G.R. No. 212819 , November 28, 2018
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marlon Casco y Villamer, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Marlon Casco was charged with illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5 of RA 9165. The prosecution alleged that on July 21, 2008, a buy-bust operation was conducted in Quezon City where PO1 Kalbi, acting as poseur-buyer, purchased a sachet of shabu from Casco for PHP 500. Upon consummation of the sale, the arresting team apprehended Casco. The seized item was marked and later submitted for laboratory examination, which yielded positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
The defense presented a starkly different version. Casco testified that he was at home with his family when armed men, including PO1 Kalbi, forcibly entered, handcuffed him, and brought him to Camp Karingal. There, he was allegedly demanded PHP 200,000 for his release. His daughter and two neighbors corroborated his claim, testifying that the arrest was made without a warrant and that no buy-bust operation occurred in their presence.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs, particularly in establishing the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized item.

RULING

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused-appellant. The prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody, which is crucial in proving the corpus delicti in drugs cases. The Court emphasized that under Section 21 of RA 9165, the apprehending team must immediately conduct a physical inventory and photograph the seized items in the presence of the accused or his representative, a media representative, a DOJ representative, and an elected public official. The records showed a complete absence of compliance with these witness requirements. The prosecution did not offer any justifiable ground for this non-compliance, nor did it present any of the required witnesses to testify on the integrity of the seized drug. The testimony of PO1 Kalbi alone was insufficient to prove that the item seized was the same one presented in court. The presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty cannot prevail over the constitutional presumption of innocence and the prosecution’s failure to meet the stringent requirements of the law. Consequently, the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti were compromised, warranting acquittal on reasonable doubt.