People of the Philippines vs. Zoraida Mariano a.k.a. Nora,
G.R. No. 247522, February 28, 2022
Facts:
1. A confidential informant (CI) notified Police Officer Lendro Tutor about the illegal drug activities of Nora and her co-accused.
2. A buy bust team was thus formed with PO3 Tutor as the designated poseur buyer.
3. Then the team proceeded to the area. Thereafter, PO3 Tutor and the CI alighted from the vehicle and walked towards Nora and her co-accused.
4. After the introduction, Nora glanced at PO3 Tutor and made an eye gesture towards her co-accused.
5. PO3 Tutor gave the marked money to the co-accused, who handed it over to Nora. Nora took out one elongated transparent plastic sachet from her shoulder bag and discreetly gave it to PO3 Tutor. After examining the contents of the sachet containing what appeared to be shabu, PO3 Tutor gave the pre-arranged signal by removing the towel from his shoulder to alert the backup team.
6. PO3 Tutor also conducted a body search on Nora and recovered one big plastic sachet containing shabu weighing 1.0923 grams; forty ( 40) pieces of elongated sachets containing shabu weighing 3.5437 grams.
7. Thereafter, PO3 Tutor placed the seized items in separate evidence pouches and kept them in his custody.
8. Upon arrival at the police station, PO3 Tutor placed his markings on the seized items and indorsed them, as well as the accused, to the desk officer, PO2 Adnan Ahadain.
9. Subsequently, PO2 Ahadain placed his own markings on the seized items and returned them to PO3 Tutor as the latter was the evidence custodian and investigating officer.
10. Afterwards, PO3 Tutor delivered the seized items, along with the Letter Request for Laboratory Examination to the PNP Crime Laboratory.
Issue:
Whether or not Nora is guilty of Illegal Sale and Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs.
You can support our page by clicking any of the following links:
|
Ruling:
No. The Supreme Court holds that the prosecution failed to establish the very corpus delicti of the crimes charged and an unbroken chain of custody.
The four links in the chain of custody that the prosecution must establish:
(1) the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the apprehending officer;
(2) the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to the investigating officer;
(3) the turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and
(4) the turnover and submission of the seized and marked illegal drug from the forensic chemist to the court.
In the case at bar, the prosecution failed to establish the first, third and fourth links.
A perusal of the records shows that one plastic sachet containing what appears to be shabu was the subject of the sale transaction between Nora and P03 Tutor and another 40 pieces of elongated plastic sachets, also believed to contain shabu, were recovered from the possession of Nora. P03 Tutor admittedly did not immediately mark the said elongated plastic sachets at the place of the apprehension but only made the marking at the police station. However, the prosecution failed to provide any detail as to how these sachets were segregated or identified from each other, aside from the fact that P03 Tutor placed the seized items in separate evidence pouches and kept them in his custody. The sachets were mingled with each other and the lack of marking thus made it impossible for the prosecution to identify which item was subject of the sale, and which sachets were confiscated from Nora's possession. This is important since the weight of the seized contraband determines the proper penalty in the Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs case. Evidently, this critical lapse on the part of the apprehending officers made the initial link in the chain of custody unreliable. Consequently, the integrity and evidentiary value of the subsequent links were also tainted.
Based on P03 Tutor's testimony, POI Marron received the seized drugs. However, there is no evidence on record indicating how he handled and preserved the identity of the seized drugs while he was in possession thereof before handing it over to PST Fabian. Relatedly, there are also no informative details as to how PSI Fabian handled and preserved the identity of the seized drugs before and after she conducted the qualitative examination. Consequently, there is doubt on whether the supposed shabu seized from accused-appellant were the same ones submitted to the crime laboratory, and eventually, presented in court.
0 comments:
Post a Comment