G.R. No. 242132, September 25, 2019
NOR JELAMIN MUSA, IVAN USOP BITO, AND MONSOUR ABDULRAKMAN ABDILLA, PETITIONERS, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioners Nor Jelamin Musa, Ivan Usop Bito, and Monsour Abdulrakman Abdilla were charged with violating Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) for allegedly transporting 18.4349 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride (“shabu”) from Pagalungan, Maguindanao to Barangay Tibanban, Governor Generoso, Davao Oriental on July 22, 2014. The prosecution’s case was based on a confidential tip about a white multi-cab (plate number NBD-279, marked “Jarus Jeth”) transporting drugs. A police checkpoint was established. The described vehicle approached but then stopped and changed direction before reaching the checkpoint. Police gave chase and found the vehicle parked near a hut, with petitioners standing outside it. Upon apprehension, Abdilla was found clutching and subsequently surrendered one plastic sachet of shabu. The seized item was marked, inventoried in the presence of required witnesses (a vice-mayor, a barangay kagawad, and a media representative), and photographed. Laboratory examination confirmed the substance was shabu. Petitioners denied the charges, claiming they were merely waiting to catch fish when police apprehended them at gunpoint and found no drugs on them. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted petitioners, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA).

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in upholding the conviction of petitioners for illegal transport of dangerous drugs.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition and REVERSED the convictions. Petitioners were ACQUITTED.
The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the essential element of “transport” under RA 9165, defined as “to carry or convey from one place to another.” The evidence was insufficient to establish that petitioners were the persons transporting the drugs in the multi-cab from Maguindanao to Davao Oriental. Critical gaps in the prosecution’s evidence included: (1) No witness positively identified petitioners as the passengers inside the multi-cab when it evaded the checkpoint; they were first seen only after the chase, already outside the parked vehicle. (2) The confidential information did not describe the vehicle’s occupants. (3) The alleged point of origin (Pagalungan, Maguindanao) was not proven, as no evidence showed the vehicle came from there. The mere possession of drugs, absent proof of movement from one location to another, does not constitute “transport.”
Furthermore, the Court found a broken chain of custody of the seized drugs, which compromised their integrity as evidence. The prosecution did not adequately account for the handling of the evidence between its seizure and its delivery to the forensic chemist. PO3 Molejon, who received the sachet at the scene, did not testify to explain his custody. The Request for Laboratory Examination was prepared and received a day after the seizure, but the testimony did not establish who had custody during this interim period or how the evidence was preserved. These lapses, unexcused by any justifiable ground, created reasonable doubt on the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti.
Due to the prosecution’s failure to prove the element of transport and to establish an unbroken chain of custody beyond reasonable doubt, the Court reversed the lower courts’ decisions and ordered the acquittal of all petitioners.