Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions


Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2012 > June 2012 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 195427 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF APPELLEE, VERSUS REMEDIOS CAPULE Y MADAYAG, ACCUSED-APPELLANT. :




FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 195427 : June 13, 2012]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF APPELLEE, VERSUS REMEDIOS CAPULE Y MADAYAG, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

Sirs/Mesdames:

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated 13 June 2012 which reads as follows:cralaw

"G.R. No. 195427 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff appellee, versus REMEDIOS CAPULE y MADAYAG, accused-appellant.

On appeal is the July 30, 2010 Decision[1] of the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the Decision[2] of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City convicting appellant Remedios Capule y Madayag of violating Sections 5 and 11, Article II of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

At the trial, prosecution witness PO1 Ronald Allan Mateo testified that on March 18, 2005, P/Supt. Napoleon Cuaton formed a team to conduct a buy-bust operation upon information given by a confidential informant that appellant was engaged in illegal drug trade. As the designated poseur-buyer, PO1 Mateo was given the buy-bust money which he marked with the initials "RAM." Then, they coordinated with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and proceeded to San Vicente, Camarin, Caloocan City. Upon reaching Macopa Street, the confidential informant pointed to the suspect's house and described her. PO1 Mateo went to the house, knocked at the door, and a woman who fitted the informant's description opened the door. PO1 Mateo told her, "Sis, pa-iskor naman." The suspect asked how much, to which he replied "dalawang piso lang." He handed her the marked money and was told to wait outside. When the suspect entered the house, PO1 Mateo saw two men and a woman using shabu. One was holding an aluminum foil and the other one was holding a tooter. Another person was holding an aluminum foil and a lighter.[3]

When the suspect returned, she already had with her three plastic sachets and asked PO1 Mateo to pick one. He took one from her hand and knew that it contained shabu. He then made the pre-arranged signal to the other officers by spitting. The suspect tried to close the door, but PO1 Mateo arrested her. He also confiscated the plastic sachets and the buy-bust money from the suspect, who was later identified as appellant Remedios Capule. The appellant and the confiscated plastic sachets were turned over to the investigator who marked the sachets in PO1 Mateo's presence.[4] Police officers Jose Martirez and Remegio Valderama, Jr. corroborated PO1 Mateo's testimony.[5] A forensic laboratory examination conducted by the Forensic Chemical Officer Albert S. Arturo of the PNP-NPD Crime Laboratory Office revealed that the contents of the plastic sachets confiscated from appellant yielded positive result for Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride or shabu.[6]

In her defense, appellant testified that on March 18, 2005, between 9:00 to 10:00 p.m. she was at their house putting her child to sleep when three men in civilian clothes knocked at the door and entered the house. They searched the house and told her to keep quiet. When she asked who they were looking for, the men did not respond. They continued to search the house but found nothing. She was then ordered to go outside on the pretext that their chief will ask her something. But once outside, they boarded a passenger jeep with other persons whom she did not know and roamed around the area for several hours still looking for someone. At around 2:00 a.m., they were brought to the police headquarters. At the Caloocan City Jail, she learned that the charges against her were related to illegal drugs and that the same is non-bailable.[7]

On January 6, 2009, the RTC rendered a decision finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt for violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The trial court imposed on her the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000 in Criminal Case No. C-72801, and the penalty of imprisonment of 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and a fine of P300,000 in Criminal Case No. C-72802.

The RTC gave credence to PO1 Mateo's detailed account of how the sale took place from the initial negotiation to the delivery of the dangerous drugs. It also held that what is material in the prosecution of an accused for an illegal sale or possession of dangerous drugs is the presentation in court of the corpus delicti as evidence. In this case, the plastic sachet containing shabu was positively identified by PO1 Mateo as the very same shabu appellant sold and delivered to him. Likewise, PO1 Mateo positively identified the plastic sachets he recovered from appellant.

Appellant appealed to the CA arguing that the arresting police officers failed to comply strictly with Section 21(1) of R.A. No. 9165, since there was no proof that they conducted an inventory of the confiscated items or even marked the same in her presence or the presence of her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ) or any elected official.

In a decision dated July 30, 2010, the CA dismissed the appeal. It held that the failure of the police officers to comply strictly with Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 is not fatal as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the confiscated items are properly preserved by the apprehending officers. Their noncompliance will not render an accused's arrest illegal nor result in the items seized from him becoming inadmissible. In this case, the CA found that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were properly preserved.

Appellant is now before this Court raising the main issue of whether the prosecution's evidence sufficiently established appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Our thorough review of the records and the parties' submissions lead us to conclude that the prosecution succeeded in that task.

Adherence to the guidelines under Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 relating to custody and disposition of confiscated or seized dangerous drugs accounts for a crucial link in the chain-of-custody rule. Section 21 provides that the apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and the DOJ, and any elected public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof.

However, it is further provided under Section 21 (a), Article II of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Rules of 2002, the implementing rules and regulations of R.A. No. 9165, that noncompliance with the prescribed procedures does not necessarily result in the conclusion that the identity of the seized drugs has been compromised so that an acquittal should follow as long as the prosecution can demonstrate that the integrity and evidentiary value of the evidence seized have been preserved.

This Court has, in many cases, held that while the chain of custody should ideally be perfect, in reality it is not, as it is almost always impossible to obtain an unbroken chain.[8] The most important factor is the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items as they will be used to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused.[9] Slight infractions or nominal deviations by the police from the prescribed method of handling the corpus delicti should not exculpate an otherwise guilty defendant.[10]

In the present case, there was substantial compliance with the law and the integrity and evidentiary value of the drugs seized from appellant was preserved. The chain of custody of the seized drugs subject was shown not to have been broken. The facts reveal that PO1 Mateo confiscated the dangerous drugs, as well as the marked money. Appellant was immediately arrested and brought to the police station for investigation where the sachets of suspected shabu were marked RCM-1, RCM-2 and RCM-3. From the time of appellant's arrest, the drugs and the marked money were in the possession of PO1 Mateo until he turned them over to the investigator, PO2 Randulfo S. Hipolito.[11] Immediately thereafter, the confiscated substance, with a letter of request for examination, was submitted to the PNP Crime Laboratory for examination to determine the presence of any dangerous drug.[12]  Per Physical Science Report No. D-108-05, the specimen submitted was found positive for methylamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug.[13] In other words, the prosecution presented an unbroken chain of custody for the seized illegal drugs.cralaw

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Court hereby AFFIRMS the July 30, 2010 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03821 affirming the trial court's judgment which found appellant Remedios Capule y Madayag guilty of the offenses charged.

With costs against the accused-appellant.

SO ORDERED." PERLAS-BERNABE, J., acting member per S.O. No. 1227 dated 30 May 2012.

  Very truly yours,

  (Sgd.) EDGAR O. ARICHETA
Division Clerk of Court

Endnotes:


[1] Rollo, pp. 2-21. Penned by Associate Justice Vicente S.E. Veloso and concurred in by Associate Justices Francisco P. Acosta and Samuel H. Gaerlan. The Decision was rendered in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03821.

[2] CA rollo, pp. 17-29. Penned by Judge Aurelio R. Ralar, Jr.

[3] TSN, October 6, 2006, pp. 5-15.

[4] Id. at 16-21.

[5] TSN, November 17, 2006, pp. 3-19; TSN, March 16, 2007, pp. 4-16.

[6] Records, p. 13.

[7] TSN, January 28, 2008, pp. 3-14.

[8] Asiatico v. People, G.R. No. 195005, September 12, 2011, 657 SCRA 443, 451- 452.

[9] People v. Campomanes, G.R. No. 187741, August 9, 2010, 627 SCRA 494, 507.

[10] People v. Sultan, G.R. No. 187737, July 5, 2010, 623 SCRA 542, 552.

[11] Records, p. 6.

[12] Id. at 4.

[13] Id. at 5.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






June-2012 Jurisprudence                 

  • [A.C. No. 7565 : June 13, 2012] MILA C. ARCHE v. ATTY. SOFRONIO CLAVECILLA, JR.

  • [G.R. No. 195193 : June 13, 2012] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VERSUS JUANITO METRE, JR. A.K.A. "LUCIO", APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 190316 : June 13, 2012] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VERSUS ZALDY C. RAFER @ SALVADOR RAFER, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 195427 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF APPELLEE, VERSUS REMEDIOS CAPULE Y MADAYAG, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 181427 : June 13, 2012] JOMIL ENTERPRISES, INC. v. SPOUSES GLORIA AND JULIAN C. CARGULLO

  • [G.R. No. 171243 : June 13, 2012] SPOUSES ISAGANI CASTRO AND DIOSDADA CASTRO v. CONCORDIA BARTOLOME AND VICTORIA BARTOLOME

  • [G.R. No. 195775 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MARITES ROBLES Y LARIOS

  • [G.R. No. 195526 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROLANDO ALBURO AND MICHAEL CARVAJAL ACCUSED; ROLANDO ALBURO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 199206 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. OMAR WANDAY Y AMPASO

  • [G.R. No. 192548 : June 13, 2012] ANTONIO T. CHU v. SPOUSES ALFRED & LAUREANA ESTOE, FELIX GRAVIDEZ, ALFREDO GRAVIDEZ, ANGELO VIOLENA, ARACELI SORIA AND FRANCISCO CALONGE

  • [G.R. No. 175228 : June 13, 2012] ALFREDO M. ABIERTAS v. JOSE C. LATORRE

  • [G.R. No. 172899 : June 13, 2012] NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. HEIRS OF ZACARIAS ALICANDO, REPRESENTED BY BERNARDINA ALICANDO, ADMINISTRATOR

  • [A.M. No. P-10-2870 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 09-3235-P) : June 13, 2012] PRESTIDIO HAIR SALON CO., REPRESENTED BY MARITA L. ESTABALAYA v. EFREN P. LUNA, SHERIFF III, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 37, QUEZON CITY.

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-12-2315 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 09-3309-RTJ) : June 13, 2012] ALAN F. PAGUIA v. JUDGE LEOPOLDO MARIO P. LEGAZPI, PRESIDING JUDGE, ALEXANDER A. RIVERA, CLERK OF COURT, AND MA. THERESA V. RODRIGUEZ, ALL OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 49, PUERTO PRINCESA CITY.

  • [G.R. No. 199398 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. GEORGE VELO Y BALBAS

  • [G.R. No. 199220 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ISMAIL DALAMBAN MAGDATU

  • [G.R. No. 175016 : June 13, 2012] BANCO DE ORO UNIVERSAL BANK v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • [G.R. No. 189103 : June 13, 2012] PRIMITIVO R. DOMINGO, JR., TERESA D. SANDERS, DANILO R. DOMINGO, IRENEO R. DOMINGO, ROSARIO DOMINGO-LACSON, LORETA DOMINGO-PANIS, MARY ANN R. DOMINGO, AMADOR R. DOMINGO, LYDIA T. DOMINGO, MICHELLE D. DETITA, SERGIO T. DOMINGO, JR. AND JENNILYN T. DOMINGO v. ARNULFO MANZON, AMELIA MANZON-PANGANIBAN, ORLANDO MANZON, ADORACION MANZON-PESTANO, MILAGROS MANZON-TOLENTINO, RIZALINA MANZON-MARZAN, QUIRINO MANZON, FELICISIMA MANZON-SANTIAGO AND BENITA MANZON-TINIO

  • [G.R. No. 181609 : June 13, 2012] ASIAN TERMINALS, INC. v. PHILAM INSURANCE CO., INC.

  • [G.R. No. 201412 : June 13, 2012] HENRY DEMANDACO v. FRAILENE A. DEMANDACO AND MELBA D. LEGASA

  • [G.R. No. 181609 : June 13, 2012] ASIAN TERMINALS, INC. v. PHILAM INSURANCE CO., INC.

  • [G.R. No. 201412 : June 13, 2012] HENRY DEMANDACO v. FRAILENE A. DEMANDACO AND MELBA D. LEGASA

  • [G.R. No. 198790 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JONIE ORCALES Y LANAGA

  • [G.R. No. 166461 : June 13, 2012] HEIRS OF LORENZO AND CARMEN VIDAD AND AGVID CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. v. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 188850 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JUANITO MONTES Y CABONILAS

  • [G.R. No. 182524 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ALFREDO PINEDA Y BORJA

  • [G.R. No. 196008 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MOHAMAD IBRAHIM Y MALIGA

  • [G.R. No. 194462 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. GILFREDO FAUSTINO Y MENDOZA

  • [G.R. No. 198017 : June 13, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. EMMANUEL RAMOS Y CARBONEL ALIAS "ENGOL"

  • [G.R. No. 199101 : June 13, 2012] MA. REGINA DELARMA v. COURT OF APPEALS, SPOUSES MERLYN S. UY AND GOHOC P. UY

  • [G.R. No. 189947 : June 13, 2012] MANILA PAVILION HOTEL, OWNED AND OPERATED BY ACESITE (PHILS.) HOTEL CORPORATION V. HENRY DELADA

  • [G.R. No. 200569 : June 13, 2012] PACIFICO MENDIGO Y GALLENO, PETITIONER, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 199068 : June 13, 2012] LAUREANA P. BORRES v. SISTER ANGELINA M. FERNANDO

  • [G.R. No. 194070 : June 18, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. BENJAMIN GALICIA Y ROBLAS

  • [G.R. No. 188726 : June 18, 2012] CRESENCIO C. MILLA v. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND MARKET PURSUITS, INC. REPRESENTED BY CARLO V. LOPEZ.

  • [G.R. No. 192085 : June 18, 2012] CARIDAD SEGARRA SAZON v. LETECIA VASQUEZ-MENANCIO, REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY-IN-FACT EDGAR S. SEGARRA.

  • [UDK-14595 : June 18, 2012] LOLITO BORJA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND ELIZABETH L. URBANO.

  • [G.R. No. 196971 : June 18, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. LOURDES AGAPOR Y AZUELA, A.K.A. "ODETTE".

  • [G.R. No. 196985 : June 18, 2012] ALEXANDER G. CASTRO, PETITIONER, VERSUS GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS) AND HONORABLE ROBERT VERGARA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER OF GSIS, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 201183 : June 18, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MARIANO BERSABE

  • [A.C. No. 8178 : June 18, 2012] NAPOLEON CHIU v. ATTY. ALAN A. LEYNES

  • [A.M. No. 11-8-151-RTC : June 19, 2012] RE: BURNING OF THE HALL OF JUSTICE, IPIL, ZAMBOANGA SIBUGAY

  • [A.M. No. 14265-Ret. : June 19, 2012] RE: SURVIVORSHIP PENSION BENEFITS UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9946 OF JUDGE ERNESTO D. MERCADO, RTC, BRANCH 3, BATANGAS CITY; JUDGE SIMON D. ENCINAS, RTC, BRANCH 51, SORSOGON CITY; JUDGE PORFIRIO A. PARIAN, RTC, BRANCH 33, ILOILO CITY; JUDGE SANTIAGO F. BAUTISTA, JR., MTCC, SAN JOSE CITY, NUEVA ECIJA; AND JUDGE PEDRO R. SUYAT, MCTC, NATIVIDAD, PANGASINAN

  • [A.M. No. P-04-1924 : June 19, 2012] OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. JUSTAFINA HOPE T. LAYA, ET AL; FLAVIANO D. BALGOS, JR., ET AL. VS. JUSTAFINA HOPE T. LAYA, ET AL.

  • [A.M. No. 14297- Ret. : June 19, 2012] RE: APPLICATION FOR SURVIVORSHIP PENSION BENEFITS PURSUANT TO REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9946 OF MRS. NORA L. HERRERA, SURVIVING SPOUSE OF THE LATE HON. MANUEL C. HERRERA, FORMER ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS

  • [A.C. No. 3375 : June 20, 2012] FEDENCIO BALICOLON v. ATTY. LAWRENCE CORDOVA

  • [G.R. No. 170046 : June 20, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MAXIMO A. BORJE, JR., ET AL.

  • [A.C. No. 6998 : June 20, 2012] CLARITA O. SANTIANO v. ATTY. TEODULO PUNZALAN.

  • [G.R. No. 192904 : June 20, 2012] ELADIA LIMBO v. ELIZABETH MYRNA AGRIPA-MANEGDEG, IN HER CAPACITY AS SURVIVING HEIR AND AS SUBSTITUTE FOR DECEASED SPS. MARCELO AGRIPA AND LYDIA AGRIPA.

  • [G.R. No. 201560 : June 20, 2012] DR. JOSE CESAR CABRERA v. AMECO CONTRACTORS RENTAL, INC.

  • [G.R. No. 200939 : June 25, 2012] SPOUSES CARMELO, JR. AND ELIZABETH AFRICA, PETITIONERS, VERSUS BANK OF COMMERCE, THE PURPORTED TRANSFEREE OF TRADERS ROYAL BANK, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.C. No. 6332 : June 26, 2012] RE: SUPREME COURT RESOLUTION DATED APRIL 28, 2003 IN G.R. NO. 145817 AND G.R. NO. 145822 (ATTY. MAGDALENO M. PEÑA, RESPONDENT)

  • [G.R. No. 139472 : June 26, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. DELFIN S. RODRIGO

  • [A.M. No. 12-6-110-RTC : June 26, 2012] RE: REQUEST OF CLERK OF COURT CLARENCE G. CHERREGUINE, RTC, BRANCH 42, BALANGIGA, EASTERN SAMAR, TO APPEAR AS COUNSEL FOR HIS FATHER

  • [A.M. No. 12-5-89-RTC : June 26, 2012] RE: QUERY OF EXECUTIVE JUDGE JOCELYN SUNDIANG DILIG, RTC, PUERTO PRINCESA CITY, AS TO WHO MAY RESOLVE THE PETITION FOR RENEWAL OF THE NOTARIAL COMMISSION OF ATTY. CONRADO B. LAGMAN AND THE OPPOSITION THERETO

  • [G.R. No. 196530 : June 27, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. LUISITO TULANG Y LLANITA, A.K.A "LOUIE"

  • [G.R. No. 175779 : June 27, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. VIRGINIA MENDOZA Y ARBO @ CRIS

  • [G.R. No. 181323 : June 27, 2012] LILIAN MANTO AND EMMANUEL FAUSTINA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 199493 : June 27, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HERMIE ASPACIO Y MAYOLA

  • [G.R. No. 196490 : June 27, 2012] LEONARDO IGOT v. BANCO SAN JUAN

  • [G.R. No. 188778 : June 27, 2012] ANTONIO HERMANO v. OCTAVIO ALVAREZ, JR., LEONORA CASTRO-BATAC, GILBERTO C. CASTRO, JR., MANUEL C. CASTRO, CONSUELO CASTRO-CASTRO, JAKE CASTRO, MA. ELISA CASTRO-VILLANUEVA AND ROSELINO CASTRO

  • [G.R. No. 192817 : June 27, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ANGELITO MALABANAN Y ANAHAN

  • [G.R. No. 185165 : June 27, 2012] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOSE MACAWILI Y PALLER.

  • [G.R. No. 182210 : June 27, 2012] PAZ T. BERNARDO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.

  • [G.R. No. 179902 : June 27, 2012] METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY v. RODOLFO PASCUAL, SR. & RODOLFO PASCUAL, JR.

  • [A.M. No. MTJ-07-1687 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 99-830-MTJ) : June 27, 2012] DOMINGO B. PANTIG v. JUDGE PASCUALA CLEOFE G. CANLAS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT [MTC], SASMUAN, PAMPANGA.