous drugs was properly maintained. Whether the non-presentation of the confidential informant warrants acquittal.
Ruling
The appeal is unmeritorious. The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, finding Mark Anthony Paguinto guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs under Republic Act No. 9165. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of PHP 500,000.00 for illegal sale, and imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to fourteen (14) years and a fine of PHP 300,000.00 for illegal possession.
Ratio Decidendi
On the failure to allege quantity/weight: The Court reiterated that the failure to allege the quantity or weight of dangerous drugs in the Information is not fatal to sustain a judgment of conviction. At most, such omission affects only the penalty to be imposed upon the accused. The records showed that the weights were determined and specified in the request for laboratory examination, allowing for the imposition of the correct penalty based on the statutory ranges. On the elements of illegal sale and illegal possession: The Court found that the elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs were proven by the consistent and straightforward testimony of PO2 Agsawa, the poseur-buyer. He identified Mark Anthony as the seller, detailed the transaction where P2,500.00 was exchanged for 1.10 grams of shabu, and confirmed that the substance tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride. The delivery of the illicit drug and receipt of the buy-bust money consummated the sale. The Court held that the elements of illegal possession were also established. After the sale, PO2 Agsawa recovered three small sachets containing a white crystalline substance from Mark Anthony's left pocket, which tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride. Mark Anthony failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for his possession, establishing prima facie evidence of his intent to possess the drugs. On the chain of custody: The Court found that the prosecution sufficiently established the movement and custody of the seized drugs. The marking of the sachets at the place of arrest, the inventory and photography in the presence of witnesses, the turnover to the crime laboratory, the forensic examination, and the submission to the court demonstrated an unbroken chain of custody. The integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were properly preserved throughout the process. On the non-presentation of the confidential informant: The Court clarified that the presentation of a confidential informant is not a requisite in drug cases. The informant's testimony would be merely corroborative. Informants are often not presented to protect their identities. The testimony of the poseur-buyer, PO2 Agsawa, was sufficient and credible, and his account was supported by other witnesses, making the informant's presence unnecessary.
Main Doctrine
The failure to allege the quantity or weight of dangerous drugs in the Information is not fatal to a conviction but affects the penalty. The prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of custody for the seized drugs, and the presentation of a confidential informant is not always required if the poseur-buyer's testimony is credible and sufficient.