GR 247974; (July, 2020) (Digest)
G.R. No. 247974, July 13, 2020
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Peter Lopez y Canlas, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Peter Lopez y Canlas was charged with Illegal Sale and Illegal Use of Dangerous Drugs under Sections 5 and 15, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002). The prosecution’s version states that on March 30, 2014, a buy-bust operation was conducted in Iriga City. PO1 Jonard Buenaflor acted as poseur-buyer and purchased a plastic sachet of suspected shabu from Lopez for PHP 2,000. Upon the pre-arranged signal, Lopez was arrested. Representatives from the DOJ, media, and a barangay official were called as witnesses to the inventory. The seized item was marked, and subsequent laboratory examination confirmed the substance was methamphetamine hydrochloride. Lopez’s urine sample also tested positive for the same drug. The defense presented a different version, claiming Lopez was merely flagged down while on an errand to deliver money, that no drugs were recovered from him, and that the evidence was planted. He also claimed the water given to him for the urine test tasted unpleasant. The Regional Trial Court found Lopez guilty on both charges, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Regional Trial Court’s Judgment finding Lopez guilty beyond reasonable doubt for violations of Sections 5 and 15, Article II of R.A. No. 9165.
RULING
The Supreme Court PARTLY GRANTED the appeal. The conviction for Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs under Section 5 (Criminal Case No. IR-10559) was AFFIRMED. The conviction for Illegal Use of Dangerous Drugs under Section 15 (Criminal Case No. IR-10614) was REVERSED and SET ASIDE, and Lopez was ACQUITTED of this charge.
1. On the Illegal Sale Charge (Sec. 5): The Court found the prosecution successfully proved all elements of the crime and preserved the integrity of the corpus delicti. The buy-bust transaction was established through the credible testimony of PO1 Buenaflor. The chain of custody was substantially complied with: the item was immediately marked at the scene in the presence of the required witnesses (DOJ, media, and barangay representatives), and its integrity was maintained until laboratory testing. The defenses of denial and frame-up were unsubstantiated.
2. On the Illegal Use Charge (Sec. 15): The Court acquitted Lopez because the prosecution failed to prove compliance with the mandatory confirmatory test required by law. Section 15 of R.A. No. 9165 requires that a screening test must be confirmed by a confirmatory test conducted by an accredited drug testing laboratory. The prosecution only presented Chemistry Report No. DTC-081-2014, which was a screening test report. It did not present any evidence that a confirmatory test was conducted on Lopez’s urine sample as required. This failure created reasonable doubt as to his guilt for illegal use of dangerous drugs.