G.R. No. 105667. March 1, 1994.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. WINIFRED DAVID @ “BUTCH,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

An Information was filed charging Winifred David with violating Section 4, Article II of R.A. No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act) for selling and delivering dried marijuana fruiting tops without authority. The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution evidence established that on June 12, 1990, NARCOM officers conducted an entrapment operation in Angeles City. Pfc. Lauro Mamac acted as the poseur-buyer and, using marked money, bought two small plastic bags of marijuana from the accused. Upon the prearranged signal, the back-up team arrested the accused and recovered the marked bills. The contents of the plastic bags were examined by Forensic Chemist Maj. Marlene Salangad and found positive for marijuana. The defense claimed the accused was framed, alleging that NARCOM agents forcibly placed marijuana in his pocket and arrested him. The trial court convicted the accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine. The accused appealed.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused by disregarding the defense evidence and failing to give it probative value.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the trial court’s decision. The Court held that the defense’s new claim of inducement, raised only on appeal and based on an alleged confession to the accused’s wife, was not formally offered as evidence and did not qualify as newly discovered evidence. The Court found the entrapment operation lawful and the testimonies of the NARCOM officers credible, as no improper motive was shown. The Court also ruled that drug transactions can occur in public places, which does not negate the crime. The positive identification of the accused and the forensic evidence established his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.