G.R. No. 238870 . October 06, 2021.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ABDUL RACMAN OSOP OMAR AND EDDIE RASCAL Y SARAPIDA, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS.

FACTS

On February 13, 2013, in Panabo City, Davao del Norte, a buy-bust operation was conducted based on information that Abdul Racman Osop Omar (Omar) and Eddie Rascal y Sarapida (Rascal) were selling drugs. PO2 Noel V. Vildosola acted as the poseur-buyer, using a marked P1,000 bill. At the location, the asset introduced the officers to Omar and Rascal. PO2 Vildosola handed the marked money to Omar. Rascal then opened a belt bag containing several sachets, selected one, and gave it to Omar, who handed it to PO2 Vildosola. After the transaction, the officers arrested the accused. From Rascal, they recovered 79 more heat-sealed transparent sachets from his belt bag. The seized items were marked and inventoried at the scene in the presence of the accused, a DOJ representative, a media representative, and a barangay kagawad. The sachet from the sale weighed 0.1804 gram, and the 79 sachets from Rascal’s possession had a total weight of 6.3722 grams, all confirmed to be methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) by forensic examination. Two Informations were filed: one for illegal sale (Section 5, R.A. 9165) against both accused, and another for illegal possession (Section 11, R.A. 9165) against Rascal. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed frame-up, alleging they were arrested while looking for a family member who had eloped.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of the accused-appellants for violations of Sections 5 and 11 of Republic Act No. 9165 , despite alleged irregularities in the chain of custody of the seized dangerous drugs.

RULING

The appeal is denied. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution successfully established all elements of the crimes. For illegal sale under Section 5, it proved the transaction where the accused sold and delivered shabu to the poseur-buyer. For illegal possession under Section 11, it proved Rascal was in possession of 79 sachets of shabu without legal authority. The Court found the chain of custody was substantially complied with. The drugs were marked immediately at the place of arrest in the presence of the accused and the required witnesses (a DOJ representative, a media representative, and a barangay official). The forensic chemist confirmed the integrity and identity of the drugs from receipt through examination to presentation in court. The defense of frame-up was rejected for being unsubstantiated and inherently weak. The penalties imposed by the lower courts were affirmed: for Section 5 (Criminal Case No. CrC 63-2013), life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000 for each accused; for Section 11 (Criminal Case No. CrC 64-2013) against Rascal, imprisonment of 12 years and 1 day to 20 years and a fine of P300,000.