G.R. No. 184808 ; November 14, 2011
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ASMAD BARA y ASMAD, Appellant.

FACTS

After receiving information that appellant Asmad Bara y Asmad was selling drugs on M. Adriatico Street, Malate, Manila, SPO1 Rodolfo Ramos planned a buy-bust operation. PO1 Alexander delos Santos was designated as the poseur-buyer and was given two marked ₱100 bills. The team proceeded to the location. The informant identified the appellant to PO1 Delos Santos. The appellant approached, was introduced to PO1 Delos Santos as a buyer, and asked how much he wanted. PO1 Delos Santos replied “Two hundred pesos.” The appellant left to get his “stuff” from a nearby alley and returned to hand over one transparent plastic sachet containing crystalline substances. PO1 Delos Santos gave the marked money in exchange. PO1 Delos Santos then arrested the appellant, and the backup team assisted. The seized sachet was handed to team leader SPO1 Ramos. The appellant was informed of his rights and brought to the police station. At the station, the desk investigator marked the sachet with “AAB.” A request for laboratory examination was prepared, and the item was forwarded to the PNP Crime Laboratory. P/Insp. Maritess Mariano examined the specimen and found it positive for shabu. The prosecution charged the appellant with illegal sale of shabu under Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 . The appellant denied the charge, claiming he was arrested while resting at home. The RTC convicted him and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a ₱500,000 fine. The CA affirmed the RTC decision.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of the appellant for violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (illegal sale of dangerous drugs) has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the appellant’s guilt has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court denied the appeal for lack of merit. All elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs were established: (1) the identity of the buyer (PO1 Delos Santos) and seller (appellant), the object (shabu), and consideration (₱200); and (2) the delivery of the drug and payment. The prosecution successfully proved the transaction occurred, and the corpus delicti (the seized shabu) was presented and identified in court. PO1 Delos Santos positively identified the appellant as the seller, and the forensic examination confirmed the substance was shabu. The chain of custody of the seized item was unbroken: from seizure by PO1 Delos Santos, to turnover to SPO1 Ramos, marking at the station as “AAB,” forwarding to the crime lab, examination by P/Insp. Mariano, and presentation in court. The integrity and evidentiary value of the drug were preserved. While there was a failure to strictly comply with Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 (regarding inventory and witness requirements), the defense did not question this non-compliance during trial or on appeal. Moreover, such non-compliance is not fatal if the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved, as was the case here. The CA decision affirming the RTC conviction was upheld.