GR L 65647; (August, 1988) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-65647 August 30, 1988
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ERNESTO FLORES, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The prosecution’s case, based on the testimony of Sgt. Angel Nieves of the Constabulary Anti-Narcotics Unit (CANU), alleged that on August 21, 1980, a buy-bust operation was conducted in Balintawak, Quezon City. A confidential informer, Annalisa Santos, was given marked money to purchase marijuana. Sgt. Nieves testified that he observed from a distance as the accused, Ernesto Flores, arrived and delivered fifteen dried marijuana stalks to Santos in exchange for the money. Nieves then arrested Flores, confiscated the marked bills and the marijuana, which was later confirmed by the NBI to be marijuana. The defense presented a starkly different version. Flores testified that on the morning of that day, he was working as a painter and was merely buying food from a store when he was suddenly accosted, assaulted, and forced into a car. He claimed a plastic packet was placed in his pocket, he was brought to CANU headquarters, tortured, and forced to sign a confession.
ISSUE
The principal issues are: (1) the admissibility of the accused’s extrajudicial confession, and (2) whether the guilt of the accused for selling marijuana has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision and acquitted Ernesto Flores. On the first issue, the Court found the extrajudicial confession inadmissible. The advice of rights given to Flores was defective; it misleadingly stated that anything he said could be used for or against him in court, which improperly diluted the constitutional right against self-incrimination. More critically, the confession was obtained during custodial interrogation without the assistance of counsel, and there was no valid waiver of this right, rendering the confession void.
On the second and decisive issue, the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found the testimony of the sole eyewitness, Sgt. Nieves, to be unreliable and replete with material inconsistencies regarding the time of the operation and the marked money. The prosecution’s case was fatally weakened by its failure to present the confidential informer, Annalisa Santos, the alleged poseur-buyer and the only other eyewitness who could have directly corroborated the alleged sale. Without her testimony, the evidence did not morally certainty establish that Flores was engaged in selling marijuana at the time of his arrest. The Court emphasized that while it supports the government’s campaign against drugs, this campaign must respect constitutional rights, and the presumption of innocence must prevail where the evidence is insufficient. The totality of the circumstances negated a conviction.