G.R. No. 186392 ; January 18, 2012
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MARCOS SABADLAB y NARCISO @ “Bong Pango,” Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

On September 21, 2006, an informant reported to the Makati Central Police Station’s Station Anti-Illegal Drugs-Special Operation Task Force (SAID-SOTF) that a certain “Bong” was engaged in selling and delivering shabu. A buy-bust team was formed, coordinated with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), and used marked money. At the target area on Dapitan Street, Guadalupe Nuevo, Makati City, the informant introduced PO3 Eusebio Lowaton, the poseur-buyer, to accused-appellant Marcos Sabadlab. Accused-appellant, who was carrying his son, asked how much PO3 Lowaton wanted to buy. Upon being told ₱300 worth, accused-appellant took a plastic sachet from his pocket and gave it to PO3 Lowaton in exchange for the marked money. PO3 Lowaton then gave the pre-arranged signal and arrested accused-appellant. A body search yielded the marked money and another plastic sachet. The two sachets, marked “EBL-1” (the one sold) and “EBL-2” (the one recovered), were forwarded to the crime laboratory, where Forensic Chemist P/SInsp. Abraham Verde Tecson found both to contain 0.02 grams of methylamphetamine hydrochloride. Accused-appellant was charged with violations of Sections 5 (sale) and 11 (possession) of Republic Act No. 9165 .
The defense presented a different version. Accused-appellant testified that on September 21, 2006, while with his three children in front of his house, eight to ten men in civilian clothes alighted from a vehicle, asked for a certain “Minyong,” and when he said he did not know the person, forcibly took him to the SAID-SOTF office where he learned of the drug charges. He claimed PO3 Lowaton had previously arrested him for playing cara y cruz on September 16, 2006, and he was released after paying ₱2,000. He denied the charges and noted that his brother, sister, and wife were also undergoing trial for drug-related offenses.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati convicted accused-appellant. In Criminal Case No. 06-1837 (Section 5), he was sentenced to life imprisonment and a ₱500,000 fine. In Criminal Case No. 06-1838 (Section 11), he was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months, and a ₱300,000 fine. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision. Hence, this appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of accused-appellant for violations of Sections 5 and 11 of Republic Act No. 9165 was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Decision of the Court of Appeals with MODIFICATION regarding the penalty in Criminal Case No. 06-1838 (violation of Section 11).
1. On the Credibility of Prosecution Witnesses and the Buy-Bust Operation: The Court found the testimonies of PO3 Lowaton and MADAC Operative Miguel Castillo clear, consistent, and credible. Their detailed accounts of the buy-bust operation—from the pre-operation coordination, the actual exchange of shabu for marked money, the arrest, and the recovery of another sachet—established the elements of the crimes. The defense of denial and frame-up, unsupported by clear and convincing evidence, could not prevail over the positive identification by the police officers. The minor discrepancy in the name used in the coordination papers (“Narciso Sabadlab” instead of “Marcos Sabadlab”) did not invalidate the operation, as the identity of the accused was sufficiently established during the trial. The Court upheld the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties by the police officers.
2. On the Chain of Custody: The Court ruled that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved. The sachets were immediately marked at the scene (“EBL-1” and “EBL-2”) by PO3 Lowaton, turned over to the Scene of the Crime Operation (SOCO), and subsequently examined by the PNP Crime Laboratory, which confirmed the contents as shabu. This established an unbroken chain of custody.
3. On the Penalties:
* For Criminal Case No. 06-1837 (Section 5 – Sale of Dangerous Drugs), the penalty of life imprisonment and a ₱500,000 fine was affirmed, being in accordance with Section 5 of R.A. No. 9165 .
* For Criminal Case No. 06-1838 (Section 11 – Possession of Dangerous Drugs), the Court found the RTC’s imposition of an indeterminate sentence (12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months) erroneous. Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, for offenses punished by special laws like R.A. No. 9165 , the maximum sentence shall not exceed the maximum fixed by the law, and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum prescribed. For possession of 0.02 grams of shabu, Section 11(3) of R.A. No. 9165 prescribes a penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from ₱300,000 to ₱400,000. Therefore, the proper indeterminate penalty is twelve (12) years and one (1) day, as minimum, to twenty (20) years, as maximum. The fine of ₱300,000 was sustained.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 02690 dated July 31, 2008 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Accused-appellant Marcos Sabadlab y Narciso is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 in Criminal Case No. 06-1837 and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱500,000.00). He is also found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 in Criminal Case No. 06-1838 and is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day, as minimum, to twenty (20) years, as maximum, and to pay a fine of Three Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱300,000.00).