GR 181422; (September, 2010) (Digest)
G.R. No. 181422 ; September 15, 2010
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ARNEL BABANGGOL y MACAPIA, CESAR NARANJO y RIVERA and EDWIN SAN JOSE y TABING, Accused. ARNEL BABANGGOL y MACAPIA and CESAR NARANJO y RIVERA, Appellants.
FACTS
The accused were charged with selling 295.8 grams of shabu in a buy-bust operation at Coastal Mall, Parañaque City. The prosecution, through PO2 Windel Alfonso, testified that a police informant arranged a drug deal. Alfonso acted as poseur-buyer, met with appellants Babanggol and Naranjo, and was later introduced to co-accused Sumayan and San Jose, who handed over a paper bag containing the drugs. Upon receiving the boodle money, Alfonso signaled the arrest. The seized substance was examined and confirmed to be methamphetamine hydrochloride. The defense presented a frame-up, claiming they were merely traveling to Cavite when arrested, beaten, and extorted by police officers along the coastal road.
ISSUE
The core issues are: (1) the sufficiency of evidence to prove the occurrence of a valid buy-bust operation and the integrity of the seized drugs, and (2) whether conspiracy was established, particularly for appellant Naranjo.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed Babanggol’s conviction but acquitted Naranjo. On the first issue, the Court found the prosecution evidence sufficient. Minor inconsistencies, such as a correction on the request for laboratory examination from “heat-sealed” to “self-sealing” plastic, did not impair the evidence’s integrity. PO2 Alfonso adequately explained the marking and chain of custody. The forensic chemist’s testimony confirmed the substance was shabu. The defense of frame-up was rejected for lacking clear and convincing evidence, whereas the police officers’ testimonies on the buy-bust were credible and consistent.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that conspiracy was not proven against Naranjo. Conspiracy requires proof of a common criminal design. The evidence showed Naranjo was merely the van driver, hired by San Jose. There was no showing he had prior knowledge of the drug transaction or participated in its negotiation and consummation. His presence at the scene and mere association with the other accused, without any act demonstrating shared criminal intent, were insufficient to establish conspiracy. Consequently, his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court modified the CA decision, acquitting Naranjo and ordering his release, while affirming Babanggol’s conviction.