PEOPLE V ANDAYA - buy – bust operation ISSUE:

FACTS: 1. WON search & seizure was a violation of the

constitutional right of accused against unreasonable
On February 7, 2003, an information for violation of searches and seizures.
Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165 1 (RA 9165) was filed 2. WON prosecution’s non-presentation of the confidential
charging Pablito Andaya y Reano (Andaya). The Information informant was adverse to the prosecution = failure to
reads on or about December 16, 2002 at around 9:50 o'clock prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt
in the evening at Brgy. San Jose Sico, Batangas City, not being
authorized by law, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully HELD:
and feloniously, sell, dispense or deliver, more or less 0.09 To secure the conviction of the accused who is charged with
gram(s) of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (shabu), a the illegal sale of dangerous drugs as defined and punished by
dangerous drug, which is a clear violation of RA 9165. Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive
Upon arraignment, 3 Andaya pleaded not guilty to Drugs Act of 2002), the State must establish the concurrence
the charge. Thereafter, trial on of the following elements, namely:
the merits ensued. (a) that the transaction or sale took place between the
accused and the poseur buyer; and
Five (5) witnesses were presented by the (b) that the dangerous drugs subject of the transaction or sale
prosecution, namely: SPO4 Delfin Alea, SPO3 Nelio Lopez, is presented in court as
SPO2 Danilo Mercado, SPO4 Protasio Marasigan and Jupri evidence of the corpus delicti.
Delantar. SPO2 Delfin Alea testified that at about 8:00 o'clock
in the evening of December 16, 2002, their asset who was A buy-bust operation is a valid and legitimate form
conducting surveillance of Pablito Andaya in Barangay San of entrapment of the drug pusher.
Jose Sico, Batangas City, arrived at their station. Said asset In such operation, the poseur buyer transacts
reported that he had arranged to buy shabu from Pablito. A with the suspect by purchasing a quantity of the dangerous
team composed of SPO1 Aguila, SPO1 Cabungcal, Eric de drug and paying the price agreed upon, and in turn the drug
Chavez, PO1 Lindberg Yap, Edwalberto Villar and asset Bagsit pusher turns over or delivers the dangerous drug subject of
was constituted to conduct a buy-bust. Two (2) pieces of their agreement in exchange for the price or other
P100.00 bills both duly marked "X" were recorded in the consideration. Once the transaction is consummated, the
police blotter. Alea gave the marked bills to the asset. Upon drug pusher is arrested, and can be held to account under the
reaching the designated place, the team members alighted criminal law. The justification that underlies the legitimacy of
from their vehicles and occupied different positions where the buy-bust operation is that the suspect is arrested in
they could see and observe the asset. The asset knocked on flagranti delicto, that is, the suspect has just committed, or is
the door of Pablito's house. Pablito came out. Pablito and the in the act of committing, or is attempting to commit the
asset talked briefly. The asset gave Pablito the marked offense in the presence of the arresting police officer or
money. The asset received something from appellant. The private person. 12 The arresting police officer or private
pre-arranged signal signifying consummation of the person is favored in such instance with the presumption of
transaction was given. The team members approached regularity in the performance of official duty.
Pablito and theasset, introduced themselves as police officers
and arrested accused. He was brought to the police station. Here, the confidential informant was not a police
The arrival of the team was recorded in the police blotter. officer. He was designated to be the poseur buyer himself. It
The merchandise handed by accused to the asset was sent to is notable that the members of the buy-bust team arrested
the Regional Crime Laboratory in Camp Vicente Lim, Andaya on the basis of the pre-arranged signal from the
Canlubang, Laguna. The specimen was positive for poseur buyer. The pre-arranged signal signified to the
methampethamine Hydrochloride members of the buy-bust team that the transaction had been
(shabu), a dangerous drug. consummated between the poseur buyer and Andaya.
However, the State did not present the confidential
RTC: accused guilty as charged informant/poseur buyer during the trial to describe how
- violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 exactly the transaction between him and Andaya had taken
(illegal sale of DDs) place. There would have been no issue against that, except
* Appeal – search & seizure was illegal that none of the members of the buy-bust team had directly
- grave abuse of discretion - court for prosecution witnessed the transaction, if any, between Andaya and the
failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. poseur buyer due to their being positioned at a distance from
the poseur buyer and Andaya at the moment of the supposed
CA: appeal dismissed transaction.

The CA did not find anything wrong or odd in the non-

presentation of the poseur buyer as a witness against the
accused. – SC: CA IS WRONG
 p.m. However, that Crime laboratory indorsed the request
In this case, however, it was different, because the with the specimens on June 4, 2004 at 2:30 p.m. to the
poseur buyer and the confidential informant were one and Regional Crime Laboratory in Calamba City.
the same. Without the poseur buyer's testimony, the State
did not credibly incriminate Andaya. Police Inspector and Forensic Chemist Donna Villa P.
Huelgas found the specimens positive for the presence of
No buyer, pre arranged signal was not shown on methamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug, as
record = no buyer = no sale to prove shown by Chemistry Report No. D-566-04, the authenticity
and genuineness of which were admitted by accused during
SC: WHEREFORE, the Court REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the the pre-trial.
decision promulgated on February 11, 2008; ACQUITS
accused Pablito Andaya y Reano for failure to prove his guilt Appellant: Motion for Leave to File Demurrer – denined by
beyond reasonable doubt; and ORDERS his immediate release the RTC for failure of appellant to adduce any reason
from confinement at the National Penitentiary in Muntinlupa therefore.
City. The Court DIRECTS that the Director of the Bureau of
Corrections to implement RTC: accused was found guilty
the immediate release of Pablito Andaya y Reano, unless he is
confined for any other lawful cause; and to report his CA: affirmed the conviction of appellant
compliance within ten days from receipt. SO ORDERED.
The Court of Appeals further ruled that the failure of
the arresting officers to conduct a physical inventory and to
NOTES: take photographs of the seized items is not fatal as long as
1. selling - any act "of giving away any dangerous drug and/or the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are
controlled properly preserved, as in this case.
precursor and essential chemical whether for money or any
other consideration; According to the Court of Appeals, the prosecution
was able to prove the unbroken chain of custody of the
2. delivering - any act "of knowingly passing a dangerous drug prohibited drug from the time PO3 Villas confiscated the
to plastic sachets from appellant and marked them at the place
another, personally or otherwise, and by any means, with or of arrest, to the time PO3 Villas brought the plastic sachets to
without the police station and turned them over to the investigator
consideration." on-duty until the time SPO1 de Castro
submitted the marked plastic sachets to the Regional Crime
PEOPLE V ENUMERABLE – chain of custody: sale Laboratory Office Calabarzon for laboratory examination.
FACTS:
A deal in shabu between the asset of PO3
Edwalberto Villas and a certain Gerry of San Pablo City, a buy- ISSUE:
bust operation was onducted by the elements of the Whether the prosecution established the identity and
Batangas City Police Station with the assistance of Police integrity of the confiscated illegal drug, which is the corpus
Inspector Danilo Balmes of the CIDG Batangas Province on delicti of the offense charged against appellant.
May 27, 2004 at 11:30 o'clock in the morning at the Petron
Gasoline Station along B. Morada Ave., Lipa City. HELD:
It is settled that in prosecutions for illegal sale of
Using two (2) pieces of marked P500.00 bills and dangerous drug, not only must the essential elements of the
boodle money to make the appearance of about P24,000.00, offense be proved beyond reasonable doubt, but likewise the
the police asset who posed as a identity of the prohibited drug. The dangerous drug itself
buyer transacted with the alias Gerry upon his arrival at the constitutes t h e corpus delicti of the offense and the fact of
gas station. After the exchange of the marked money and the its existence is vital to a judgment of conviction.
three (3) plastic sachets of shabu placed in a black plastic box,
alias Gerry was placed under arrest. He was later identified as Necessarily, the prosecution must establish that the
Gerardo Enumerable y de Villa. The marked money was substance seized from the accused is the same substance
recovered from his possession by PO3 Villas who also took offered in court as exhibit.
custody of the specimen shabu which he marked EMV 1 to
EMV 3. The three (3) sachets of shabu were turned over to In this regard, the prosecution must sufficiently
the Batangas prove the unbroken chain of custody of the confiscated illegal
Provincial Crime Laboratory, pursuant to the request for drug. In People v. Watamama, 11 the Court held:
laboratory examination of P/Supt. Fausto Manzanilla, Jr.,
Chief of Police, Batangas City PNP on May 27, 2004 at 5:25 In all prosecutions for the violation of the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, the existence of the prohibited Honorable Court, the above-named accused, JAIME D. DE LA
drug has to be proved. The chain of custody rule requires that CRUZ, a public officer, having been duly appointed and
testimony be presented about every link in the chain, from the qualified to such public position as Police Officer 2 of the
moment the item was seized up to the time it is offered in Philippine National Police (PNP) assigned in the Security
evidence. To this end, the prosecution must ensure that the Service Group of the Cebu City Police Office, after having
substance presented in court is the same substance seized been arrested by agents of the
from the accused. National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in an entrapment
operation, was found positive for use of METHAMPHETAMINE
In People v. Climaco, 12 citing Malillin v. People, the Court HYDROCHLORIDE commonly known as "Shabu", the
held: dangerous drug after a confirmatory test conducted on said
accused.
With this, an element in the criminal cases for illegal
sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs, the corpus When arraigned, petitioner, assisted by counsel de
delicti, is not proven, and the accused must then be acquitted parte, pleaded not guilty to the charge. The records do not
based on reasonable doubt. For this reason, [the accused] reveal whether De la Cruz was likewise charged for extortion.
must be acquitted on the ground of reasonable doubt due to
the broken chain of custody over the dangerous drug VERSION OF PROSECUTION:
allegedly recovered from him. NBI received a Complaint from CORAZON ABSIN AND
CHARITO ESCOBIDO. The complainants claimed that
In this case, there was a glaring gap in the custody of CORAZON AND ARIEL (SON OF CHARITO, live in partner of
the illegal drug since the prosecution failed to sufficiently Corazon) were picked up by several unknown male persons
establish who had custody of the illegal drug from the believed to be police officers for allegedly selling drugs.
moment it was allegedly transmitted to the Batangas
Provincial Crime Laboratory on 27 May 2004 until it was An errand boy gave a number to the complainants,
allegedly delivered to the Regional Crime Laboratory on 4 and when the latter gave the number a ring, they were
June 2004. There was no evidence presented how the instructed to proceed to the Gorordo Police Office located
confiscated sachets of shabu were stored, preserved or along Gorordo Avenue, Cebu City. In the said police office,
labeled nor who had custody prior to their delivery to the they met "James" who demanded from them PhP100,000,
Regional Crime Laboratory and their subsequent presentation later lowered to PhP40,000, in exchange for the release of
before the trial court. This is evident from the testimony of Ariel. After the meeting, the complainants proceeded to the
PO3 Villas, who stated he had no knowledge on who had NBICEVRO to file a complaint and narrate the circumstances
custody of the sachets of shabu from 27 May 2004 until 4 of the meeting to the authorities. While at the NBI-CEVRO,
June 2004. Charito even received calls supposedly from "James"
instructing her to bring the money as soon as possible.
* Based on testimony of PO3 Villas: he has no knowledge
that specimen (shabu) was submitted 7 days after *Special investigators at NBI – CEVRO verified the text
apprehension messages received by the complainants.
* A team was formed to implement an ENTRAPMENT
Since the failure of the prosecution to establish every OPERATION – Jollibee in Cebu
link in the chain of custody of the illegal drug gravely
compromised its identity and integrity, which illegal drug is The officers were able to nab Jaime dela Cruz by
the corpus delicti of the offense charged against appellant, his using a pre-marked PhP500 bill dusted with fluorescent
acquittal is therefore in order. powder, which was made part of the amount demanded by
"James" and handed by Corazon. Petitioner was later brought
WHEREFORE, we GRANT the appeal and ACQUIT to the forensic laboratory of the NBICEVRO where forensic
appellant Gerardo Enumerable y De Villa based on reasonable examination was done by forensic chemist Rommel
doubt and we ORDER his immediate release from detention, Paglinawan. Petitioner was required to submit his urine for
unless he is detained for any other lawful cause. drug testing. It later yielded a positive result for presence of
dangerous drugs as indicated in the confirmatory test result
DELA CRUZ v PEOPLE – entrapment operation PO2 labeled as Toxicology (Dangerous Drugs) Report No. 2006-
FACTS: TDD-2402 dated 16 February 2006.
Petitioner Jaime D. dela Cruz was charged with
violation of Section 15, Article II of Republic Act No. (R.A.) VERSION OF DEFENSE:
9165, by the Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer of The defense presented petitioner as the lone witness. He
the Office of the Ombudsman: denied the charges and testified that while eating at the said
Jollibee branch, he was arrested allegedly for extortion by NBI
Info: That on or about the 31st day of January 2006, agents. When he was at the NBI Office, he was required to
at Cebu City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this extract urine for drug examination, but he refused saying he
wanted it to be done by the Philippine National Police (PNP) pesos (PhP200,000.00): Provided, That this Section shall not
Crime Laboratory and not by the NBI. His request was, be applicable
however, denied. He also requested to be allowed to call his where the person tested is also found to have in his/her
lawyer prior to the taking of his urine sample, to no avail. possession such quantity of any dangerous drug provided for
under Section 11 of this Act, in which case the provisions
RTC: stated therein shall apply.
*Accused – guilty of violating Section 15, Article II of R.A.
9165 First, "[a] person apprehended or arrested" cannot
*Appeal: Petitioner: there was error on the RTC’s validation literally mean any person apprehended or arrested for any
of the result of the urine test despite its dubiousness having crime. The phrase must be read in context and understood in
been admitted in spite of lack of legal basis for its admission. consonance with R.A. 9165. Section 15 comprehends persons
– 1. he was not assisted by a counsel 2. He was allegedly held arrested or apprehended for unlawful acts listed under Article
guilty beyond reasonable doubt notwithstanding the lack of II of the law.
sufficient basis to convict him.

CA: affirmed RTC, appeal devoid of merit 2. The drug test is not covered by allowable non-testimonial
compulsion.
Petitioner filed for MR: arguing that CA overlooked a
prevailing jurisprudence, which states that drug testing "a waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does not mean a
conducted under the circumstances similar to this would waiver of the inadmissibility of evidence seized during an
violate a person’s right to privacy. The appellate court illegal warrantless arrest."
nevertheless denied the motion.
We are aware of the prohibition against testimonial
PETREV ON CERTIORARI: He assigns as errors the use of compulsion and the allowable exceptions to such
hearsay evidence as basis for his conviction and the proscription. Cases where non-testimonial compulsion has
questionable circumstances surrounding his arrest and drug been allowed reveal, however, that the pieces of evidence
test. obtained were all material to the principal cause of
the arrest.
Respondent, through the OSG, filed its Comment,
saying that "petitioner's arguments cannot be the subject of a In the instant case, we fail to see how a urine sample
petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, as they could be material to the charge of extortion. The RTC and the
involve questions of facts which may not be the subject CA, therefore, both erred when they held that the extraction
thereof; after his arraignment, he can no longer contest the of petitioner's urine for purposes of drug testing was "merely
validity of his arrest, less so at this stage of the proceedings; a mechanical act, hence, falling outside the concept of a
his guilt has been adequately established by direct evidence; custodial investigation."
and the manner in which the laboratory examination was
conducted was grounded on a valid and existing law. Gutang vs People:
"what the Constitution prohibits is the use of physical or
ISSUE: whether or not the drug test conducted upon the moral compulsion to extort communication from the accused,
petitioner is legal but not an inclusion of his body in evidence, when it may be
material"
HELD:
Ruling of RTC AND CA IS ERRONEOUS on 3 counts 3. The drug test was a violation of
petitioner's right to privacy and right
1. The drug test in Section 15 does not cover persons against self-incrimination.
apprehended or arrested for any unlawful act, but only
for unlawful acts listed under Article II of R.A. 9165. Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable
Section 15. Use of Dangerous Drugs. — A person apprehended searches and seizures of papers, and effects against
or arrested, who is found to be positive for use of any unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and
dangerous drug, after a confirmatory test, shall be imposed a for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or
penalty of a minimum of six (6) months rehabilitation in a warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to
government center for the first offense, subject to the be determined personally by the judge after examination
provisions of Article VIII of this Act. If apprehended using any under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
dangerous drug for the second time, he/she shall suffer the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the
penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) years and one place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
(1) day to twelve (12) years and a fine ranging from Fifty
thousand pesos (PhP50,000.00) to Two hundred thousand Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness
against SOTG) Of􀀶ce where PO2 Paras marked the plastic sachet
himself. with "BP/EBB 07 Sept 2010."

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the assailed Decision Thereafter, PO2 Paras turned-over appellant and the
dated 22 June 2011 issued by the Twentieth Division, and the seized item to PO2 Espadero who placed the seized item in a
Resolution dated 2 February 2012 issued by the former much bigger plastic sachet which the latter marked with
Twentieth Division of the Court of Appeals, in CA-G.R. C.R. "SAID-SOTG EVIDENCE 07-Sept 2010." 10 PO2 Espadero then
No. 00670 are SET ASIDE. Petitioner is hereby ACQUITTED. prepared a Request for Laboratory Examination 11 of the
seized item, dated September 7, 2010, and another request
SO ORDERED. for drug test on the urine sample taken from appellant. These
requests were both signed by P/Chief Insp. Bartolome
Tarnate. PO2 Espadero transmitted the requests and the
PEOPLE VS BADILLA – indiscriminate firing specimen to the Northern Police District Crime Laboratory
FACTS: Of􀀶ce, where duty desk of􀀶cer PO1 Pataweg received and
In an Information, appellant Enrico Briones Badilla recorded the same in his logbook. PO1 Pataweg, in the
was charged with violation of Section 11, Article II of RA No. presence of PO2 Espadero, turned-over the requests and the
9165. The informations reads: that on the 6th day of specimen to P/Sr. Insp. Libres for laboratory examination.
September 2010 in Caloocan City, MM BADILLA has in his
possession, custody and control 1 small heat sealed The white crystalline substance was found positive
transparent plastic sheet consting METHYLAMPHETAMINE for methylamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug,
HYDROCHLORIDE (SHABU) weighing 7.75gram, which when per Physical Science Report No. D-246-10 while the urine
subjected for lab exam gave POSTIVE result to the test. sample taken from appellant was found positive for
methylamphetamine, per Physical Evidence Report No. DT-
Arraginmend: accused pleaded not guilty to the 250-10.
offense charged.
DEFENSE:
PROSECUTION: He was just walking when police called him. The
Evidence consists of testimonies of police offcer poked a gun at him which he shoved away and
(1) PO2 Borban Paras, the one who arrested appellant and fell on the ground. He. denied accusation and said that he
seized the illegal drug from him; only saw the plastic sachet containing shabu in court.
2) PO2 Rafael Espadero, the one who received the marked
specimen from PO2 Paras; The police officers asked P20,000.00 from him
(3) PO2 Eduardo Ronquillo, one of PO2 Paras' companions allegedly because they knew that his father had a junk shop
during the arrest of accused; and business, but he refused to give them money. He questioned
(4) P/Sr. Insp. Margarita. the positive result of the drug test because allegedly no
examination was conducted on his person
Summation of testimonies:
On September 6, 2010, around 10:15 p.m., PO2 Paras RTC: accused guilty of violating Sec. 11, RA 9165
received a phone call from a concerned citizen informing him
that someone was indiscriminately 􀀶ring a gun at BMBA CA: affirmed the appellant’s conviction
Compound, 4th Avenue, Caloocan City. PO2 Paras and his
companions, PO2 Ronquillo, PO3 Baldomero and PO2 Woo, ISSUE:
responded to the call and reached the target area around Whether or not the trial court gravely erred in giving full
10:25 p.m. weight and credence to the prosecution's evidence
notwithstanding its failure to prove the identity and integrity
There they saw a male person, later identi􀀶ed as of the alleged seized shabu.
appellant Enrico Briones Badilla, standing along the alley.
Appellant was suspiciously in the act of pulling or drawing HELD:
something from his pocket; thus, as a precautionary measure,
and thinking that a concealed weapon was inside his pocket, First Issue: Legality of arrest: accused is estopped when he
PO2 Paras immediately introduced himself as a police officer, entered plea.
held appellant's arm, and asked the latter to bring out his
hand from his pocket. It turned out that appellant was Second Issue: Compliance with the Chain of Custody Rule
holding a plastic sachet with white crystalline substance. PO2
Paras con􀀶scated the plastic sachet from appellant, informed Section 21. Custody and disposition of Con􀀶scated, Seized
him of his constitutional rights, and arrested him. Appellant and/or Surrendered Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs,
and the con􀀶scated plastic sachet were brought to the controlled precursors and Essentials Chemicals,
Station Anti-Illegal Drugs-Special Operation Task Group (SAID- Instruments/Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment. —
The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all dangerous PEOPLE VS MORILLA – transport of DDs
drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled
precursors and essential chemicals, as well as FACTS:
instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so On or about October 13, 2001, in Barangay Kiloloran,
con􀀶scated, seized and/or surrendered, for proper Municipality of Real, Province of Quezon, Morilla, Mayor
disposition in the following manner: Mitra, Willie Yang y Yao (Yang) and Ruel Dequilla y Regodan
(Dequilla) who all belong to an organized/syndicate crime
(1) The apprehending of􀀶cer/team having initial custody and group as they all help one another, for purposes of gain in the
control of the drugs shall immediately, after seizure and transport of illegal drugs, and in fact, conspiring and
con􀀶scation, physically inventory and photograph the same in confederating together and mutually aiding and abetting one
the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and
items were con􀀶scated and/or seized, or his/her feloniously transport by means of two (2) motor vehicles,
representative or counsel, a representative from the media namely a Starex van bearing plate number RWT-888 with
and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected public commemorative plate to read "Mayor" and a municipal
of􀀶cial who shall be required to sign the copies of the ambulance of Panukulan, Quezon Province,
inventory and be given a copy thereof. methamphetamine hydrochloride, a regulated drug which is
commonly known as shabu, and with an approximate weight
Further, Section 21 (a), Article II of the Implementing of 􀀶ve hundred three point sixty eight (503.68) kilos, without
Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 9165 similarly authority whatsoever.
provides that:
(a) The apprehending of􀀶cer/team having initial custody RTC: convicted accused of illegal transport of meth/shabu
and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure (503.68 kilos)
and con􀀶scation, physically inventory and photograph
the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s Police officers have acquired prior knowledge of the
from whom such items were con􀀶scated and/or seized, suspected transport of illegal drugs. During the CHECKPOINT
or his/her representative or counsel, a representative – the information was indeed and accurate.
from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ),
and any elected public of􀀶cial who shall be required to Mayor Mitra: defense – he has no knowledge of the contents
sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy of the sacks and that he was merely requested to transport
thereof: . . . Provided, further, that non-compliance with them to Manila on board his Starex van upon a request of a
these requirements under justi􀀶able grounds, as long as certain Ben Tan because the latter bought his fishing boat
the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized
items are properly preserved by the apprehending
of􀀶cer/team, shall not render void and invalid such Defense of ambulance driver Morilla: lack of knowledge of
seizures of and custody over said items. illegality of the contents of the sack – he thought they were
wooden tiles and electronics spare parts with Dequilla
Under the same proviso, however, non-compliance with the
stipulated procedure, under justi􀀶able grounds, shall not Yang: other passenger in the van – did not bother to inquire
render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said about the contents of the vehicle because he was merely an
items, for as long as the integrity and evidentiary value of the accommodated passenger of the ambulance.
seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending
of􀀶cers. The court rejected the defenses.

the prosecution was able to demonstrate that the integrity Checkpoint – van was not tinted so police inquired
and evidentiary value of the con􀀶scated drug had not been Driver said narra wooden tiles but when opened they were
compromised because it established the crucial link in the white crystalline granules
chain of custody of the seized item from the time it was 􀀶rst
discovered until it was brought to the court for examination. CA: affirmed the ruling of RTC

In this case, the facts persuasively proved that the sachet of ISSUE:
shabu presented in court was the same item seized from (1) whether he may be convicted for
appellant. The integrity and evidentiary value thereof were conspiracy to commit the offense charged sans allegation of
duly preserved. conspiracy in the
Information, and
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED and the (2) whether the prosecution was able to prove his culpability
Decision of the Court of Appeals dated March 27, 2015 in CA- as alleged in
G.R. CR-HC No. 06354 is AFFIRMED. the Information
HELD: the police of􀀶cers, "Dos (P200.00) ang isa." Upon hearing this,
the police of􀀶cers introduced themselves as cops. PO1 Reyes
Accused were caught in flagrante delicto in the act of immediately arrested Laylo. Ritwal, on the other, tried to get
transporting DDSs on board their vehicles. away but PO1 Pastor caught up with her. PO1 Pastor then
frisked Ritwal and found another sachet of shabu in a SIM
Transport" - "to carry or convey from one place to another card case which Ritwal was carrying. PO1 Reyes and PO1
Pastor marked the three plastic sachets of shabu recovered
It was well established duringtrial that Morilla was driving the from Laylo and Ritwal and forwarded them to the Philippine
ambulance following the lead of Mayor Mitra, who was National Police Crime Laboratory for forensic testing. Forensic
driving a Starex van going to Manila. The very act of Chemist Police Inspector Yehla C. Manaog
transporting methamphetamine hydrochloride is malum conducted the laboratory examination on the specimens
prohibitum since it is punished as an offense under a special submitted and found the recovered items positive for
law. methylamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous
drug.
The fact of transportation of the sacks containing
dangerous drugs need not be accompanied by proof of The police of􀀶cers charged Laylo for attempted sale of illegal
criminal intent, motive or knowledge. drugs and used the two plastic sachets containing shabu as
basis while Ritwal was charged for possession of illegal drugs
WHEREFORE –PETITION DENIED, CONVICTION using as basis the third sachet containing 0.02 grams of
AFFIRMED shabu.

PEOPLE VS LAYLO anti-drug surveillance DEFENSE:

FACTS: presented different versions of the facts. The
On or about the 17th day of December, 2005, in the witnesses presented were: appellant Laylo; Laylo's three
Municipality of Binangonan, Province of Rizal, accused neighbors namely Rodrigo Panaon, Jr., Marlon de Leon, and
ROLANDO LAYLO y CEPRES and MELITONA RITWAL, not Teresita Marquez.
being authorized by law to sell any dangerous drug, did then
and there willfully, unlawfully, and knowingly attempt to sell, Laylo testi􀀶ed that while he and his common-law
deliver, and give away shabu to PO1 Angelito G. Reyes, 0.04 wife, Ritwal, were walking on the street, two men grabbed
gram of white crystalline substance contained in two (2) heat- them. The two men, who they later identi􀀶ed as PO1 Reyes
sealed transparent plastic sachets which were found positive and PO1 Pastor, dragged them to their house. Once inside,
to the test for Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride, also the police of􀀶cers placed two plastic sachets in each of their
known as shabu, a dangerous drug, thus commencing the pockets. Afterwards, they were brought to the police station
commission of the crime of illegal sale but did not perform where, despite protests and claims that the drugs were
all the acts of execution which would produce such crime by planted on them, they were arrested and charged.
reason of some cause or accident other than the accused's
own spontaneous desistance, that is, said PO1 Angelito G.
Reyes introduced himself as policeman, arrested the accused To corroborate Laylo's testimony, the defense
and con􀀶scated the two (2) above-mentioned sachets from presented Laylo's three neighbors. Marlon de Leon (de Leon),
the latter. also a close friend of the couple, testi􀀶ed that he was taking
care of the Laylo and Ritwal's child when he heard a
Upon arraignment, both accused pleaded not guilty. commotion. He saw men, whom de Leon identi􀀶ed as assets,
However, during the trial, Ritwal jumped bail and was tried in holding the couple and claimed that he saw one of them put
absentia. Thus, something, which he described as "plastic," in the left side of
Ritwal was deemed to have waived the presentation of her Laylo's jacket.
evidence and the case was submitted for decision without
any evidence on her part. Rodrigo Panaon, Jr. (Panaon) narrated that on 17
December 2005, at around 5:00 or 6:00 p.m., he was on his
PROSECUTION version of facts: way home when he saw Laylo arguing with three men in an
In the afternoon of 17 alley. He overheard Laylo uttering, "Bakit ba? Bakit ba?"
December 2005, PO1 Reyes and PO1 Pastor, both wearing Later, Panaon saw a commotion taking place at Laylo's
civilian clothes, were conducting anti-drug surveillance backyard. The three men arrested Laylo while the latter
operations at Lozana Street, Calumpang, Binangonan, Rizal. shouted, "Mga kapitbahay, tulungan ninyo kami, kami'y
While the police of􀀶cers were in front of a sari-sari store at dinadampot." Then Panaon saw someone place something
around 5:40 p.m., appellant Laylo and his live-in partner, inside the jacket of Laylo as he heard Laylo say, "Wala kayong
Ritwal, approached them and asked, "Gusto mong umiskor ng makukuha dito."
shabu?" PO1 Reyes replied, "Bakit mayroon ka ba?" Laylo
then brought out two plastic bags containing shabu and told Teresita Marquez (Marquez) testi􀀶ed that while she
was fetching water from the well on 17 December 2005, at In People v. de Guzman, We have ruled that peddlers of illicit
around 5:00 or 6:00 p.m., she heard Laylo's son shouting, drugs have been known, with ever increasing casualness and
"Amang, Amang." Marquez then saw the child run to his recklessness, to offer and sell their wares for the right price to
father, who was with several anybody, be they strangers or not. What matters is not the
male companions. Then someone pulled Laylo's collar and existing familiarity between the buyer and the seller, or the
frisked him. Marquez overheard someone uttering, "Wala po, time and venue of the sale, but the fact of agreement as well
wala po." Marquez went home after the incident. as the act constituting the sale and delivery of the prohibited
At around 9:00 in the evening, Ritwal's daughter visited her drugs.
and borrowed money for Laylo and Ritwal's release. Marquez
then accompanied Ritwal's daughter to the municipal hall, Appeal dismissed
where a man demanded P40,000.00 for the couple's release. Conviction affirmed

RTC: guilty Laylo and Ritwal – Section 11, RA 9165

The RTC gave credence to the testimonies of the police

officers,who were presumed to have performed their duties
in a regular manner. The RTC stated that Reyes and Pastor
were straightforrward and candid in theirtestimonies and
unsha3en $y cross8e amination. Their testimonies were
unflawed by inconsistencies or contradictions in their
material points. The RTC added that the denial of appellant
Laylo’s defense is weak and self-serving and his allegation of
planting of evidence or frameup can be easily concocted.
Thus, Laylo’s defense cannot be given credence o'er the
positive and clear testimonies of the prosecution
witnesses.Laylo filed an appeal with the CA. The CA affirmed
the decision of theRTC

ISSUE:
Whether or not the Court of Appeals gravely erred in
affirming the Decision of RTC in convicting appellant of
attempted sale of dangerous drugs

HELD:
The elements necessary for the prosecution of illegal
sale of drugs are: (1) the identity of the buyer and seller, the
object, and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the
thing sold and the payment.
Section 26(b), Article II of RA 9165 provides:
Section 26. Attempt or Conspiracy. – Any attempt or
conspiracy to commit the following unlawful acts shall be
penalized by the same penalty prescribed for the commission
of the same as provided under this Act:
x x x (b) Sale, trading, administration,
dispensation, delivery, distribution and
transportation of any dangerous drug
and/or controlled precursor and essential
chemical; x x x

Appellant intended to sell shabu and commenced by overt

acts the commission of the intended crime by showing the
substance to PO1 Reyes and PO1 Pastor. The sale was
aborted when the police officers identified themselves and
placed appellant and Ritwal under arrest. The plastic sachets
were presented in court as evidence of corpus delicti. Thus,
the elements of the crime charged were sufficiently
established by evidence.