G.R. No. 173795 ; April 4, 2007
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. LOIDA R. SORIANO and MANUELITA L. MIGUEL, Appellants.

FACTS

Appellants Loida Soriano and Manuelita Miguel were convicted for selling shabu in violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 . The prosecution evidence established that a buy-bust team was formed on April 8, 2003, acting on a tip. PO1 Janet Sabo acted as poseur-buyer and was given marked money. At the target location, an informant introduced Sabo to appellant Miguel, stating Sabo wanted to buy shabu. Sabo handed the marked money to Miguel, who passed it to Soriano inside a house. Soriano then handed a plastic sachet to Miguel, who delivered it to Sabo. Upon confirming the substance, Sabo gave the pre-arranged signal, leading to the arrest of both appellants. The seized sachet tested positive for methylamphetamine hydrochloride.
Appellants presented a different version, claiming they were merely conversing in front of their house when an acquaintance, Junjun Paulino, approached them. They alleged that police officers suddenly arrived, and after Paulino fled, they were forcibly taken to the police station, where they were falsely charged after refusing to identify a big-time drug pusher. The Regional Trial Court found the prosecution’s version credible and convicted the appellants, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellants for illegal sale of dangerous drugs beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the factual findings of the lower courts, emphasizing that the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great respect, especially when supported by the evidence. The prosecution successfully established all elements of illegal sale: the identity of the buyer and seller, the object (the shabu), the consideration (the marked money), and the delivery. The detailed testimonies of the police officers, particularly PO1 Sabo, provided a clear and coherent narrative of the transaction, from the initial offer to the consummation of the sale.
The Court found the defense of denial and frame-up weak and unsubstantiated. Appellants failed to present clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties by the buy-bust team. The chain of custody of the seized drug was also properly established, with the item being transmitted to the crime laboratory and yielding a positive result. The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of ₱500,000.00 for each appellant was correctly imposed under the law.