G.R. No. 175590 ; February 9, 2010
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. FERNANDO VILLAMIN Y SAN JOSE ALIAS ANDOY, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Members of the Drug Enforcement Unit (DEU) of San Jose del Monte Police Station received a report in the first week of August 2002 that accused-appellant Fernando Villamin alias “Andoy” was engaged in selling shabu in Barangay Gumaok. A test-buy operation was conducted on August 15 and 16, 2002, where a civilian asset and a police aide attempted to buy shabu from the accused-appellant, who informed them to return as he had no stock. On August 17, 2002, a buy-bust team was formed with SPO4 Abelardo Taruc as the poseur-buyer. The team proceeded to the accused-appellant’s house. SPO4 Taruc and a civilian asset approached, and the asset introduced Taruc as a buyer wanting shabu worth ₱200.00. Accused-appellant said, “Meron na, meron na,” entered his house, and returned with a small plastic sachet. SPO4 Taruc handed over two marked ₱100.00 bills, and accused-appellant handed over the plastic sachet. After confirming the content was shabu, SPO4 Taruc arrested accused-appellant. A search yielded six more sachets of shabu and the marked money from him. Additional sachets and paraphernalia were recovered from his house. The seized items were tested and found positive for Methylamphetamine hydrochloride. Accused-appellant was charged with violations of Sections 5, 6, and 11 of Article II of R.A. 9165. He pleaded not guilty and claimed during trial that police officers forcibly entered his house while he was having breakfast and arrested him without cause, a story corroborated by his live-in partner. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 5 (sale of dangerous drugs) but acquitted him of the other charges, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of ₱500,000.00. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s decision finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating Section 5, Article II of R.A. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002).

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the prosecution successfully established all elements of the illegal sale of dangerous drugs: (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 police officers, particularly SPO4 Taruc the poseur-buyer, were credible, straightforward, and consistent, detailing the buy-bust operation from the transaction to the arrest and seizure. The defense of denial and frame-up by accused-appellant was deemed weak and unsupported by clear and convincing evidence, and could not prevail over the positive identification by the prosecution witnesses. The Court found no reason to deviate from the factual findings and assessment of witness credibility by the trial court, which were affirmed by the appellate court. The chain of custody of the seized drugs was also preserved. Thus, accused-appellant’s guilt for the illegal sale of shabu was proven beyond reasonable doubt.