Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions

G.R. No. 195775 (People of the Philippines v. Marites Robles y Larios).

RESOLUTION

The Assistant City Prosecutor of Manila charged the accused Marites Robles before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 2 in Criminal Cases 08-259420 and 08-259421 with violation of Sections 5 and 11(3), respectively, Article II of Republic Act (R.A.) 9165.^[1] When arraigned, Robles pleaded not guilty to both charges.

PO1 Exequiel Arevalo testified that Chief Inspector John Guiagui of the Manila Police District Station formed a buy-bust team after receiving information that a certain Mia is selling illegal drugs. PO1 Arevalo acted as the poseur-buyer. Afterwards, they prepared the buy-bust money composed of three P100.00 bills.

At around 9:00 p.m. of February 5, 2008 PO1 Arevalo and the informant rode a jeep to Arlegui St., Quiapo, Manila, while the other officers boarded a private vehicle. When they arrived, the informant asked a person regarding the whereabouts of Mia. Said person then pointed to a place near the gate of the Manuel L. Quezon University (MLQU). They approached Mia and told her that they wanted to buy shabu. Mia directed them to cross the street where she demanded P300.00 as payment. PO1 Arevalo handed the marked bills and Mia took out three plastic sachets and asked him to choose one. He picked one and placed it inside his pocket. Afterwards, he stepped down from the gutter and made the pre-arranged signal. He then grabbed the marked money from Mia's left hand and the two remaining packets of shabu from her right hand. The other police officers arrived and thereafter they brought her to the precinct.

Upon arrival, PO1 Arevalo immediately handed the three packets of shabu  to the investigator, David Gonzales. Gonzales marked the sachets as "MLR", "MLR-1", and "MLR-2� in front of Robles and PO1 Arevalo. Subsequently, Gonzales submitted them to the forensic chemist for examination who confirmed the contents as shabu.

On the other hand, accused Robles testified that on February 5, 2008 at about 2:15 p.m., she was in Tayuman waiting for a ride to her sister's house. While waiting, someone held her shoulder and said, "eto na, nakakulay pula ang damit nya." Robles asked the person why he was taking her but the person just ordered her to board a motorcycle. Nine people supposedly surrounded her and insisted that she was Mia because she was wearing a red dress. They shortly arrived at the police station. The police officers informed Robles that she violated Sections 5 and 11(3), Article II of R.A. 9165.^[2]  The officers allegedly demanded P1,000,000.00 but she failed to pay. As a result, they detained her.

On May 7, 2009 the RTC found Robles guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal sale and illegal possession of shabu. The RTC sentenced her to life imprisonment, and to pay a fine of P500,000.00 in Criminal Case 08- 259420, and in Criminal Case 08-259421 to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 12 years and 1 day as minimum to 17 years and 4 months as maximum and to pay P300,000.00.

On September 6, 2010 the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision of the RTC in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. 03951.

The issue here is whether or not the RTC and the CA committed a reversible error in admitting the seized shabu in evidence despite the prosecution's alleged failure to prove the identity, and integrity of the prohibited drug.

Robles argues that the arresting officers violated Section 21, Article II of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. 9165. It is settled, however, that non-compliance with the procedure outlined in Section 21, Article II of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. 9165 shall not render void and invalid such seizure as long as the apprehending officers successfully preserved the integrity and evidentiary value of the confiscated items.^[3] The records would show that the officers in this case were able to maintain the integrity of the seized shabu. PO1 Arevalo, the poseur-buyer, testified that the entrapment took place somewhere in Arlegui, Quiapo, near the MLQU gate at around 9:00 p.m. of February 5, 2008. They immediately brought Robles and the seized drugs to the nearest precinct, which they reached only after a few minutes. PO1 Arevalo was in possession of the confiscated items while they were on their way to the police station. Upon reaching the police station, PO1 Arevalo personally turned over the three packets of shabu to police investigator Gonzales; Gonzales thereafter marked the three plastic sachets as "MLR", "MLR-1", and "MLR-2" in the presence of both PO1 Arevalo and accused Robles; at 12:35 a.m. of February 6, 2008 Gonzales forwarded the seized drugs to the forensic chemist; after only two hours or at 2:35 a.m. the forensic chemist completed his laboratory report and confirmed the submitted specimens as shabu; the forensic chemist also personally brought the specimens in court. Lastly, the appellate court correctly pointed out that Robles did not raise this matter before the trial court. Without such objection, the defense cannot raise the question for the first time on appeal.^[4]

Robles's defense of frame-up and denial cannot stand. Her claim that she was arrested while waiting for a ride to her sister's house and simply because she was wearing red remained unsubstantiated. The defense never presented her sister to testify in court. Robles also failed to present any evidence with respect to the alleged extortion. Neither did she show any effort to correct the purported wrong done to her by filing the appropriate administrative and/or criminal charges against the arresting officers.cralaw

WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the Decision dated September 6, 2010 in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. 03951 affirming the Decision dated May 7, 2009 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 2 in Criminal Cases 08-259420 and 08-259421 finding Marites Robles guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sections 5 and 11(3), Article II of R.A. 9165. (Peralta, J., Acting Chairperson, per Special Order 1228 dated June 6, 2012; Villarama, Jr., J., Acting Member, in lieu of Justice Velasco, Jr., per Special Order 1229 dated June 6, 2012.)

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO
Division Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Entitled Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

^[2] TSN, April 21, 2009, p. 6.

^[3] People v. Cardenas, G.R. No. 190342, March 21, 2012.

^[4] People v. Sta Maria, G.R. No. 171019, February 23, 2007, 516 SCRA 621, 634.