A.

Regional Trial Court of Lanao del Norte, Branch 01, Iligan City

B. Criminal Case No. 21420 & 21421 & 21399

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. NORODIN BATO GANDAWALI and

ALDEN DIBAROSAN y SANGBAAN “SUKA” (D)
Presided by: Judge Ali M. Balindong

The case was the sole case scheduled on the calendar for hearing in the afternoon of May
28, 2019. The accused were under trial for the violation of Sec. 5 and Sec. 11 of Article II,
Republic Act 9165. For the Prosecution, Atty. Cherry Sumaoy appeared before the court, while
for the defense, Atty. Macacuna Macadato appeared for accused Gandawali and Atty. Muamar
Macaraya appeared for accused Dibarosan.

The hearing commenced with the presentation of witness by the prosecution. The first
witness who took the stand was a CDEU officer, Policer Officer Chang. Police Officer Chang
was the poseur-buyer during the buy-bust operation which lead to the arrest of the accused. At
the trial, during the direct examination of Atty. Sumaoy, the officer identified the accused
according to their names by pointing to them in court. With the questions coming from Atty.
Sumaoy, Officer Chang narrated the buy-bust operation they conducted, more specifically the
post-operation procedures they observed. The officer was asked about who were present during
the inventory of the seized items. It was then revealed that a representative from DOJ were
absent during the inventory. Officer Chang testified and corroborated that he personally heard
their team leader, Police Officer Pantaran when he called a prosecutor from the DOJ which was
never answered. Nevertheless, Chang submitted in court that all other officials required to be
present by the law during inventory were present. He said that a representative from media, two
barangay officials, and an investigator were present at the inventory of the seized items who
came immediately after being called upon by their team leader.

In the cross-examination of Chang, Atty. Macadato raised and highlighted the issue on
the absence of the DOJ representative from the inventory. He cited the recent ruling of the
Supreme Court in the case of People vs. Romy Lim, where the accused was acquitted because of
procedural flaws, specifically in the required presence of representatives from media, elected
officials and DOJ in the conduct of inventory. Atty. Macadato again further questioned the
witness what transpired after the prohibited items were seized from the accused. Atty. Macaraya
also reiterated on the matter and centered his cross-examination on the facts of the conduct of
inventory, whether the rule established by law and jurisprudence was adequately followed. No
further questions were asked.

The prosecution then called another CDEU officer to take the stand as a witness, Officer
Quizon. The direct examination of the witness chiefly focused on the specifics of the conduct of
the buy-bust operation. From the briefing up to the actual execution. The witness was made to
recount the conduct of their briefing and who were present, the officers in the actual operation,
and the flow of the actual happening of events during the buy-bust operation. Atty. Sumaoy
asked precise details regarding the operation, such as the location of the buy-bust, the car where
the accused were apprehended, the position of the car of the officers relative to the accused
vehicle, the positioning of the members when they alighted the car, the signal planned to be
executed by the poseur-buyer, and a lot more detailed inquiries. Officer Quizon was the arresting
officer of the buy-bust operation. He described the manner of how he arrested Gandawali and
Dibarosan, and eventually how he obtained prohibited drugs from them as a result of their lawful
warrantless arrest. Officer Quizon attested that as he was frisking the two accused, he obtained
from their pockets prohibited articles assumed to be shabu. On Dibarosan, Quizon found two
large sachets of shabu, while on Gandawali, Quizon frisked a Marlboro cigarette pack containing
not cigarettes but sachets of alleged shabu. Quizon was also asked on the manner of how they
compiled, labeled and protected the seized items against any contaminations. Officer Quizon,
through Atty. Sumaoy, were asked to identify the evidence obtained against the accused. He was
asked to identify certain photographs and items and verify their authenticity, such as the
photographs taken during inventory where he was asked to label the persons in the picture which
included barangay officials and the representative from media. The direct examination of Quizon
lasted for more or less an hour. The same with the first witness, Atty. Sumaoy asked Quizon to
point and identify the accused Gandawali and Dibarosan in court, whom he personally arrested
during the operation. The prosecution then rested its direct examination.
 The defense in lieu of the observance of Ramadhan and the nearing ‘iftar’, requested that
the cross-examination of Officer Quizon be moved. Atty. Macadato, with respect, requested that
the cross-examination be done instead on June 11, 2019 for the time left isn’t enough for him to
finish the cross. This motion was seconded by Atty. Macaraya. Judge Balindong granted the
motion. The continuation of the trial and the cross-examination of the witness was then set on
June 11. The trial concluded for the day.

It is worthy of mentioning that after the trial, Judge Ali Balindong took the time to take a
photo with us. He also gave us a one-sentence advise that I appreciated a lot. He told us that in
studying law, we should impart 75% of our day on it and that we shouldn’t take the study of law
for granted. Also worthy of commending is the Court Interpreter who briefed us prior to the start
of the trial regarding the procedure in court proceedings. Absolutely, I personally wanted more,
but unfortunately, it was the only case we could observe. Nevertheless, the experience was
totally worth it and I look forward to future court observations.
 COURT OBSERVATION

Presented to:
Atty. Annabelle B. Cañazares-Mindalano
Assistant Dean, MSU–College of Law, Iligan Ext.

In Partial Fulfillment Of
Legal Techniques and Logic

Presented by:
Nasrullah A. Macalimbon

May 2019
Photograph of the Court Calendar – May 28, 2019
Photograph of the Court Calendar – May 28, 2019