G.R. No. 220022 June 19, 2017
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee vs. Wilton Alacdis y Anatil a.k.a. “Welton”, Accused-Appellant

FACTS

Accused-appellant Wilton Alacdis, along with two others at-large, was charged with the illegal sale, delivery, and transport of 110 kilograms of marijuana under R.A. 9165. The case stemmed from a buy-bust operation by PDEA-CAR agents. A poseur-buyer, SP02 Agbayani, negotiated a purchase of 107 kilograms of marijuana from the at-large accused, Lingbanan and Alacdis. On the day of the transaction, May 6, 2008, at Rizal Park in Baguio City, the at-large accused informed the poseur-buyer that they were sending appellant to deliver the drugs. Appellant arrived, confirmed the marijuana was in a taxi, and showed the bricks to SP02 Agbayani. Upon the pre-arranged signal, the back-up team arrested appellant and the taxi driver, confiscating five cartons containing marijuana bricks.
The defense presented a denial and frame-up. Appellant testified he was merely waiting for a friend in La Trinidad when the taxi driver, a neighbor, offered him a ride to Baguio. He claimed he was unaware of the contents of the taxi and was suddenly arrested at Rizal Park. He alleged he was forced to drink liquor by the agents after his arrest. The RTC and the CA convicted him of illegal sale. Appellant appealed, arguing the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that he was a mere innocent bystander.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming accused-appellant’s conviction for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of R.A. 9165.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the conviction from illegal sale to illegal delivery and transportation, but affirmed the penalty. The Court clarified that the elements of illegal sale are: (1) the identity of the buyer and seller, object, and consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment. The evidence established that appellant was not the seller but the courier or deliveryman. The negotiation and agreement on price were conclusively between the poseur-buyer and the at-large accused. Appellant’s role was limited to transporting and delivering the marijuana bricks to the poseur-buyer at the designated place. This constitutes the crime of illegal delivery and transportation under the same Section 5 of R.A. 9165, which penalizes the act of delivering or transporting dangerous drugs regardless of sale.
The Court found the prosecution evidence on appellant’s participation as the deliverer credible and consistent, overcoming his bare denial and implausible claim of being an unwitting passenger. The chain of custody over the seized drugs was also preserved. Consequently, appellant is guilty as principal by direct participation for the illegal delivery and transportation of 107 kilograms of marijuana. The penalty for this quantity under the law is life imprisonment and a fine of One Million Pesos (PhP1,000,000.00), which the Court imposed.