University of the Philippines College of Law

TJRS - D2023
Rights of the Accused – Presumption of Innocence

Case Name Delariva v. People

Docket Number | Date G.R. No. 212940, Sept. 16, 2015

Ponente Mendoza, J.

Petitioner/s Christopher Dela Riva y Horario

Respondent/s People of the Philippines

Case Summary (Maximum of
5 sentences for conciseness)
Dela Riva was accused of sale of illegal drugs and was convicted by the
RTC and affirmed by the CA in one entrapment operation. The review of
evidence however show that the investigating officer never properly
marked and photographed the seized evidence in accordance with Sec.
21 RA9165 – no justifiable grounds were also given as to why these were
not complied. PDEA then failed to comply with the chain of custody
requirements. This in turn completely compromised the identity, integrity
and evidentiary value of the seized drugs. Dela Riva was acquitted.

Doctrine (Main provision of a The prosecution bears the burden to overcome such presumption of
statute or the Constitution innocence. If the prosecution fails to discharge this burden, the
being argued upon the case) accused deserves a judgement of acquittal.

RELEVANT FACTS

Dela Riva was found in violation of Section 5, Article 2 of RA 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002. He was arraigned and he pleaded not guilty to the offense charged. Eventually he was
convicted by the trial court for selling one (1) plastic sachet of 1.3095 grams of Methamphetamine
Hydrochloride aka shabu, to a poseur-buyer for 1,000 pesos marked money. This was affirmed by the CA.

Petitioners’ version and evidence:

A confidential report was made at the National Headquarters of PDEA that a certain Chris (Dela Riva) was
doing illegal activities in Subic, Zambales. IO1 Enrique Lucero was assigned to operate an entrapment.
The team proceeded to Calapuan Subic. They successfully conducted the entrapment and the team saw
in plain view some paraphernalia inside the house and thereafter conducted an inventory at the National
Headquarters of PDEA. The inventory was witnessed and also signed by a Barangay Kagawad while
photographs were taken. The lab result of the specimen yielded positive for shabu and accused’s urine also
yielded positive.

Defense’s version and evidence:

Dela Riva was invited by Jovann to go to the casino. Dela Riva agreed to be fetched. Jovann arrived but
instead of going to play casino at Angeles City, Dela Riva was bought at the PDEA HQ. He was told to be
silent and was handcuffed. He was asked for a palit-ulo meaning that he should produce another person
selling drugs in exchange for his release. He was told to sign the Booking Sheet Arrest Report which he
did. Pictures were taken prior the arrest. He first saw Agent Enrique Lucero at the HQ. Accused is not aware
of the execution of the inventory and denied that the items in the inventory were taken from him.

-
RTC convicted Dela Riva stating that the prosecution was able to establish his guilt with moral certainty
based on the positive straightforward and credible testimonies of the police. All elements of the crime
established: 1.) The identity of the buyer and the seller, and the object and consideration. 2.) the delivery
of the thing sold and the payment thereof.

CA affirmed this and said that the non-complaince with the directive of Section 21 of RA 9165 is not fatal
to the prosecution case as long as there were justifiable grounds for the lapses committed and the integrity
and value of the evidence seized were preserved. Integrity of the evidence presumed unless there is
showing of bad faith or ill will. There is a need for Dela Riva to overcome the presumption of regularity by
public officers in the discharge of their duties. There was already consummated sale of illegal drugs.

RATIO DECIDENDI

Issue/s Ratio

WON there was mis- YES.

appreciation of facts and
evidence presented.
The buy-bust team failed to immediately mark the seized drugs, conduct
an inventory and photograph the evidence after the arrest and
confiscation. It should be conducted at the nearest police station but
instead they went to the PDEA HQ in QC.

Prosecution failed to prove that the four sachets which tested positive for
shabu and eventually presented to court were the same ones
confiscated by the police officers due to its non-marking at the place
where the buy-bust was committed.

There must be strict compliance with the prescribed measures during

and after seizure of drugs which were not followed. Sec 21 – RA 9165

WON the guilt of the NO.

accused-appellant was
proven beyond reasonable
doubt
Agent Lucero never confirmed that he conducted the marking and
photograph of the seized items in the presence of the accused, his
lawyer, a media representative, DOJ representative or an elected official
from the specific barangay where the buy-bust was conducted. The only
present Barangay Kagawad was from QC and not present at the scene
of the crime.

Agent Lucero and his prosecution case could have been given the
chance to redeem their case and non-compliance if there would be a
justified explanation for it. However, they failed to produce one. The
absence of a witness and the delay of marking and photographing of the
evidence was caused by the prosecution’s fear of safety and that they
needed to rest after traveling.

It destroys the reliability of the corpus delicti - concrete evidence of a

crime. They did not comply with the chain of custody requirements.

RULING
Decision (of the trial court) and Resolution of the appellate court reversed. Dela Riva acquitted.