G.R. No. 105832 December 22, 1994
People of the Philippines vs. Junny Utinas

FACTS

The prosecution’s evidence established that on June 27, 1990, a NARCOM buy-bust team, acting on reports of rampant marijuana peddling in Ivisan, Capiz, conducted an operation. T/Sgt. Rizaldo Labitan, Jr., acting as poseur-buyer, approached accused-appellant Junny Utinas at his residence and used marked money to purchase marijuana. After receiving the payment, Utinas went inside his house and returned to hand over two plastic tea bags of marijuana to Labitan, who then effected the arrest with his backup, Pat. Jesus Monajan. The seized items were later confirmed by forensic examination to be marijuana. The defense presented a starkly different account, alleging that Utinas was arbitrarily arrested after refusing to act as a police informer. His mother and a neighbor testified that NARCOM agents arrived at their home, collared Utinas without provocation, and brought him to the police station.

ISSUE

The core issue is the credibility of the witnesses, specifically whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses over the defense’s denial and frame-up claim.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, emphasizing that factual findings are best left to the trial judge who observed the witnesses’ demeanor. The positive and categorical testimonies of the arresting officers, who are presumed to have performed their duties regularly in the absence of proof to the contrary, prevailed over the denial and uncorroborated allegation of frame-up by the defense. The Court found the alleged discrepancy in the officers’ testimonies—whether they initially went for surveillance or immediately for a buy-bust—to be minor and inconsequential, not affecting the core narrative of the completed sale. However, applying the ruling in People v. Simon, the Court modified the penalty. Since the quantity of marijuana sold was only 1.5 grams, a minor quantity, the applicable penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law was an indeterminate prison term of five months of arresto mayor maximum as minimum, to three years and two months of prision correccional medium as maximum. As Utinas had already been detained longer than this maximum term, his immediate release was ordered.