GR 185284; (June, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 185284 ; June 22, 2009
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-appellee, vs. JASON SY, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Jason Sy was charged with the illegal sale of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) under Section 15, Article III of Republic Act No. 6425 , as amended. The prosecution alleged that on December 3, 2000, in San Fernando, Pampanga, Sy sold approximately 987.32265 grams of shabu to PO2 Christian Trambulo, who acted as a poseur-buyer in a buy-bust operation. The transaction occurred at a Chowking restaurant parking lot, where Sy arrived in a red Nissan Altima. Upon consummation of the sale, signaled by Trambulo removing his bull cap, the police team arrested Sy and recovered the marked money and the drugs.
Sy denied the charges, claiming he was a victim of extortion. He testified that he was forcibly taken by armed men from his home, brought to a dark area, and threatened to pay a large sum of money. He asserted that the drugs were planted and that the buy-bust story was fabricated. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and a fine. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of Jason Sy for illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that all elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs were proven: (1) the identity of the buyer and seller, the object, and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment. The testimonies of the poseur-buyer, PO2 Trambulo, and his back-up, SPO3 Amontos, were credible, consistent, and constituted sufficient proof of the transaction. The defense of frame-up and extortion was rejected for being inherently weak and unsupported by clear and convincing evidence. The Court emphasized that such defenses are commonly raised in drug cases and cannot prevail over the positive identification by police officers who are presumed to have performed their duties regularly. The integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved, as the chain of custody was established from the seizure at the scene to the forensic examination, which confirmed the substance was shabu. The alleged irregularities, such as the non-presentation of the informant and the non-subjection of the marked money to ultraviolet examination, did not create reasonable doubt. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the fine were upheld as proper under the law.