G.R. No. 223562 , September 04, 2019
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Lean Noel Dizon @ “Jingle”, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Lean Noel Dizon @ “Jingle” was charged with Violation of Section 5 (Illegal Sale) and Section 11 (Illegal Possession) of Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 . The charges stemmed from a buy-bust operation on December 5, 2010, in Siaton, Negros Oriental. The prosecution’s version, based on the testimonies of PDEA and police officers, stated that a buy-bust team was formed after receiving information about appellant’s drug peddling. PDEA Special Investigator 1 Claire Oledan acted as the poseur-buyer. Appellant sold her one sachet of shabu for a marked P500 bill. Upon the consummated sale signal, backup officers arrested appellant, from whom another sachet of shabu was recovered. The seized items were marked and inventoried at the scene in the presence of appellant, barangay officials, and a DOJ representative. The items were later examined and found positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride. The defense presented a different version, claiming appellant was arbitrarily arrested while outside his house, that the police officers planted the evidence, and that they tried to coerce him into becoming an asset.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant for illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in establishing the identity and integrity of the seized drugs and the legality of the warrantless arrest.

RULING

The Supreme Court ACQUITTED accused-appellant Lean Noel Dizon. The Court found that the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody over the seized dangerous drugs, which is crucial for proving the corpus delicti. Specifically, the Court noted the absence of a representative from the media during the initial inventory at the place of arrest, as required under Section 21 of RA 9165. While the law allows non-compliance under justifiable grounds, the prosecution did not offer any explanation for this absence nor prove that earnest efforts were made to secure a media representative. The subsequent signing of the inventory by a media representative at the NBI office did not cure the defect, as the initial inventory was already flawed. The integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were therefore compromised. Consequently, appellant’s guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court directed his immediate release from custody unless held for another lawful cause.