DECISION 2 G.R. No. 200304 That on or about April 3, 1998 in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused not having been authorized by law to sell, dispense, deliver, transport or distribute any regulated drug, did then and there [willfully], unlawfully and knowingly sell or offer for sale, dispense, deliver, transport or distribute 45.46 grams, 44.27 grams, 45.34 grams, 51.45 grams, 41.32 grams and 20.14 grams or with a total weight of TWO HUNDRED FORTY-SEVEN POINT NINETY-EIGHT (247.98) grams contained in six (6) transparent plastic sachets of white crystalline substance known as “Shabu” containing methamphetamine hydrochloride, which is a regulated drug.
Criminal Case No. 98-164175, on the other hand, arose from an alleged violation of Section 16, Article III of Republic Act No. 6425, as amended,
which was said to be committed in this manner:
That on or about April 3, 1998 in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused without being authorized by law to possess or use any regulated drug, did then and there [willfully], unlawfully and knowingly have in his possession and under his custody and control 1.61 grams, 0.58 grams, 0.29 grams, 0.09 [grams], 0.10 grams, 0.17 grams, 0.21 grams, 0.24 grams, 0.12 grams, 0.06 grams, 0.04 grams, .51 grams or all with a total weight of four point zero three grams of white crystalline substance contained in twelve (12) transparent plastic sachets known as “SHABU” containing methamphetamine hydrochloride, a regulated drug, without the corresponding license or prescription thereof.
Initially, Criminal Case No. 98-164175 was raffled to the RTC of Manila, Branch 23. Upon motion
of the appellant, however, said case was allowed to be consolidated with Criminal Case No. 98-164174 in the RTC of Manila, Branch 41.
On arraignment, the appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges.
The pre-trial conference of the cases was held on July 27, 1998, but the same was terminated without the parties entering into any stipulation of facts.
During the trial of the cases, the prosecution presented the testimonies of the following witnesses: (1) Police Inspector (P/Insp.) Jean Fajardo,
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 20 of this Act to the contrary, if the victim of the offense is a minor, or should a regulated drug involved in any offense under this Section be the proximate cause of the death of a victim thereof, the maximum penalty therein provided shall be imposed.”
Records, p. 1.
Section 16 of Republic Act No. 6425 as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, provides: “SEC. 16.
Possession or Use of Regulated Drugs
. - The penalty of
to death and a fine ranging from five hundred thousand pesos to ten million pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall possess or use any regulated drug without the corresponding license or prescription, subject to the provisions of Section 20 hereof.”
Records, p. 16.
Id. at 28-29.
Id. at 62.
Id. at 19, 52.
Id. at 69.
TSN, August 11, 1998; TSN, October 6, 1998.