G.R. No. 227403. October 13, 2021.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. CHIH CHIEN YANG, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Chih Chien Yang was charged with illegal possession of 9.9 kilograms of Ketamine Hydrochloride under Section 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. On April 19, 2008, a police team implemented a search warrant at Yang’s residence in Parañaque City. After a chase, Yang was arrested near his village gate pursuant to a separate warrant of arrest. The police proceeded to his house, where, in the presence of barangay kagawads, they searched a locked room opened by Yang and recovered a white paper bag containing a plastic bag with a yellow SM plastic bag holding two transparent bags of a powdery white substance suspected to be Ketamine. A search of Yang’s vehicle yielded two traveling bags containing several plastic bags with white powdery substance. The items were marked at the scene. An inventory and photography were conducted, witnessed by the barangay kagawads, though Yang refused to sign the inventory receipt. The seized items were brought to Camp Crame, shown to a DOJ prosecutor, and then submitted to the PNP Crime Laboratory. Forensic examination confirmed that one of the specimens (marked EXH C-2 JENN 04-19-18) tested positive for Ketamine Hydrochloride. Yang presented a different version, claiming the evidence was planted and that the police demanded money for the dropping of the case.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of accused-appellant for violation of Section 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, despite alleged irregularities in the chain of custody of the seized drugs.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the conviction. The Court held that while strict compliance with Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 is desirable, the law excuses non-compliance under justifiable grounds. In this case, the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved. The marking was done immediately at the place of seizure in the presence of Yang and the barangay witnesses. The inventory and photography were conducted at the scene with the required witnesses. The seized items were then turned over to the investigating officer and subsequently to the forensic chemist for examination. The forensic report confirmed the substance was Ketamine, a dangerous drug. The quantity seized (9.9 kilograms) was of such enormous volume that the possibility of planting or contamination was negligible. The prosecution established an unbroken chain of custody, and Yang’s defense of frame-up and extortion was unsubstantiated. The Court emphasized that the procedural lapses, if any, did not impair the integrity of the evidence given the large quantity of drugs involved, which itself argues against the risk of evidence tampering.