GR 73725; (November, 1992) (Digest)
G.R. No. 73725 November 13, 1992
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. WINSTON GONZALES, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
Winston Gonzales and Rebecca Ramos were charged with selling marijuana in violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act. After trial, Ramos was acquitted, but Gonzales was convicted. The prosecution evidence established that on August 22, 1985, a buy-bust team was dispatched to Barbosa, Quiapo, Manila, to entrap a reported pusher. The team included Pfc. Reynaldo Jaylo and Pat. Jesus Gesolgon, who acted as the poseur-buyer using marked money (a P20 and a P10 bill initialed by Lt. Lazarte). At Gonzales’s house, Gesolgon witnessed Gonzales selling a marijuana stick to two individuals, Edgar Rosal and Fredisbindo Valenzuela. Gesolgon then gave Gonzales the marked money in exchange for 12 sticks of marijuana. Upon Gesolgon’s signal, the team arrested Gonzales, who attempted to flee. The team recovered the marked money from Gonzales’s wallet and confiscated a plastic bag containing marijuana from his room, along with the marijuana stick being smoked by Rosal and Valenzuela. Gonzales denied the charges, testifying that he was arrested without any marijuana found on him, and raised issues regarding the identification of evidence and inconsistencies in the prosecution’s testimonies.
ISSUE
Whether the conviction of Winston Gonzales for selling marijuana is valid based on the evidence presented.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the prosecution proved Gonzales’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt through credible testimonies of the buy-bust team members, who had no ulterior motive. The minor inconsistencies in the testimonies of Gesolgon and Jaylo did not impair the essential veracity of the prosecution’s case. The marked money was properly identified by Gesolgon and Jaylo, and the plastic bag containing marijuana, though not individually marked, was sufficiently identified by the attached paper bearing Gonzales’s name, the date, time, and investigating officer’s name. The Court also rejected Gonzales’s claim that the trial court’s decision was constitutionally deficient, noting it clearly stated the facts and law. However, the Court modified the penalty by imposing a fine of P20,000.00, as mandated by Section 4 of Republic Act No. 6425 , in addition to the life imprisonment sentenced by the trial court. The appeal was dismissed, and the trial court’s decision was affirmed with modification.