G.R. No. 237355 , November 21, 2018
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angel Angeles y Arimbuyutan, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Two Informations were filed against accused-appellant Angel Angeles for violations of Sections 5 (sale) and 15 (use) of Republic Act No. 9165 . The prosecution alleged that on November 1, 2013, a buy-bust operation was conducted in Caloocan City. PO1 Aldrin Engracia acted as poseur-buyer and purchased two plastic sachets of shabu from Angeles using a marked Php500 bill. Upon consummation of the sale, Angeles was arrested, and the marked money was recovered from his pocket. The seized items were marked at the scene. An inventory was later conducted at the police station, and laboratory examination confirmed the substance was methamphetamine hydrochloride. Angeles tested positive for drug use.
The defense presented a different version. Angeles claimed he was sleeping inside his house when armed men entered, frisked him, and accused him of selling drugs. He was brought outside where a plastic sachet was shown to bystanders, falsely claiming it was recovered from him. He denied the sale and alleged he was framed. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty on both charges, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt for violations of Sections 5 and 15 of R.A. No. 9165 .

RULING

The Supreme Court ACQUITTED accused-appellant Angel Angeles. For the illegal sale charge, the Court found a broken chain of custody, which is fatal to the prosecution’s case. The law requires the immediate physical inventory and photographing of seized items to be conducted in the presence of the accused or his representative, a representative from the media and the Department of Justice, and any elected public official. The prosecution failed to establish compliance with these witness requirements. The police officers merely testified that an inventory was done at the station without specifying who the required witnesses were or justifying their absence. This constitutes a substantial gap in the chain of custody, casting doubt on the integrity and identity of the corpus delicti. Without the identity of the dangerous drug being established with moral certainty, conviction cannot stand.
Regarding the illegal use charge, the Court also acquitted Angeles. A positive drug test result alone is insufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 15. The prosecution must also prove the act of drug use through evidence other than the laboratory report. The prosecution failed to present any testimonial or object evidence showing the actual act of ingestion or use by the accused. Consequently, the guilt of the accused-appellant for both charges was not established beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption of innocence prevails, and he is ordered immediately released from detention unless held for another lawful cause.