G.R. No. 181250 ; July 18, 2012
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EMMALYN DELA CERNA y QUINDAO and REGIE MEDENCELES y ISTIL, Accused, REGIE MEDENCELES y ISTIL, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution established that on August 28, 2002, a buy-bust operation was conducted by NBI agents in Mandaluyong City. Agent Gregorio Zuniga, Jr. acted as the poseur-buyer to purchase 200 ecstasy tablets worth P80,000.00 from a certain “Inday.” At the designated McDonald’s location, the informant and Zuniga were waved over by a woman, later identified as accused Emmalyn Dela Cerna. Upon approach, Dela Cerna handed a box to the man seated beside her, accused Regie Medenceles. Medenceles then handed the white box containing the tablets to Zuniga, who in turn handed over the boodle money. Zuniga then introduced himself as an NBI agent and arrested both accused.
The accused presented a different version. Dela Cerna claimed they were merely eating at McDonald’s when about ten persons frisked and arrested them without cause. Medenceles alleged he was tortured, with a plastic bag placed over his head, and that no items were recovered from him. The Regional Trial Court convicted both accused of illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165 and initially imposed the death penalty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to life imprisonment. Only Medenceles appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of accused-appellant Regie Medenceles for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court reiterated that for a successful prosecution of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the elements are: (1) the identity of the buyer, seller, object, and consideration; and (2) the delivery of the illicit drug and payment. The presentation of the corpus delicti is vital. The Court found the prosecution evidence, primarily the testimony of poseur-buyer Zuniga, clear and credible. Zuniga positively identified Medenceles as the person who physically handed over the box of ecstasy tablets in exchange for the marked money, establishing his direct participation in the consummated sale. His presence was not merely incidental; his act of delivery was integral to the transaction.
The defense of denial and frame-up was rejected for being inherently weak. Such defenses cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony of a law enforcement agent who performed his official duty, which is accorded the presumption of regularity in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary. The alleged ill-treatment was not substantiated by evidence and did not negate the fact of the sale. The chain of custody of the seized drugs was also properly established, with the forensic chemist confirming the substance was Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P1,500,000.00 was sustained, applying Republic Act No. 9346 which prohibits the death penalty.