G.R. No. 98703 September 14, 1993
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DANILO CABISADA Y HOYOHOY, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Danilo Cabisada y Hoyohoy was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Ozamiz City for violating Section 4, Article II of Republic Act No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972) and sentenced to life imprisonment, a fine of P20,000.00, accessory penalties, and costs. The information alleged that on October 11, 1989, at about 3:15 p.m. in Ozamiz City, he willfully and unlawfully sold and delivered marijuana cigarettes without authority of law.
The prosecution evidence established that on October 11, 1989, a buy-bust operation was conducted by PC Narcotics agents Sgts. Reynaldo Miguel, Bernardino Mugot, Rolando Malagayo, and C1C Emilio de Guzman at the gate of the Bliss Project near the public market in Ozamiz City, based on reliable information about rampant marijuana sales. A civilian informer, Percival Raterta, acted as poseur-buyer. Before the operation, Sgt. Miguel gave Raterta a marked ten-peso bill (SN-GJ279302), which was recorded in their logbook. The narcotics agents positioned themselves strategically. Raterta approached accused-appellant, gave him the marked money, and in return received six handrolled marijuana cigarettes. After the transaction, Raterta immediately left for the PC headquarters. The narcotics agents then moved to arrest accused-appellant, who ran inside the public market but was apprehended after a chase and subdued with reasonable force as he resisted arrest. A body search revealed the marked ten-peso bill in his pocket. The six sticks were turned over to Sgt. Miguel and later confirmed to be marijuana by NBI examination. Testimonies from poseur-buyer Raterta and Sgt. Mugot corroborated the sale. It was also revealed that accused-appellant had been previously arrested on May 23, 1989, for possession of marijuana cigarettes and was granted conditional immunity to act as an informer, but he failed to comply, leading to a pending criminal case against him.

ISSUE

Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution is sufficient to sustain the conviction of accused-appellant for the illegal sale of marijuana beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the trial court in toto, dismissing the appeal. The Court found the evidence for the prosecution, particularly the testimonies of the poseur-buyer and the arresting narcotics agents, to be credible and sufficient to prove accused-appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defense of alleged ill-motive or retaliation for accused-appellant’s failure to provide information as a conditional immunity grantee was not substantiated by adequate proof. Prosecution witnesses are presumed to have acted in the regular performance of official duty and are entitled to full faith and credence. The prerogative of the PC Narcotics Team in choosing the poseur-buyer and conducting the operation was upheld.