GR 199735; (October, 2012) (Digest)
G.R. No. 199735 ; October 24, 2012
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ASIA MUSA y PINASALO, ARA MONONGAN y PAPAO, FAISAH ABAS y MAMA, and MIKE SOLALO y MILOK, Accused-Appellants.
FACTS
An information charged accused-appellants with violating Section 5, Article II of R.A. 9165 for selling dangerous drugs. The prosecution’s case, anchored on the testimony of PO1 Rey Memoracion, established that a buy-bust operation was conducted on June 1, 2004, in Taguig City. Acting as poseur-buyer, PO1 Memoracion, accompanied by an informant, met with Abas and Solano at a mall. They informed him they had no drugs but could take him to their supplier, Musa. The group proceeded to a condominium where Musa and Monongan were located. Musa handed a plastic sachet of shabu to Memoracion, who then gave the pre-arranged signal. The back-up team arrested the appellants, recovered the marked money from Monongan, and seized the sachet, which later tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
The defense consisted of denial and alibi. Musa claimed she was at a friend’s house discussing travel plans when police barged in. Monongan alleged she was at her aunt’s unit washing clothes and was arrested during an unwarranted search. Solano stated he merely accompanied his cousin Abas to the mall. They collectively denied any drug transaction and claimed the charges were fabricated.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of accused-appellants for illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The elements for illegal sale of shabu were all present: (1) the identity of the buyer and seller, object, and consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment. The detailed testimony of PO1 Memoracion, corroborated by PO1 Arago, clearly established the consummated sale where Musa handed the shabu to the poseur-buyer in exchange for the marked money, with Monongan counting the payment. The defense of denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification by the police officers. The Court found no ill motive for the officers to falsely testify.
Regarding the chain of custody, the Court ruled it was sufficiently established. PO1 Memoracion immediately marked the seized sachet at the scene with “APM” (Aisa Pinasilo Musa). He then personally delivered it to the crime laboratory for examination, which confirmed the substance was shabu. While the ideal procedure under Section 21 of R.A. 9165 was not followed to the letter—specifically, the lack of an inventory and photographs at the place of seizure—the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized item were preserved. The marking at the scene constituted the initial link in the chain and ensured the sachet’s identity. The prosecution satisfactorily accounted for the custody of the evidence from seizure to laboratory analysis, overcoming the presumption of regularity in the officers’ performance of duty. Thus, the guilt of all accused-appellants was proven beyond reasonable doubt.