G.R. No. 235956, December 05, 2018
Arjay Gutierrez y Consuelo @ “RJ”, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Arjay Gutierrez was charged with illegal possession of dangerous drugs under Section 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The prosecution alleged that on October 16, 2014, police officers responded to a report of alarm and scandal. PO2 Baturi arrested Gutierrez and, during a body frisk, recovered a fliptop box containing five plastic sachets and a folded cigarette paper with suspected dried marijuana. The items were marked at the police precinct in the presence of Gutierrez and others. An inventory was later conducted at the barangay hall and signed by a barangay kagawad and Gutierrez. The forensic chemist confirmed the substances were marijuana.
The defense presented a different version. Gutierrez testified he was merely buying cigarettes when he was suddenly apprehended, brought to the barangay hall, and forced to sign a blank paper. He denied possession of any illegal drugs. The Regional Trial Court convicted Gutierrez, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution successfully proved the identity and integrity of the seized drugs, establishing the corpus delicti of the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court acquitted Gutierrez. The Court emphasized that in drug cases, the prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of custody to prove the identity of the corpus delicti. The arresting officers committed unjustified deviations from the mandatory procedure under Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165. The law requires the physical inventory and photographing of seized items to be conducted immediately after seizure and confiscation at the place of arrest, or at the nearest police station if not practicable, in the presence of the accused and required witnesses.
Here, the inventory was not done at the place of arrest or the police precinct. PO2 Baturi admitted they conducted it later at the barangay hall, offering no credible explanation for this procedural lapse. While the presence of an elected barangay official was secured, the unjustified failure to conduct the inventory at the prescribed time and place compromised the integrity of the seized items from the outset. The prosecution failed to provide justifiable grounds for these deviations. Consequently, the identity and evidentiary value of the drugs were not preserved with moral certainty. The broken chain of custody created reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal.