SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 233208. October 10, 2018.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.JUDITO VERAN TINAPUNAN, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 10 October 2018which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 233208 (People of the Philippines vs. Judito Veran Tinapunan). — Before this Court is the appeal 1 filed by accused-appellant Judito Veran Tinapunan from the Decision 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. No. CR-HC No. 02190 promulgated on April 28, 2017. The CA affirmed the Judgment 3 dated October 26, 2015 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Dumaguete City in Criminal Case Nos. 2014-22392 and 2014-22393, convicting Tinapunan of Violation of Sections 5 and 11 of Article II of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Facts
Tinapunan was indicted in an Information for Violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, which reads as follows:
Criminal Case No. 2014-22392
That on or about 9 in the evening of 30 July 2014, at Magsaysay, Dauin, Negros Oriental, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did, then, and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell and/or deliver to a police poseur buyer, one (1) piece heat sealed transparent plastic sachet containing methamphetamine hydrochloride, locally known as 'shabu' weighing 0.03 gram, without authority of law. CAIHTE
Contrary to section 5, R.A. 9165. 4
Tinapunan was also accused for Violation of Section 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The information of which reads:
Criminal Case No. 2014-22393
That on or about 9 in the evening of 30 July 2014, at Magsaysay, Dauin, Negros Oriental, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did, then, and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously possess and have in his possession and control, one (1) piece heat sealed transparent plastic sachets (sic), containing methamphetamine hydrochloride, locally known as 'shabu' weighing 0.06 gram, without authority of law.
Contrary to section 11, R.A. 9165. 5
Version of the Prosecution
It was on July 20, 2014, when Police Inspector Enreque Asonio (P/Insp. Asonio), Chief of Police of Dauin Police Station, Dauin, Negros Oriental, received information about a certain homosexual known as "Botchoy" who was said to be engaged in the sale of illegal drugs or shabu in Barangay Magsaysay, Dauin. Armed with this information, P/Insp. Asonio directed Police Officer 2 Bienvenido Imbo (PO2 Imbo) and PO1 Christopher Dordado (PO1 Dordado), who are members of the Dauin Municipal Anti-Illegal Drugs Special Operation Task Group (MAIDSOTG) to render surveillance on the movement of Botchoy. 6
PO2 Imbo and PO1 Dordado, with the informant went to Barangay Magsaysay to conduct surveillance operations. 7
On July 23, 2014, PO2 Dordado and PO2 Imbo were able to successfully buy shabu from Botchoy. With this successful test buy, they obtained the real name of Botchoy, accused-appellant Tinapunan. 8
The police officers attempted to apply for a search warrant from an Executive Judge, however due to unavailability, they failed to do so. 9
P/Insp. Asonio was tasked to conduct a buy-bust operation against Tinapunan. 10 DETACa
At about 3:45 p.m. of July 30, 2014, P/Insp. Asonio coordinated with the local Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) with respect to the operation for the conduct of a buy bust. Upon a coordination request of PDEA Agent Intelligence Officer 1 Julieta Amatong, PDEA had issued a certificate of coordination as part of the documentation. Armed with the coordination control number from the PDEA, P/Insp. Asonio held a briefing among his MAIDSOTG personnel. The buy-bust operations team was formed and comprised of the following members: a) PO2 Imbo as poseur buyer; b) PO1 Dordado as immediate back up; c) P/Insp. Asonio also served as back up. PO2 Imbo had one (1) five hundred peso (Php500.00)-bill as buy-bust money. PO2 Imbo had markings of his signature on the bill. The pre-arranged signal for a consummated transaction was the removal of his ball cap. 11
At around 4:30 p.m., the buy-bust team proceeded to Barangay Magsaysay, Dauin, Negros Oriental. Some members of the team strategically positioned themselves near the residence of Jesusa Mongit (Mongit), where Botchoy worked as a caretaker. PO2 Imbo, who was accompanied by their confidential informant, went to a barangay basketball court to watch a basketball game. On the other hand, PO1 Dordado stayed behind to serve as back up but was at a close distance and pretended watching the game as well. 12
However, at around 9:00 p.m., the target arrived. Tinapunan also watched the game. Upon seeing Tinapunan, the confidential informant and PO2 Imbo approached him. The confidential informant asked him if he could buy shabu worth Php500.00, and Tinapunan replied he should follow him. The two were asked to stay outside the house of Mongit, then Tinapunan came out of the house wearing a camouflage jacket. He asked PO2 Imbo for money, and the former gave the marked buy-bust money to him first. After which, Tinapunan handed the heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet from the right pocket of the jacket he was wearing. When PO2 Imbo received the plastic, he examined it and realized it was indeed the target drugs, he removed his cap. 13
With this, PO2 Imbo informed Tinapunan that he is a police officer, for which he held him and arrested him. Tinapunan resisted, and PO1 Dordado saw this, he got out of his hideout and assisted in the arrest. PO2 Imbo apprised Tinapunan of the nature of the arrest, and his constitutional rights. 14
PO2 Imbo placed markings on the seized item with the initials "JVT-BB-07-30-14." 15
A commotion was already formed and the relatives of Tinapunan were congregating at the crime scene. For fear of their safety as it was an unfamiliar area in the mountain barangay, P/Insp. Asonio directed his personnel to leave the area. He instructed that the inventory be conducted at the Dauin Police Station. 16
At the police station, PO2 Imbo frisked the body of Tinapunan and this yielded the marked money and another heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet containing shabu at the right pocket of the camouflage jacket which Tinapunan wore. 17 aDSIHc
PO2 Imbo arrested Tinapunan for illegal possession of dangerous drugs. He was likewise advised of the nature of his arrest and his constitutional rights. PO2 Imbo made markings on the seized item as "JVT-P-07-30-14." 18
It was PO2 Imbo who made an inventory of all the items seized. PO2 Imbo prepared an Inventory receipt which was signed by P/Insp. Asonio as Team/Leader Supervisor as well as Kagawad Carmelo Tubog (Tubog), Department of Justice (DOJ) representative Lemuel Lagahit (Lagahit) and media representative Marife Tenido (Tenido). PO3 Marlon Parol took photographs during the conduct of inventory and likewise signed the receipt inventory. 19
After the inventory, PO2 Imbo placed the two heat-sealed transparent plastic sachets containing shabu which were marked, and placed them inside a white evidence envelope which he sealed with tape and thereafter signed it. This envelope was kept by PO2 Imbo. 20
A memorandum request for laboratory examination and drug test was addressed to the Chief of the Negros Oriental Provincial Crime Laboratory Office at the Dauin Police Station, which was signed by P/Insp. Asonio. 21
With a memorandum request, PO2 Imbo brought the white evidence envelope of Tinapunan to the crime laboratory for the drug test and examination. 22
At the early morning of July 31, 2014, it was duty officer PO2 Robert John Pama (PO2 Pama) who received the evidence envelope at the crime laboratory. PO2 Pama verified the contents of the white evidence envelope if it tallied with the items indicated in the memorandum request. After tallying, PO2 Pama kept the said envelope in the locker for which he has the only access. 23
Thereafter, at around 7:00 a.m. of the same day, PO2 Pama turned over the said envelope to Police Chief Inspector Josephing Llena (PCI Llena), a Forensic Chemist of the crime laboratory. 24
PCI Llena made markings as an Examiner, upon receipt of a sealed brown envelope with signatures containing two heat-sealed transparent plastic sachets with markings "JVT-BB-07-30-14" and "JVT-P-07-30-14" with signatures. These contained shabu, and were turned over by PO2 Pama. 25 ETHIDa
PCI Llena conducted both qualitative and quantitative examinations on the seized drugs. She kept the specimens she received in the evidence vault of the crime laboratory, for which she has the only access. 26
PCI Llena submitted the said specimens, together with her chemistry report, to trial when she was called to testify. 27
Version of the Defense
Tinapunan denied being engaged in the sale or in possession of shabu.
At around 8:00 p.m., Tinapunan alleged that he was at the basketball court, watching games. The basketball court is located 200 meters away from the house where he lives and works as a caretaker. 28
At about 9:00 p.m., he decided to go home. When he reached his destination, he noticed that the lights of the gate were on, thinking he might have forgotten to turn them off. 29
When he was nearing the gate, he heard someone call out his name, and he did not recognize the person behind the voice. Suddenly, there were people who came out of nowhere and hugged him. All of a sudden, while hugging him, this person, whom he later found out to be named Imbo, asked where he was from, and if he had some to sell. 30
Tinapunan then asked what he was supposed to sell, then this Imbo began searching his pockets. Tinapunan kept on resisting in order to avoid the search, but his pleas were not heeded. Imbo did not find anything in his pockets. Still, he was handcuffed and eventually brought to the roadside where the basketball court is. The police officers waited for the patrol car to arrive, where he was asked to board the vehicle and was brought to the police station. 31
The RTC on October 26, 2015 rendered a Decision 32 finding Tinapunan guilty of the crimes charged. The dispositive part of which reads:
WHEREFORE, in the light of the foregoing, the Court hereby renders judgment as follows: cSEDTC
• In Criminal Case No. 2014-22392, [TINAPUNAN] is hereby found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of illegal sale of 0.03 gram of shabu in violation of Section 5, Article II of [R.A. No.] 9165 and is hereby sentenced to suffer of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500,000.00).
The one (1) heat sealed transparent plastic sachet with markings "JVT-BB-07-30-14" containing 0.03 gram of shabu is hereby confiscated and forfeited in favor of the government and to be disposed of in accordance with law.
• In Criminal Case No. 2014-22393, [TINAPUNAN] is hereby found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of illegal possession of 0.06 gram of shabu in violation of Section 11, Article II of [R.A. No.] 9165 and is hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day as minimum term to fourteen (14) years as maximum term and to pay a fine of Four Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php400,000.00).
The one (1) heat sealed transparent plastic sachet with markings "JVT-P-07-30-14" containing 0.06 gram of shabu is hereby confiscated and forfeited in favor of the government and to be disposed of in accordance with law.
In the service of sentence, [TINAPUNAN] shall be credited with the full time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment, provided he agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners.
SO ORDERED. 33
On appeal, the CA affirmed the ruling of the lower court in toto. The dispositive portion of the CA Decision 34 dated April 28, 2017 reads:
WHEREFORE, the Joint Judgment dated 26 October 2015 rendered by the [RTC], Branch 30, Dumaguete City in Criminal Case No. 2014-22392 and Criminal Case No. 2014-22393 convicting [Tinapunan] of Violation of Section 5 and Violation of Section 11 respectively, of Article II of [R.A. No.] 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act is AFFIRMED.
Costs against the Accused-appellant. 35
Ruling of the Court
The Court finds no reversible error in the findings of the appellate court in upholding the conviction of Tinapunan for Violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II, of R.A. No. 9165, and the imposition of the corresponding penalties, thereat.
From the prosecution's evidence, a sale transaction was consummated between PO2 Imbo, the poseur buyer, who handed the money and Tinapunan exchanged the illegal drug. Settled is the rule that as long as the police officer went through the operation as a buyer and his offer was accepted by appellant and the dangerous drugs delivered by the former, the crime is considered consummated by the delivery of the goods. 36 SDAaTC
In People v. Bautista, 37 the Court explained that in a prosecution for the illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs, the following elements must be proved: (1) that the accused was in possession of the object identified as a prohibited or regulated drug; (2) that the drug possession was not authorized by law; and (3) that the accused freely and consciously possessed the drug. 38 All the aforesaid elements were clearly established by the prosecution.
In People v. Alcuizar, 39 it was held: "The dangerous drug itself, the shabu in this case, constitutes the very corpus delicti of the offense and in sustaining a conviction under [R.A.] No. 9165, the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti must definitely be shown to have been preserved. This requirement necessarily arises from the illegal drugs unique characteristic that renders it indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily open to tampering, alteration or substitution either by accident or otherwise. Thus, to remove any doubt or uncertainty on the identity and integrity of the seized drug, evidence must definitely show that the illegal drug presented in court is the same illegal drug actually recovered from the accused-appellant; otherwise, the prosecution for possession under [R.A.] No. 9165 fails." 40
The prosecution was able to prove the case for illegal sale and possession of methamphetamine hydrochloride in compliance with Section 21, paragraph 1, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. In People v. Pagaduan,41 it was held that strict compliance with the requirements of Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 may not always be possible under field conditions; the police operates under varied conditions, and cannot at all times attend to all the niceties of the procedures in the handling of confiscated evidence. For this reason, the last sentence of the implementing rules provides that "non-compliance with these requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items." 42
Therefore lapses in the procedure made by the police operatives, as these have been clearly explained by the prosecution, render evidence admissible and prove the case for illegal sale and possession of methamphetamine hydrochloride.
The chain of custody requirement performs the function of ensuring that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved, so much so that unnecessary doubts as to the identity of the evidence are removed. To be admissible, the prosecution must show by records or testimony, the continuous whereabouts of the exhibit at least between the times it came into possession of the police officers and until it was tested in the laboratory to determine its composition up to the time it was offered in evidence. 43 acEHCD
From the narration of the prosecution's witnesses, there was no break on the chain of custody of the seized drugs. From the time the drug was seized from Tinapunan, it was marked by PO2 Imbo; PO2 Imbo proceeded to conduct an inventory with a prepared receipt inventory signed by P/Insp. Asonio, Kagawad Tubog, DOJ representative Lagahit and media representative Tenido. PO2 Pama received from PO2 Imbo the evidence envelope. PO2 Pama submitted the evidence envelope to PCI Llena, Forensic Chemist of the crime laboratory; PCI Llena prepared the qualitative and quantitative examinations and submitted the chemistry report to the court for trial. Therefore, the integrity of the seized drugs was preserved.
As enunciated in Sy v. People, 44 in cases of violations of Dangerous Drugs Act, credence should be given to the narration of the incident by police officers who are presumed to have performed their duties in a regular manner, unless there is evidence to the contrary. The presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty, as well as the findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses, shall prevail over petitioner's self-serving and uncorroborated denial. 45
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision dated April 28, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 02190, finding accused-appellant Judito Veran Tinapunan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165, is hereby AFFIRMED. Costs against the accused-appellant.
SO ORDERED." (J. Reyes, Jr., J., on wellness leave.)
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON
Deputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. CA rollo, pp. 157-158.
2. Penned by Associate Justice Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap, with Associate Justices Gabriel T. Ingles and Germano Francisco D. Legaspi, concurring; id. at 141-156.
3.Id. at 70-83.
4.Id. at 70.
5.Id. at 70-71.
6.Id. at 71.
7.Id.
8.Id.
9.Id.
10.Id.
11.Id. at 71-72.
12.Id. at 72.
13.Id.
14.Id.
15.Id.
16.Id. at 72-73.
17.Id.
18.Id.
19.Id. at 73.
20.Id.
21.Id.
22.Id.
23.Id.
24.Id. at 73-74.
25.Id. at 74.
26.Id.
27.Id.
28.Id.
29.Id.
30.Id.
31.Id. at 74-75.
32.Id. at 70-83.
33.Id. at 83.
34.Id. at 141-156.
35.Id. at 155-156.
36. People v. Tamaño, G.R. No. 208643, December 5, 2016, 812 SCRA 203, 220-221.
37. 682 Phil. 487 (2012).
38. Id. at 496.
39. 662 Phil. 794 (2011).
40. Id. at 801.
41. 641 Phil. 432 (2010).
42. Id. at 443.
43. People v. Rosialda, 643 Phil. 712, 720 (2010).
44. 671 Phil. 164 (2011).
45. Id. at 181.