5/26/2017 G.R.No.

177320

RepublicofthePhilippines
SupremeCourt
Manila

FIRSTDIVISION


PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES, G.R.No.177320
PlaintiffAppellee,
Present:


CORONA,C.J.,Chairperson,
LEONARDODECASTRO,
versus BERSAMIN,
VILLARAMA,JR.,and
*PERLASBERNABE,JJ.

CESARBAUTISTAySANTOS,
AccusedAppellant. Promulgated:
February22,2012
xx


DECISION


BERSAMIN,J.:

Underreviewistheconvictionoftheaccusedforillegalsaleandillegalpossessionofshabu
respectivelypunishedunderSection5andSection11(3)ofRepublicActNo.9165(Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002). He had been tried for and found guilty of the offenses by the
Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 127, Caloocan City, and the Court of Appeals (CA) had
[1]
affirmedtheconvictionsthroughthedecisionpromulgatedonFebruary15,2007.



Antecedents

OnApril28,2003,theOfficeoftheCityProsecutorofCaloocanCityfiledintheRTCtwo
separateinformationschargingCesarBautistaySantoswithaviolationofSection5andaviolation
ofSection11(3)ofRA9165,allegingthus:

CriminalCaseNo.C67993

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 1/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320

That on or about the 25th day of April 2003 in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the
jurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,withoutbeingauthorizedbylaw,did
thenandtherewillfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslyhaveinhispossession,custodyandcontrolsix(6)
pieces of plastic sachets containing METHYLAMPHETAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE (Shabu)
weighing0.05gram,0.09gram,0.05gram,0.09gram,0.07gram&0.06gramknowingthesameto
bedangerousdrugundertheprovisionsoftheabovecitedlaw.

[2]
CONTRARYTOLAW.


CriminalCaseNo.C67994

That on or about the 25th day of April 2003 in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the
jurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccusedwithoutauthorityoflaw,didthenand
therewillfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslysellanddelivertoPO2AMADEOTAYAGwhoposed,as
buyer METHAMPHETAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE (SHABU) weighing 0.05 gram, a dangerous
drug,withoutthecorrespondinglicenseorprescriptiontherefore,knowingthesametobesuch.

[3]
CONTRARYTOLAW.

EvidenceoftheProsecution

IntheafternoonofApril25,2003,aninformantwenttotheStationDrugEnforcementUnit
oftheCaloocanPoliceStationtoreportthepeddlingofillegaldrugsbyBautistaonKasamaStreet,
Barangay28,CaloocanCity.Forthwith,PoliceInsp.CesarCruzformedateamconsistingofSPO1
RommelYbaez,PO3RizalinoRangel,PO2JessieCaragdag,PO2JuanitoRivera,andPO2Amadeo
L. Tayag to conduct a buybust operation against Bautista. PO2 Tayag, designated as the poseur
buyer,wasgivenaP100.00billasbuybustmoney,onwhichheplacedhisinitialsALT.Therestof
the buybust team would serve as back up for PO2 Tayag. The team proceeded to the target area
[4]
withtheinformant.

Uponarrivingatthetargetarea,theinformantpointedoutBautistatotheteam.Bautistawas
thenstandinginfrontofahouse.PO2TayagandtheinformantthenapproachedBautistaevenas
therestoftheteamtookuppositionsnearby.TheinformantintroducedPO2TayagtoBautistaas
biyaherongshabu,afterwhichtheinformantleftPO2TayagandBautistaalonetothemselves.PO2
Tayag told Bautista: Cesar, pakuha ng piso. Bautista drew a plastic sachet from his pocket and
handed it to PO2 Tayag, who in turn handed the P100.00 bill buybust money to Bautista. PO2
Tayagthenturnedhiscapbackwardsastheprearrangedsignaltothebackupmembers.Thelatter

rushed forward and arrested Bautista. Upon informing Bautista of his constitutional rights, SPO1
Ybaezfriskedhimandfoundinhispocketsixotherplasticsachets,whilePO2Caragdagseizedthe
buybustmoneyfromBautistashand.TheteambroughtBautistaandtheseizedplasticsachetsback
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 2/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
buybustmoneyfromBautistashand.TheteambroughtBautistaandtheseizedplasticsachetsback
[5]
tothepolicestation.

Inthepolicestation,theteamrecordedthebuybustbillinthepoliceblotterandturnedover
[6]
the plastic sachets to PO2 Hector Castillo, the investigator on duty. PO2 Castillo marked the
sachet handed by Bautista to PO2 Tayag as CBS (Bautistas initials) Buybust, and the other six
sachets recovered by SPO1 Ybaez from appellants possession as CBS1, CBS2, CBS3, CBS4,
[7]
CBS5,andCBS6.
BasedonthewrittenrequestofInsp.Cruz,ForensicChemistAlbertS.Arturoconducteda
[8]
laboratoryexaminationonthecontentsofthemarkedsachets, andstatedinhisPhysicalScience
Report that the marked sachets contained methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous
substance. The Physical Science Report enumerated the marked sachets examined and gave the
weightoftheshabuineachasfollows:CBS(Bautistasinitials)Buybust0.05gramCBS10.05
gramCBS20.09gramCBS30.05gramCBS40.09gramCBS50.07gramandCBS60.06
[9]
gram.

EvidenceoftheAccused

Bautistadeniedthecharge.HeclaimedthatonApril25,2003,ataround6:00p.m.,heandhis
wife,Rosario,wereintheirhousecuttingclothtobemadeintodoormatswhenPO2Tayagandtwo
others barged in that when he asked what they wanted, they told him that it was none of his
businessthatthethreeintroducedthemselvesaspolicemenandorderedhimtogowiththemthat
theyforcedhimtogowiththem,withPO2Tayaghittinghimonthenapethatastheywerewalking
ontheroad,theydemandedmoneyfromhim,buthetoldthemthathehadnoneandthathewas
[10]
broughttoanddetainedattheCaloocanCityJail.

DecisionoftheRTC

After trial, the RTC found Bautista guilty as charged through its joint decision dated
[11]
September5,2005, disposing:

WHEREFORE,premisesconsideredandtheprosecutionhavingestablishedtoamoralcertainty
the guilt of Accused CESAR BAUTISTA y SANTOS @ CESAR TAGILID, this Court hereby
rendersjudgmentasfollows:
1. InCriminalCaseNo.C67993forViolationofSec.11,Art.IIofRA9165,thisCourtin
the absence of any aggravating circumstance hereby sentences same Accused to a prison term of
twelve(12)years,eight(8)monthsandonedaytoseventeen(17)yearsandeight(8)monthsandto
paythefineofThreehundredthousandpesos(P300,000.00)withsubsidiaryimprisonmentincaseof
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 3/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
paythefineofThreehundredthousandpesos(P300,000.00)withsubsidiaryimprisonmentincaseof
insolvencyand

2.InCrim.CaseNo.C67994forViolationofSection5,Art.IIofR.A.9165,thisCourtin
the absence of any aggravating circumstance hereby sentences said Accused to LIFE
IMPRISONMENT,andtopaythefineofFivehundredthousandpesos(P500,000.00)withsubsidiary
imprisonmentincaseofinsolvency.

Subjectdruginbothcasesaredeclaredconfiscatedandforfeitedinfavorofthegovernmentto
bedealtwithinaccordancewithlaw.

SOORDERED.

DecisionoftheCA

[12]
OnFebruary15,2007,theCAaffirmedtheRTCjudgment,pertinentlyholding:

In sum, the prosecution was able to establish the guilt of herein appellant beyond reasonable
doubt. The actual sale of prohibited or regulated drugs coupled with their presentation in court has
beensufficientlyprovenbythetestimoniesoftheprosecutionwitnesses.Theirrecountoftheincident
complementeachother,givingacompletepictureonhowtheillegalsaleofshabutranspiredandhow
the sale led to the apprehension of appellant in flagrante delicto. Their testimonies likewise
establishedbeyonddoubtthatappellantwasfoundinactualpossessionofsix(6)additionalpiecesof
heatsealedsachetscontainingwhitecrystallinesubstance(shabu)whenhewasarrested.

Appellants claim, therefore, that in convicting him, the trial court merely relied on the
presumptionthatofficialdutyhasbeenregularlyperformediswithoutmerit.Appellantsconviction
wasbasedonestablishedfactsandevidenceonrecord.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Joint Decision of the Regional Trial Court of
CaloocanCity,Branch127inCriminalCasesNos.C67993andC67994isAFFIRMEDintoto.

SOORDERED.



Issues

Hence,thisappeal,inwhichBautistacontendsthattheCAerredinaffirminghisconviction
because: (a) there were inconsistencies in the testimonies of Prosecution witnesses as to who of
themhadactuallyreceivedthetipfromtheinformant(b)PO2TayagstestimonythatBautistahad
handed him a sachet of shabu without inquiring about the formers identity ran counter to human
experience(c)thebackupmembersofthebuybustteamdidnotactuallywitnessthetransaction
between PO2 Tayag and Bautista and (d) the plastic sachets were not immediately marked after
[13]
theirseizurefromBautista.

Ruling
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 4/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320

Theappeallacksmerit.

I
Illegalsaleandillegalpossessionofshabu
wereestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubt

Section5andSection11ofRepublicActNo.9165pertinentlyprovideasfollows:

Section 5. Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution and
Transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. The
penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00)toTenmillionpesos(P10,000,000.00)shallbeimposeduponanyperson,who,unless,
authorized by law, shall sell, trade, administer, dispense, deliver, give away to another, distribute,
dispatch, in transit or transport any dangerous drug, including any and all species of opium poppy
regardlessofthequantityandpurityinvolved,orshallactasabrokerinanysuchtransactions.
xxx

Section11.Possession of Dangerous Drugs.The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a
finerangingfromFivehundredthousandpesos(P500,000.00)toTenmillionpesos(P10,000,000.00)
shallbeimposeduponanyperson,who,unlessauthorizedbylaw,shallpossessanydangerousdrug
inthefollowingquantities,regardlessofthedegreeofpuritythereof:
xxx
Otherwise, if the quantity involved is less than the foregoing quantities, the penalties shall be
graduatedasfollows:
xxx
(3)Imprisonmentoftwelve(12)yearsandone(1)daytotwenty(20)yearsandafineranging
fromThreehundredthousandpesos(P300,000.00)toFourhundredthousandpesos(P400,000.00),if
thequantitiesofdangerousdrugsarelessthanfive(5)gramsofopium,morphine,heroin,cocaine,or
cocaine hydrochloride marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil, methamphetamine hydrochloride or
shabu,orotherdangerousdrugssuchas,butnotlimitedto,MDMAorecstacy,PMA,TMA,LSD,
GHB,andthosesimilarlydesignedornewlyintroduceddrugsandtheirderivatives,withouthaving
anytherapeuticvalueorifthequantitypossessedisfarbeyondtherapeuticrequirementsorlessthan
threehundred(300)gramsofmarijuana.

To secure a conviction for illegal sale of shabu, the following essential elements must be
established: (a) the identities of the buyer and the seller, the object of the sale, and the
considerationand(b)thedeliveryofthethingsoldandthepaymentforthething.Whatismaterial

inprosecutionsforillegalsaleofshabuistheproofthatthetransactionorsaleactuallytookplace,
[14]
coupledwiththepresentationincourtofthecorpusdelictiasevidence.

The requisites for illegal sale of shabu were competently and convincingly proven by the
Prosecution. PO2 Tayag, as the poseurbuyer, attested that Bautista sold shabu to him during a
[15]
legitimatebuybustoperation. According to Forensic Chemist Arturo, the substance subject of
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 5/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320

the transaction, which weighed 0.05 gram, was examined and found to be methamphetamine
[16]
hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous drug. PO2 Caragdag declared that he recovered the buy
[17]
bustmoneyfromBautistashandrightafterthesale. Further,theProsecutionlaterpresentedas
evidenceboththesachetofshabusubjectofthesaleandthebuybustmoneyusedinthebuybust
[18]
operation. Thereby,theProsecutiondirectlyincriminatedBautista.

Forillegalpossessionofadangerousdrug,likeshabu,theelementsare:(a)theaccusedisin
possession of an item or object that is identified to be a prohibited or dangerous drug (b) such
possessionisnotauthorizedbylawand(c)theaccusedfreelyandconsciouslypossessedthedrug.
[19]

The elements of illegal possession of a dangerous drug were similarly competently and
convincinglyestablishedbytheProsecution.SPO1Ybaezstatedthatuponseeingtheprearranged
signalgivenbyPO2Tayag,heandtheothermembersoftheteamproceededtoarrestBautistaand
[20]
that he frisked Bautista and then recovered six other plastic sachets from Bautistas pocket.
Undoubtedly, the frisking was legally authorized as a search incidental to the lawful arrest of
[21]
Bautista for evidence in the commission of illegal drug pushing. Forensic Chemist Arturo
[22]
certifiedthateachofthesachetscontaineddifferentshabuofdifferentweights.

ThelowercourtsjustifiablyaccordedcredencetotheeyewitnesstestimoniesofPO2Tayag,
PO2Caragdag,andSPO1Ybaez.Theirtestimonialaccountswereconsistentwiththedocumentary
andobjectevidenceoftheProsecution.Itwassignificantthatnoillmotivewasimputedtothemto
falselytestifyagainstBautista,withBautistahimselfadmittingnotbeingawareofanyreasonwhy
[23]
theywouldwronglyincriminatehim.

Indrugrelatedprosecutions,theStatebearstheburdennotonlyofprovingtheelementsof
theoffensesofsaleandpossessionofshabuunderRepublicActNo.9165,butalsoofprovingthe

corpusdelicti,thebodyofthecrime.Corpusdelictihasbeendefinedasthebodyorsubstanceof
thecrimeand,initsprimarysense,referstothefactthatacrimehasbeenactuallycommitted. As
appliedtoaparticularoffense,itmeanstheactualcommissionbysomeoneoftheparticularcrime
charged.Thecorpusdelictiisacompoundfactmadeupoftwo(2)things,viz:theexistenceofa
certainactorresultformingthebasisofthecriminalcharge,andtheexistenceofacriminalagency
[24]
as the cause of this act or result. The dangerous drug is itself the very corpus delicti of the
[25]
violation of the law prohibiting the possession of the dangerous drug. Consequently, the State
does not comply with the indispensable requirement of proving corpus delicti when the drug is
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 6/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
does not comply with the indispensable requirement of proving corpus delicti when the drug is
missing, and when substantial gaps occur in the chain of custody of the seized drugs as to raise
[26]
doubtsontheauthenticityoftheevidencepresentedincourt.

To ensure that the chain of custody is established, Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165
relevantlyprovides:

Section 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, Seized, and/or Surrendered Dangerous
Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals,
Instruments/Paraphernaliaand/orLaboratoryEquipment.
xxx
(1)Theapprehendingteamhavinginitialcustodyandcontrolofdrugsshall,immediatelyafter
seizureandconfiscation,physicalinventoryandphotographthesameinthepresenceoftheaccused
or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or
counsel,arepresentativefromthemediaandtheDepartmentofJustice(DOJ),andanyelectedpublic
officialwhoshallberequiredtosignthecopiesoftheinventoryandbegivenacopythereof
xxx

The complementary Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Republic Act No. 9165
instructstheapprehendingofficerorteamonthecustodyandcontroloftheconfiscateddrugsinthe
followingmanner:

xxx
(a) The apprehending officer/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 Department of Justice
(DOJ),andanyelectedpublicofficialwhoshallberequiredtosignthecopiesoftheinventoryandbe
givenacopythereof:Provided,thatthephysicalinventoryandphotographshallbeconductedatthe
placewherethesearchwarrantisservedoratthenearestpolicestationoratthenearestofficeofthe
apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable, in case of warrantless seizures Provided,
further, that noncompliance with these requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the
integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending
officer/team,shallnotrendervoidandinvalidsuchseizuresofandcustodyoversaiditems
xxx


The rule on chain of custody under the foregoing enactments expressly demands the
identificationofthepersonswhohandletheconfiscateditemsforthepurposeofdulymonitoring
the authorized movements of the illegal drugs and/or drug paraphernalia from the time they are
seized from the accused until the time they are presented in court. In this regard, Section 1(b) of
Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No. 1, Series of 2002 defines the chain of custody rule as
follows:

b.ChainofCustodymeansthedulyrecordedauthorizedmovementsandcustodyofseizeddrugsor
controlledchemicalsorplantsourcesofdangerousdrugsorlaboratoryequipmentofeachstage,from
the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to
presentationincourtfordestruction.Suchrecordofmovementsandcustodyofseizeditemshall
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 7/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
presentationincourtfordestruction.Suchrecordofmovementsandcustodyofseizeditemshall
includetheidentityandsignatureofthepersonwhoheldtemporarycustody[was]oftheseizeditem,
thedateandtimewhensuchtransferofcustodymadeinthecourseofsafekeepinganduseincourtas
evidence,andthefinaldisposition[.]

Here,thebuybustteamdidnotmarkthesachetsuntilafterreachingthepolicestation.Even
so,theomissiondidnotdestroytheintegrityandtheevidentiaryvalueoftheconfiscateditems.We
aresatisfiedthatPO2TayagandSPO1Ybaezbroughttheconfiscatedsachetsofshabutothepolice
stationimmediatelyafterthebuybustoperation,andturnedthemovertothedutyinvestigator,PO2
[27]
Castillo,formarking that in their presence, PO2 Castillo marked the sachet of shabu sold by
BautistatoPO2TayagasCBS(Bautistasinitials)Buybust,andthesixsachetsofshaburecovered
bySPO1YbaezfromBautistaspossessionasCBS1,CBS2,CBS3,CBS4,CBS5,andCBS6
[28]
that PO2 Castillo then delivered the marked sachets to Insp. Cruz who in turn caused their
transmittal to the Crime Laboratory Office, Northern Police District (NPD), in Caloocan City, for
[29]
appropriate laboratory examination that upon the instruction of Insp. Cruz, SPO1 Ybaez
handcarried the written request and the marked sachets to the NPD Crime Laboratory Office for
[30]
laboratoryexamination,whereonePO2Bonifacioreceivedthem and that thereafter, Forensic
Chemist Arturo certified in the Physical Science Report prepared following his qualitative
examination that the contents of the marked sachets were positive for methamphetamine
hydrochlorideorshabu,andenumeratedthemarkedsachetsexaminedandrenderedtheweightsof
the shabu they contained, as follows: CBS (Bautistas initials) Buybust 0.05 gram CBS1 0.05
gramCBS20.09gramCBS30.05gramCBS40.09gramCBS50.07gramandCBS60.06
[31]
gram.

Wehaveheldthatanoncompliancewiththeregulationsisnotnecessarilyfatalastorender
anaccusedsarrestillegalortheitemsconfiscatedfromhiminadmissibleasevidenceofhisguilt,for

whatisoftheutmostimportanceisthepreservationoftheintegrityandtheevidentiaryvalueofthe
[32]
confiscateditemsthatwillbeutilizedinthedeterminationofhisguiltorinnocence.

That was done herein. PO2 Tayag firmly identified the sachet of shabu marked as
CBS(Bautistasinitials)BuybustastheonehehadboughtfromBautistainthebuybustoperation.
[33]
Inthesamemanner,SPO1YbaezidentifiedthesachetsofshabumarkedCBS1,CBS2,CBS
3, CBS4, CBS5, and CBS6 presented in court as those he had recovered from Bautistas
[34]
possessionrightafterthebuybustoperation. Finally, Forensic Chemist Arturo properly stated
that the same exhibits were the very specimens he had subjected to chemical analysis upon the
[35]
formal request of Insp. Cruz. Without question, then, the quantities of shabu recovered from
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 8/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
[35]
formal request of Insp. Cruz. Without question, then, the quantities of shabu recovered from
Bautistaweredulypreservedwithinthecontextoftheruleonchainofcustody.

Asifconfirmingthearrestingofficersobservanceoftheruleonchainofcustody,Bautistadid
not assail the integrity of the confiscated shabu except by insisting on being framed up by the
policemen. His insistence did not deflect guilt from him, however, considering that his failure to
chargethepolicemenwithframeupandextortioncouldonlyberegardedashistacitadmissionthat
[36]
suchevidencehadnotbeentamperedormeddledwithbutpreservedandintact.

II
Denialandframeupnotestablished

Bautistasdenialanddefenseofframeupweregivennoconsiderationduetotheirbeingself
servinganduncorroborated.Wedeclaresuchtreatmentwarranted.HedidnotpresentRosario,his
wife,tocorroboratehisclaimofbeingframedupalthoughshewassupposedtohavebeenaroundat
the time of his arrest. He did not also adduce evidence to substantiate his story of being falsely
incriminated in a frameup by competent evidence. His claim thereon did not prevail over the
positiveidentificationofhimbyPO2Tayagasthedrugpusherhehadtransactedwith.AstheCourt
seesit,hewasnotevensincereinclaimingframeup,forhedidnotformallychargethepolicemen
forthesupposedframeupandextortioncommittedagainsthim.Verily,defensesofframeupand
extortion are not looked upon with favor due to their being conveniently concocted and usually
[37]
assertedbyculpritsarrestedforviolationsofRepublicActNo.9165.

III
Inconsistenciesintestimony
areinconsequential

Bautistaarguesthatthearrestingpolicemenincurredinconsistenciesbecausetheycouldnot
besureonwhoofthemhadactuallyreceivedthereportoftheinformantontheillegaldrugpushing
ofBautista.
Theargumenthasnomerit.Thereisnodisputethatthematterofwhoamongthepolicemen
actuallyreceivedthereportfromtheinformantdidnotrelatetotheessentialelementsofthecrimes
charged.NordidsuchmatterrefertotheactualbuybustitselfthatcrucialmomentwhenBautista
wascaughtredhandedsellingandpossessingshabuinquestion.Assuch,itwasinsignificantinthis
adjudication. We deem to be basic enough that an inconsistency that had nothing to do with the
[38]
elementsofthecrimecouldnotbeabasisforacquittal.

BautistasinsistencethatitwasimpossibleforhimtosellshabutoPO2Tayagduetothelatter
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 9/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
BautistasinsistencethatitwasimpossibleforhimtosellshabutoPO2Tayagduetothelatter
beingunknowntohimmeritsnoattention.Basedonourcollectiveexperienceasjudges,weknow
thatdrugpushinghasbeencommittedwithsomuchcasualnessevenbetweentotalstrangers.Itwas
credibleenough,then,thatPO2Tayagcategoricallydeclaredthattheinformanthadfirstintroduced
himtoBautistaasbiyaherongshabubeforePO2TayagandBautistastartedtransactingwitheach
[39]
other.
BautistapositsthatthebackupmembersdidnotvisuallyseethesalebetweenhimandPO2
Tayag. That position is unfounded for three reasons. The first is that PO2 Tayag testified that
Bautista had sold shabu to him during the buybust operation. The second is that the backup
members themselves did actually witness the transaction between Bautista and PO2 Tayag, with
PO2Caragdagspecificallysayingthathehadseentheirtransactionfromsevenmetersawayfrom
[40]
them and with SPO1 Ybaez, despite admitting not actually seeing the exchange between
BautistaandPO2Tayag,stillseeingPO2Tayaggivingtheprearrangedsignaltocommunicatethe
[41]
consummationofthesaleofshabu. And,thirdly,thegivingoftheprearrangedsignalrendereda
fullocularviewoftheexchangebetweenBautistaandPO2Tayagsuperfluous.Worthyofnotingis
that the giving of the prearranged signal in a buybust operation has been an accepted form of
communicatingtheconsummationoftheexchangebetweenthedrugpusherandtheposeurbuyer.

IV
Penalties

Section11(3)ofRepublicActNo.9165providesthattheillegalpossessionoflessthanfive
grams of shabu is penalized with imprisonment of 12 years and one day to 20 years, and a fine
ranging from P300,000.00 to P400,000.00. Bautista was guilty of illegal possession of shabu

weighing0.41gram.TheRTCandtheCAimposedonhimanindeterminatesentenceof12years,
eightmonthsandoneday,asminimum,to17yearsandeightmonths,asmaximum,andafineof
P300,000.00.

Although the penalty thus imposed is within the range of the penalty imposable under
Republic Act No. 9165, the increment of one day as part of the minimum of the indeterminate
sentenceisdeleteddespiteitsbeingwithintheparametersoftheIndeterminateSentenceLaw.The
onedayincrementtotheminimumoftheindeterminatesentencewassurplusagethatmayoccasion
aslightdegreeofinconveniencewhenitwillbetimeforthepenaladministratorsconcernedtopass
upon and determine whether or not Bautista is already qualified to enjoy the benefits under the
[42]
IndeterminateSentenceLawandotherrelevantlegalprovisions. Accordingly,thepenaltyshould
be an indeterminate sentence of 12 years and eight months, as minimum, to 17 years and eight
months,asmaximum,andafineofP300,000.00.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 10/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320

UnderSection5ofRepublicActNo.9165,theunauthorizedsaleofshabu,regardlessofits
quantityandpurity,carrieswithitthepenaltyoflifeimprisonmenttodeathandafinerangingfrom
P500,000.00toP10,000,000.00.TheRTCandtheCAwerecorrectinprescribinglifeimprisonment
and fine of P500,000.00 due to the absence of any aggravating circumstance. It is relevant to
observe that the higher penalty of death might no longer be possibly prescribed in view of the
[43]
interveningenactmentofRepublicActNo.9346, alawthatprohibitstheimpositionofthedeath
penalty.

WHEREFORE,weAFFIRMthedecisionpromulgatedonFebruary15,2007bytheCourt
ofAppeals,subjecttotheSOLEMODIFICATIONthattheindeterminatesentenceprescribedon
theillegalpossessionofshabuasdefinedandpunishedunderSection11(3)ofRepublicActNo.
9165is12yearsandeightmonths,asminimum,to17yearsandeightmonths,asmaximum,anda
fineofP300,000.00.



Theaccusedshallpaythecostsofsuit.

SOORDERED.




LUCASP.BERSAMIN
AssociateJustice
WECONCUR:


RENATOC.CORONA
ChiefJustice
Chairperson

TERESITAJ.LEONARDODECASTROMARTINS.VILLARAMA,JR.
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice



ESTELAM.PERLASBERNABE
AssociateJustice


http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 11/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320

CERTIFICATION


PursuanttoSection13,ArticleVIIIoftheConstitution,Icertifythattheconclusionsintheabove
Decisionhadbeenreachedinconsultationbeforethecasewasassignedtothewriteroftheopinion
oftheCourtsDivision.


RENATOC.CORONA
ChiefJustice

*ViceAssociateJusticeMarianoC.DelCastillo,whopennedthedecisionoftheCourtofAppeals,perraffleofJanuary13,2012.
[1]
CArollo,pp.114130pennedbyAssociateJusticeMarianoC.DelCastillo(nowaMemberofthisCourt),withAssociateJustice
RubenT.Reyes(laterPresidingJusticeandaMemberoftheCourt,butalreadyretired)andAssociateJusticeArcangelitaRomillaLontok
(retired)concurring.
[2]
Records,p.2.
[3]
Id.,p.8.
[4]
TSN,August27,2003,pp.35.
[5]
Id.,pp.610.
[6]
Id.,pp.1011.
[7]
TSN,September10,2003,pp.26.
[8]
Records,pp.56.
[9]
Id.
[10]
TSN,May31,2005,pp.29.
[11]
Records,pp.148164.
[12]
Supra,note1.
[13]
CArollo,pp.5964.
[14]
Peoplev.Naquita,G.R.No.180511,July28,2008,560SCRA430,449Peoplev.DelMonte,G.R.No.179940,April23,2008,552
SCRA627,637638Peoplev.Santiago,G.R.No.175326,November28,2007,539SCRA198,212.
[15]
TSN,August27,2003,p.7.
[16]
Supra,note8.
[17]
TSN,August11,2003,p.6.
[18]
Records,p.94.
[19]
Peoplev.Naquita,supranote14,p.451.
[20]
TSN,September15,2003,p.6.
[21]
Rule126,RulesofCourt,provides:
Section13.Searchincidenttolawfularrest.Apersonlawfullyarrestedmaybesearchedfordangerousweaponsoranything
whichmayhavebeenusedorconstituteproofinthecommissionofanoffensewithoutasearchwarrant.(12a)
[22]
Supra,note8.
[23]
TSN,May31,2005,p.9.
[24]
Peoplev.Roluna,G.R.No.101797,March24,1994,231SCRA446,452citing23C.J.S.623624(italicizedportionsarefoundin
theoriginaltext).
[25]
Peoplev.Kimura,G.R.No.130805,April27,2004,428SCRA51,61.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 12/13
5/26/2017 G.R.No.177320
[25]
Peoplev.Kimura,G.R.No.130805,April27,2004,428SCRA51,61.
[26]
Peoplev.Coreche,G.R.No.182528,August14,2009,596SCRA350,356357.
[27]
TSN,August27,2003,pp.1011September15,2003,p.6September10,2003,p.5.
[28]
Supra,note7.
[29]
Supra,note8.
[30]
Id.
[31]
Id..
[32]
Peoplev.Agulay,G.R.No.181747,September26,2008,566SCRA571,595Peoplev.Pringas,G.R.No.175928,August31,2007,
531SCRA828,842843Peoplev.DelMonte,supra,note14,p.636.
[33]
TSN,August27,2003,pp.1112.
[34]
TSN,September15,2003,p.6.
[35]
TSN,July29,2003,pp.910.
[36]
Peoplev.Miranda,G.R.No.174773,October2,2007,534SCRA552,568569.
[37]
Peoplev.Concepcion,G.R.No.178876,June27,2008,556SCRA421,443.
[38]
Peoplev.Santiago,supra,note14,pp.217218.
[39]
TSN,October14,2003,p.6.
[40]
TSN,August11,2003,p.6.
[41]
TSN,September15,2003,p.5.
[42]
SeeTalampasv.People,G.R.No.180219,November23,2011.
[43]
AnActProhibitingTheImpositionofDeathPenaltyinThePhilippines,repealingRepublicAct8177otherwiseknownastheAct
Designating Death By Lethal Injection, Republic Act 7659 otherwise known as the Death Penalty Law and all other laws, executive
ordersanddecrees(ThelawwassignedonJune24,2006,andwasheldtoapplyretroactivelyinPeoplev.Tubongbanua,August31,
2006,500SCRA727andPeoplev.Cabalquinto,September19,2006,502SCRA419).

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/february2012/177320.htm 13/13