G.R. No. 233533 , June 30, 2020
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JOEL LIMSON Y FERRER, JOEY C. MENESES AND CAMILO BALILA, Accused, JOEY MENESES Y CANO, Accused-Appellant

FACTS

Accused-appellant Joey Meneses y Cano, together with co-accused Joel Limson and Camilo Balila, was charged with violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) for the illegal sale of one marijuana brick weighing 950 grams and one heat-sealed plastic sachet containing 0.581 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) on December 11, 2013, in Urdaneta City, Pangasinan. During arraignment, all accused pleaded not guilty. Limson was later acquitted after his demurrer to evidence was granted, and Balila was acquitted by the trial court.
The prosecution’s version, based on police testimony, stated that a confidential informant (CI) reported Meneses’s drug activities. A test buy of marijuana from Meneses was conducted on November 28, 2013, which yielded a positive result. On December 11, 2013, the CI informed PO2 Marman Dela Cruz that Meneses wanted to meet. A buy-bust team was formed, with PO2 Dela Cruz as poseur-buyer. At the CB Mall Public Transport Terminal, Meneses alighted from an Elf truck, produced the marijuana brick and shabu, and offered them for sale. After PO2 Dela Cruz handed the buy-bust money to Balila as instructed, he arrested Meneses. The seized items were inventoried and photographed at the arrest site in the presence of a DOJ representative, a media representative, and a barangay kagawad. Forensic examination confirmed the items were marijuana and shabu.
The defense claimed they were falsely accused. Meneses testified that on December 11, 2013, he, Balila, Limson, and Anthony Guzman were checking their Elf truck’s tires when armed men approached, forced them to lie down, and planted the drugs. They were arrested, while Guzman was released after a payment. The defense alleged extortion by the police.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Meneses guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine of ₱500,000. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the RTC’s conviction of accused-appellant Joey Meneses for illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 .

RULING

The Supreme Court DISMISSED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Court of Appeals Decision. The Court held that all elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs were proven: (1) the identity of the buyer and seller, object, and consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and payment. The transaction was consummated when Meneses delivered the drugs to PO2 Dela Cruz upon receipt of payment. The defenses of denial and frame-up were rejected for lack of evidence of police ill motive. The Court also ruled that the chain of custody was properly preserved. The required witnesses were present during inventory and photographing at the arrest site. The integrity and identity of the seized drugs were maintained from confiscation to presentation in court. The findings of the trial court on witness credibility, affirmed by the CA, are entitled to great respect. Thus, Meneses’s guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt.