G.R. No. 128277 November 16, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FERDINAND CUENO y MATA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Ferdinand Cueno y Mata was charged in two separate Informations for violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act. In Criminal Case No. 37-95, he and Florida Senarosa Fajardo were accused of selling a small brick of dried marijuana leaves (30.4315 grams) to a poseur-buyer, violating Section 4. In Criminal Case No. 38-95, Cueno alone was accused of possessing one brick and twenty-one plastic tea bags of dried marijuana leaves (851.5842 grams), violating Section 8. Both pleaded not guilty, and a joint trial was conducted.
The prosecution evidence established that after a surveillance operation on January 26, 1995, where PO1 Avelino Camantigue witnessed a sale and overheard Cueno, the police obtained a search warrant. On January 30, 1995, a buy-bust operation was conducted. Posing as a buyer, PO1 Camantigue was introduced to Cueno by an informant. Cueno took P150.00 and instructed Fajardo, his common-law wife, to give Camantigue marijuana, which she did. Upon the pre-arranged signal, the police team arrested Cueno and Fajardo. They then implemented the search warrant in the presence of barangay officials. The search of the couple’s bedroom yielded a balikbayan box containing a brick of marijuana wrapped in newspaper and twenty-one plastic tea bags of marijuana, along with rolling papers. The seized items tested positive for marijuana.
The defense presented a different version. Fajardo testified that around 4:30 p.m. on January 30, 1995, about eight armed policemen in civilian clothes forcibly entered their house. When Cueno rushed to the scene, he was slapped. They were brought outside, and Cueno was handcuffed. Barangay officials arrived later. The police found marijuana inside a box on the first floor, which Cueno claimed did not belong to him, suggesting it might have belonged to his sister’s live-in partner, a known drug user.
The trial court convicted both accused in Criminal Case No. 37-95 and convicted Cueno in Criminal Case No. 38-95, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty in the first case and reclusion perpetua and a fine in the second. Only Ferdinand Cueno appealed.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the decision of the trial court.
The Court found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses credible and consistent. The buy-bust operation was legitimate, and the subsequent search was conducted under a valid warrant in the presence of barangay officials, with a receipt of property seized signed by the accused, his mother, the police, and the officials. The defense of denial and frame-up was deemed weak and self-serving, especially since no ill-motive on the part of the police officers was proven. The Court held that in the absence of proof of any odious intent by the police, their testimony would not be overcome by an uncorroborated claim of frame-up. The confiscated drugs were positively identified and tested as marijuana. The penalties imposed were within the range prescribed by law, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659 , following the ruling in People vs. Simon.