Dimas was arrested after a valid buy-bust operation.

Macario, the policeman who acted

as poseur-buyer, inventoried and photographed ten (10) sachets of shabu in the
presence of a barangay tanod. The inventory was signed by Macario and the tanod, but
Dimas refused to sign. Aş Macario was stricken with flu the day after, he was able to
surrender the sachets to the PNP Crime Laboratory only after four (4) days. During pre-
trial, the counsel de oficio of Dimas stipulated that the substance contained in the
sachets examined by the forensic chemist is in fact methamphetamine hydrochloride or
shabu. Dimas was convicted of violating Section 5 of RA 9165. On appeal, Dimas
questioned the admissibility of the evidence because Macario failed to observe the
requisite “chain of custody” of the alleged “shabu” seized from him. On behalf of the
State, the Solicitor General claimed that despite non-compliance with some
requirements, the prosecution was able to show that the integrity of the substance was
preserved. Moreover, even with some deviations from the requirements, the counsel of
Dimas stipulated that the substance seized from Dimas was shabu so that the
conviction should be affirmed.
(A) What is the “chain of custody” requirement in drug offenses? (2.5%)
(B) Rule on the contention of the State. (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) To establish the chain of custody, the prosecution must show the movements of the
dangerous drugs from its confiscation up to its presentation in court. The purpose of
establishing the chain of custody is to ensure the integrity of the corpus delicti (People
v. Magat, G.R. No. 179939, September 29, 2008). The following links that must be
established in the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation are: first, the seizure and
marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the
apprehending officer; second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the
apprehending officer to the investigating officer; third, the turnover by the investigating
officer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and fourth,
the turnover and submission of the marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist
to the court (People v. Kamad, G.R. No. 174198, January 29, 2010)
To establish the first link in the chain of custody, and that is the seizure of the drug from
the accused, the prosecution must comply with Section 21 of RA No. 9165, which
requires that the apprehending officer after the confiscation of drug must immediately
physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the
person from whom such items were confiscated, or his representative or counsel, a
representative from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected
public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a
copy thereof and within twenty-four (24) hours upon such confiscation, the drug shall be
submitted to the.PDEA Forensic Laboratory for examination.
(B) The contention of the State is meritorious. Macario, the policeman failed to comply
with Section 21 of RA NO 9165 since the inventory and photograph of the drugs was
only made in the presence of barangay tanod and the same was not submitted to the
PNP Crime Laboratory within 24 hours. The rule is settled that failure to strictly comply
with Section 21(1), Article il of R.A. No. 9165 does not necessarily render an accused’s
arrest illegal or the items seized or confiscated from him inadmissible. The most
important factor is the preservation of the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized
item. Moreover, the issue of non-compliance with Section 21 of RA No. 9165 cannot be
raised for the first time on appeal (People v. Badilla, G.R. No. 218578, August 31,
2016).

XV

Michael was 17 years old when he was charged for violation

of Sec. 5of R.A. 9165 (illegal sale of prohibited drug). By the
time he wasconvicted and sentenced, he was already 21
years old. The court sentencedhim to suffer an
indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years
andone (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen
(17) years and four(4) months of reclusion temporal, as
maximum, and a fine of P500,000.Michael applied for
probation but his application was denied because
theprobation law does not apply to drug offenders under
R.A. 9165. Michaelthen sought the suspension of his
sentence under R.A. 9344 or theJuvenileJustice and Youth
Welfare Code.Can Michael avail of the suspension of his
sentence providedunder this law? (7%)ANSWER:The
benefits of a suspended sentence can no longer apply to
Michael. Under Section 40, RA 9344 as amended, the
suspension of sentence lasts only until the offender reaches
the maximum age of 21 years. Since Michael was already
21 years old, he can no longer be given a suspended
sentence. However,in lieu of confinement in a regular penal
institution,Michael may serve his sentence in an agricultural
camp and other training facilities that may be established,
maintained, supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in
coordinationwith the DSWD.(Section 51, RA 9344 as
amended; People vs. Jacinto, GR 182239, March 16, 2011;
People vs. Salcedo, GR 186523, June 22, 2011; Padua vs.
People, GR 168546; July 23, 2008; People vs. Sarcia, GR
169641, September 10, 2009)VI.
, a young boy aged sixteen (16) at the time of the
commission of thecrime, was convicted when he was
already seventeen (17) years of age forviolation of Section
11 of R.A. 9165 or Illegal Possession of DangerousDrugs
for which the imposable penalty is life imprisonment and a
fine.Section 98 of the same law provides that if the penalty
imposed is lifeimprisonmentto deathon minor offenders, the
penalty shall be reclusionperpetuato death. Under R.A.
9344, a minor offender is entitled to aprivilegedmitigating
circumstance. (8%)(A)May the privilegedmitigating
circumstance of minority beappreciated considering that the
penalty imposed by law is lifeimprisonment and fine?(B)Is
the Indeterminate Sentence Law applicable considering
thatlife imprisonmenthas no fixed duration and the
DangerousDrugs Law is malum prohibitum?(C)If the penalty
imposed is more than six (6) years and a notice ofappeal
was filed by A andgiven due course by the court, may Astill
file an application for probation?(D)If probation is not
allowed by the court, how will A serve
hissentence?ANSWER:(A)Yes. As stated above, under
Section 98, RA 9165, if the offender is a minor, the penalty
of life imprisonment shall be considered as reclusion
perpetua. Now that it has the nomenclature of penalties
under the RPC, the modifying circumstances therein may
also be applied. Even if reclusion perpetuais a single
indivisible penalty, the privileged mitigating circumstance of
minority would still be consideredto lower the imposable
penalty. The rule in Article 63, RPC that if the penalty
prescribed by law is a single indivisible penalty, it shall be
imposed regardless of mitigating and aggravating
circumstance refers only to ordinary mitigating
circumstances.(B)Yes. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is
applicable even to special penal laws.Since life
imprisonment was converted into reclusion perpetua, which
in turn was graduated to reclusion temporal because of the
privileged mitigating circumstance of minority, the
Indeterminate Sentence Law is applicable. (People vs.
Mantalaba, GR 186227, July 20, 2011)(C) Yes. Amay still
file an application for probation even if he filed a notice of
appeal. Section 42, RA 9344 provides: “The court may, after
it shall have convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with
the law, and upon application at any time, place the child on
probation in lieu of service of his/her sentence taking into
account the best interest of the child.For this purpose,
Section 4 of PD 968, otherwise known as the Probation Law
of 1976, is hereby amended accordingly.”The phrase “at any
time” mentioned in Section 42 means that the child in
conflict with the law may file an application for probation at
any time, even beyond the period for perfecting an appeal
and even if the child has perfected the appeal from the
judgment of conviction.(D)If probation is not allowed by the
court, the minor offender shall serve his sentence in
agricultural camp or other training facilityin accordance with
Section 51 of RA 9344 as amended.