G.R. No. 238517 , November 27, 2019
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Lung Wai Tang, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Lung Wai Tang, along with Tai On Cheung and Sek Hung Goh, was charged with illegal possession of 7918.90 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) under Section 16, Article III of R.A. No. 6425 , as amended. The Information alleged that on July 18, 2000, at Unit 310, SJB Condominium, Quezon City, they conspired to possess the said drugs without authority. The Philippine National Police (PNP) Narcotics Group, acting on information from foreign counterparts about the San Li Ong Triad’s drug trafficking, conducted surveillance on the group for about one and a half months. This surveillance included observing their movements and a successful test buy from Tai On Cheung. A search warrant was issued for Unit 310. During its implementation, police found eight plastic bags containing white crystalline substance under a bed. The items were marked, inventoried, and later confirmed by the PNP Crime Laboratory to be shabu. Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed he was arrested elsewhere and brought to the condominium unit, where police instructed him to open the door upon a knock, after which they served the warrant. He alleged the evidence was planted.

ISSUE

Whether the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals correctly convicted accused-appellant Lung Wai Tang for illegal possession of dangerous drugs.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is affirmed. The Supreme Court held that all elements of illegal possession of dangerous drugs were proven beyond reasonable doubt. Accused-appellant was found in constructive possession of the shabu, as he was present inside Unit 310 during the search, had control over the premises (having opened the door), and the drugs were discovered under a bed in the unit. His denial and claim of being framed were unsubstantiated and could not prevail over the positive testimonies of the police officers. The Court found no violation of his constitutional rights, noting that his signature on the seized items was for inventory purposes and not a custodial investigation requiring counsel. The chain of custody was adequately established from seizure, marking, inventory, laboratory examination, to presentation in court, with no evidence of tampering. The presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty by the police officers stands in the absence of proof to the contrary. The appeal was dismissed for lack of merit, and the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Php500,000.00 were sustained.