G.R. No. 94337 January 27, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. UTOH LAKIBUL y DAUD, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On November 8, 1988, an Information was filed charging Utoh Lakibul y Daud with violating Section 4, Article II of Republic Act No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act) for unlawfully selling two wrappers of dried marijuana to PO2 Manuel S. Alarcon. The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution’s evidence established that on November 6 and 7, 1988, NARCOM agents conducted surveillance on a suspected drug pusher in Lower Calarian, Zamboanga City. On November 8, a buy-bust operation was formed with PO2 Alarcon as the poseur-buyer. Using two marked five-peso bills, PO2 Alarcon approached the accused, expressed his desire to buy marijuana, and in exchange for the money, received two newspaper-wrapped articles from the accused. Upon confirming the contents were marijuana, Alarcon gave the pre-arranged signal, leading to the accused’s arrest. The marked money was recovered from the accused, and laboratory tests confirmed the articles were marijuana. The accused presented a different version, claiming he was a fish vendor who was arbitrarily arrested without any buy-bust transaction taking place. The Regional Trial Court convicted the accused, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a P20,000.00 fine.

ISSUE

The main issues raised on appeal are: (1) whether the trial court erred in admitting Exhibit “F” (a marked five-peso bill) due to alleged discrepancies in its serial number; (2) whether the trial court erred in not believing the testimony of the accused and his witnesses; and (3) whether the trial court erred in relying on the prosecution’s evidence instead of weighing it in favor of the accused.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision. On the first issue, the Court found no error in admitting Exhibit “F,” as the testimony of PO2 Alarcon clearly identified the marked bills by their serial numbers, and any minor discrepancy was inconsequential. The Court further held that the crime was consummated upon the delivery of the marijuana, regardless of the marked money. On the second and third issues, the Court upheld the trial court’s findings on credibility, emphasizing that such findings are entitled to great weight and respect on appeal. The trial court correctly gave more credence to the prosecution witnesses due to their sincerity, the lack of ill motive on the part of the NARCOM agents, and the substantive consistency of their testimonies. The alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence were not substantial enough to cast doubt on the essential fact that the accused was caught in flagrante selling marijuana during a valid buy-bust operation. The conviction was affirmed in toto.