Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1995 > March 1995 Decisions > G.R. No. 101338 March 20, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. CRISALITO A. TABARNO, ET AL.:

KAPUNAN, J.:

In a decision dated March 1, 1991, rendered by the Regional Trial Court of Cebu, Branch 21, Crisalito Tabarno y Agente and Luis Gocotano were found guilty of drug trafficking, i.e., selling marijuana cigarettes, in violation of Section 4, Article II, in relation to Article IV of Republic Act 6425, as amended (the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972). They were each sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and pay a fine of P25,000.00 and the costs. 1

The information dated January 10, 1990 against them reads as follows:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary

That on or about the 3rd day of January 1990 about 7:00 p.m., in the City of Cebu, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, conniving, confederating and mutually helping with (sic) each other, with deliberate intent and without authority of law, did then and there sell and/or deliver to a poseur buyer six (6) sticks of marijuana cigarettes, or Indian hemp, a prohibited drug for a consideration of P10.00, in violation of Sec. 4, Art. II in relation to Art. IV of RA 6425. 2

Upon arraignment on February 27, 1990, Accused Crisalito Tabarno entered a plea of not guilty. The other accused, Luis Gocotano, was arrested and arraigned five months later.

The evidence on record shows that in the evening of January 3, 1990, a three-man team from the Narcotics Command's (NARCOM) 7th Narcotics Unit was dispatched to Barangay Nivel in Busay, Cebu City, to conduct a buy-bust operation on account of reports of drug-trafficking in the area. The team, composed of Sgts. Ricardo Inding, Hermes Recla and Ibrahim Muhammadshaid, arrived in the area of operations at around 7:00 o'clock in the evening of the same day. Sgt. Inding positioned himself in a dark place beside the barangay chapel, about ten (10) meters away from the spot where Sgts. Recla and Muhammadshaid were hiding. nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Moments later, somebody (who was later identified as the accused Crisalito Tabarno) approached Inding and asked him what he was doing. Inding told Tabarno that he wanted to buy marijuana sticks to use at a disco party. Tabarno told him that his selling price for marijuana was P5.00 for three sticks. They agreed that Tabarno would deliver to Inding six (6) marijuana sticks worth P10.00. Tabarno told Inding to wait a while because he would look for a friend who had a supply of the drug. Moments later, Tabarno came back with another person, later identified as the appellant, Luis Gocotano. Holding the sticks of marijuana, Tabarno demanded payment from Inding, who handed him a ten-peso bill.

After making certain that the sticks contained real marijuana, Inding pulled a handkerchief from his pocket (which was the pre-arranged signal for Sgts. Recla and Muhammadshaid to close in on the Suspects). Sgts. Recla and Muhammadshaid rushed in and held Tabarno by the hand. Gocotano, who had seen the two operatives approaching, quickly fled with the "marked" money. 3

Tabarno was brought to the NARCOM headquarters and the marijuana sticks were turned over to Criminal Investigation Command (CIC) investigator, Jesus Ceballos. Gocotano was arrested five (5) months later, on May 26, 1990. He pleaded not guilty at his arraignment.

The evidence for the prosecution consisted of the testimonies of Sgt. Ricardo Inding, Lt. Myrna Areola, Sgt. Hermes Recla, all members of the 7th Narcotics Command team, who unanimously testified on how the buy-bust operation in Nivel was carried out. The defense presented Juanito Constantino and the two accused as witnesses in their own behalf. Gocotano's defense was alibi. He claimed that during the evening in question, he was in Tangke, Talisay, to see one Bob Constantino because he wanted to be an extra driver of Bob's tricycle, but he was instead brought to the barangay hall by a tanod on suspicion of being a thief. On the other hand, Tabarno claimed that the lawmen who arrested him only wanted to frame him by asking him to point to Gocotano as the seller of prohibited drugs in the Nivel neighborhood. nadchanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

As previously stated, the lower court rendered judgment on March 1, 1990 finding both men guilty, as conspirators, of violating Section 4, Article II, in relation to Article IV of R.A. 6425, as amended, sentencing each of them to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P25,000.00 and to jointly and severally pay the costs. The confiscated marijuana cigarette sticks were ordered burned. 4

Both defendants appealed but only Gocotano filed an appellant's brief. Tabarno's appeal was dismissed on September 16, 1992 for failure to file his appellant's brief within the extended period which expired on March 9, 1992.

Gocotano ascribed the following errors to the trial court, namely:nadchanroblesvirtualawlibrary

1. that he was denied due process because the trial judge was biased and prejudiced; and

2. that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. 5

Appellant's allegation that the trial judge was biased and prejudiced against him is not well taken. It is a judge's prerogative and duty to ask clarificatory questions to ferret the truth when he believes the witness is lying. 6

As correctly observed by the Solicitor General in his brief for the People, "there was no showing that the judge had an interest, personal or otherwise, in the prosecution of the case at bar. He is therefore presumed to have acted regularly and in the manner to preserve the ideal of the

Back to Home | Back to Main