GR 102955; (March, 1993) (Digest)
G.R. No. 102955. March 22, 1993.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ADRIAN ENRIQUEZ y GARCES, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On April 19, 1991, in Barangay Perrelos, Carcar, Cebu, a buy-bust operation was conducted by Narcom agents from the 7th Narcotics Unit of the PNP. The operation was based on a prior surveillance by Sgt. Ricardo Inding on April 17 and 18, 1991, where he observed the accused, Adrian Enriquez y Garces, receiving money from teenagers and handing them thinly rolled cigarettes. During the buy-bust, Sgt. Inding, acting as a poseur-buyer, approached the accused’s residence. The accused handed him ten (10) sticks of marijuana cigarettes in exchange for marked money. Upon the consummation of the sale, the back-up team arrested the accused. A body search yielded 47 more sticks of marijuana from his back pocket, and he voluntarily surrendered an additional 59 sticks. A Chemistry Report confirmed all seized items were positive for marijuana. The accused was charged with violating Article II, Section 4 of R.A. No. 6425 (The Dangerous Drugs Act). The Regional Trial Court found him guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine. The accused appealed, claiming he was framed and that the evidence was planted. The Solicitor General, in a rare move, recommended acquittal due to alleged major contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.
ISSUE
Whether the guilt of the accused-appellant for the illegal sale of marijuana has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the defense of frame-up was not credible. There was no evidence of improper motive on the part of the Narcom agents, and the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties stands in the absence of stronger proof to overcome it. The alleged contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses (Sgt. Inding and Sgt. Misa) pertained to minor details, such as who frisked the accused, which do not affect their credibility on the material points of the sale and arrest. The offense of illegal sale of marijuana is consummated by the handing over of the prohibited drug to the poseur-buyer in exchange for money, which was positively established by Sgt. Inding’s testimony. The Court also addressed the Solicitor General’s contention regarding the non-inclusion of another suspect, Bienvenido Genonsalao, in the information, stating that it is within the prosecutor’s discretion to determine who to charge based on the evidence. The decision of the trial court was affirmed.