G.R. No. 207635 February 18, 2015
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Dante Dela Peña and Dennis Delima, Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Dante Dela Peña and Dennis Delima were charged with violations of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002). Dela Peña was charged with illegal sale of shabu (Criminal Case No. CBU-83576) and illegal possession of shabu (Criminal Case No. CBU-83577). Delima was charged with illegal possession of shabu (Criminal Case No. CBU-83578). The charges stemmed from a buy-bust operation conducted by PDEA operatives on June 19, 2008, in Cebu City. Intelligence Officer 1 Ferdenand Kintanar acted as the poseur-buyer and purchased one sachet of shabu from Dela Peña using marked money. Upon arrest, four additional sachets were recovered from Dela Peña, and one sachet was recovered from Delima. The seized items were marked, inventoried, and photographed at the scene in the presence of a barangay captain and a media representative. The items were later confirmed to be methamphetamine hydrochloride. The defense interposed denial, claiming they were arbitrarily arrested. The Regional Trial Court convicted both accused. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties for the possession charges.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of the accused-appellants despite alleged failures in establishing the elements of the crimes and in proving the corpus delicti due to non-compliance with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21 of R.A. 9165.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals with modifications to the penalties. The Court held that all elements of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs were proven beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution established the identity and integrity of the seized drugs through an unbroken chain of custody. The buy-bust operation was legitimate, and the marking, physical inventory, and photography of the seized items were conducted immediately at the place of arrest in the presence of the accused, a barangay official, and a media representative, constituting substantial compliance with Section 21 of R.A. 9165. The defense of denial could not prevail over the positive identification by the prosecution witnesses. The penalties were imposed as follows: For Dela Peña (Section 5, R.A. 9165): life imprisonment and a fine of ₱500,000. For Dela Peña (Section 11, R.A. 9165): imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months and a fine of ₱300,000. For Delima (Section 11, R.A. 9165): imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months and a fine of ₱300,000.