G.R. No. 240430 . July 06, 2020.
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Jaymar V. Anicoy, Accused-Appellant, XXX,* Defendant (Minor—Pleaded Guilty).

FACTS

Accused-appellant Jaymar V. Anicoy, together with a minor (XXX), was charged with violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs). The Information alleged that on August 9, 2013, in Davao del Norte, they conspired to sell six packs of dried marijuana fruiting tops (weighing 17.1112 grams) to PO1 Tony B. Rubion, a poseur-buyer, for a marked P200.00 bill. Anicoy pleaded not guilty, while the minor pleaded guilty. The prosecution presented PO1 Rubion, who testified that a buy-bust operation was conducted based on a tip. He acted as poseur-buyer, with SPO4 Galo as backup. At the target area, Anicoy handed him two packs of marijuana. Upon PO1 Rubion’s request for other stocks, Anicoy called XXX, who brought four additional packs. PO1 Rubion gave the marked money to Anicoy, then gave the pre-arranged signal, leading to their arrest. The six packs were marked at the place of arrest in the presence of Anicoy, XXX, and representatives from the media, the Department of Justice, and an elected public official. An inventory and photography were conducted at the police station. The items were delivered to the crime laboratory, where they tested positive for marijuana. The defense presented Anicoy, who claimed he was merely waiting for a ride when arrested, denied selling drugs, and alleged a frame-up. He testified that SPO4 Galo arrested him and that the drugs were recovered from XXX’s house.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Anicoy’s conviction for Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs.

RULING

The Supreme Court DISMISSED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court found that the prosecution established all elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs: (1) the identity of the buyer and seller, object, and consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and payment. The buy-bust operation was legitimate, and PO1 Rubion’s testimony was credible and consistent. The Court upheld the finding that the chain of custody was duly preserved. The marking was done immediately at the place of arrest in the presence of the accused and the required witnesses, and the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were maintained through to their laboratory examination and presentation in court. Anicoy’s defenses of denial and frame-up were unsubstantiated and could not prevail over the positive identification by the police officer. The Court noted that the Information and evidence pertained to the sale of two packs (weighing 6.3685 grams) for the marked money, constituting the corpus delicti of the sale. The other four packs were seized after the sale and should have been the subject of a separate charge for possession, but this did not affect Anicoy’s conviction for the sale. The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00 was affirmed.