THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 193856. January 20, 2014.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. SUKARNO JUNAIDE Y AGGA, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated January 20, 2014, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 193856 (People of the Philippines v. Sukarno Junaide y Agga). — The Assistant City Prosecutor of Zamboanga City charged the accused Sukarno Junaide before the Zamboanga Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Criminal Case 5601(21215) with selling shabu in violation of Article II, Section 5 of Republic Act (R.A.) 9165 1 and in Criminal Case 5602(21216) with illegal possession of shabu in violation of Section 11, Article II of the same law.
The prosecution witnesses testified that on November 25, 2004 the Zamboanga Drug Enforcement Unit received a tip that accused Junaide was selling prohibited drugs at Lower Calarian, Zamboanga City. That unit promptly formed a buy-bust team with SPO1 Roberto Roca as poseur buyer. At around 2:00 p.m. the team went to the designated place. The informant together with SPO1 Roca saw accused Junaide standing near a store and approached him. The informant told Junaide that his companion wanted to buy shabu. When asked how much, SPO1 Roca said that he wanted P100.00 worth.
Accused Junaide took a sachet from his pocket and handed it to SPO1 Roca who in turn gave him a marked P100.00 bill. The police officer then signaled the rest of the police team to come. When SPO1 Roca let known that he was a police officer, Junaide tried to flee but got caught. SPO1 Amado Mirasol, Jr. searched and found four sachets of suspectedshabu and the marked money on Junaide.
Subsequently, the police brought accused Junaide to the police station where SPO1 Mirasol marked the four sachets seized from him and turned these over to the case investigator, SPO1 Federico Lindo, Jr. The latter then turned over the seized items to the police crime laboratory. The sachet Junaide sold was found to contain 0.0101 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu; the other sachets contained a total of 0.0235 gram. CSHEca
Junaide, on the other hand, testified that he was napping at home when sounds of commotion outside his house woke him up. As he took a look, he saw people being chased and his neighbors getting arrested. Junaide left his house a little later to fetch his nephew from school but while waiting for the boy, two armed men alighted from a white jeep and handcuffed him. They frisked him but found nothing. They showed him a sachet of shabu and said that they would use it as evidence against him. Junaide later identified the two men as SPO1 Roca and SPO1 Mirasol. Two neighbors claimed that they had seen the incident and corroborated Junaide's story.
On January 30, 2008 the RTC found Junaide guilty of both charges. The trial court sentenced him to suffer the penalties of life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00 for selling shabu and 12 years and 1 day to 16 years of imprisonment and a fine of P300,000.00 for illegal possession of prohibited drugs. On January 29, 2010 the Court of Appeals (CA) rendered judgment in CA-G.R. CR-HC 00593-MIN affirming the RTC Decision in toto, hence, this appeal.
Accused Junaide contends that the police officers involved failed to comply with the requirements of Section 21, Article II of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. 9165, thereby casting serious doubt on the integrity of the plastic sachets they supposedly seized from him and presented in court as evidence.
But mere failure to strictly comply with the procedure provided in Section 21 will not render void the seizure of the prohibited drugs for as long as the arresting officers present justifiable reason for their imperfect conduct 2 and show that the integrity and evidentiary value of the confiscated items had not been compromised. 3
Here, SPO1 Mirasol immediately marked the seized items with his initials "AM" upon their arrival at the police station. He then gave them to SPO1 Lindo who in turn delivered the same to the crime laboratory where they tested positive for shabu. Despite a few deviations from the required procedure, the prosecution sufficiently proved the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items. 4
Junaide of course denies that he sold or kept possession of prohibited drugs. But he failed to adduce clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption that the police officers performed their duties in a regular manner. 5
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals dated January 29, 2010 in CA-G.R. CR-HC 00593-MIN finding accused-appellant Sukarno Junaide y Agga GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes charged. HcTIDC
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LUCITA ABJELINA SORIANODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
2. People v. Habana, G.R. No. 188900, March 5, 2010, 614 SCRA 433, 440.
3. People v. Daria, Jr., G.R. No. 186138, September 11, 2009, 599 SCRA 688, 700, citing People v. Agulay, G.R. No. 181747, September 26, 2008, 566 SCRA 571, 595.
4. People v. Torres, G.R. No. 191730, June 5, 2013.
5. Id.