Professional Documents
Culture Documents
L/epublic of Tbe Jbilippineg: Upreme (Ourt
L/epublic of Tbe Jbilippineg: Upreme (Ourt
~upreme (ourt
;illilanila
FIRST DIVISION
Present:
BERSAMIN, C.J.,
-versus - DEL CASTILLO,
REYES, JR., A.,*
GESMUNDO, and
CARANDANG, JJ.
DECISION
This is an appeal from the July 30, 2015 Decision 1of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CEB-CR HC NO. 01424 affirming the July 25,
2011 Judgment2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu City, Branch 57
in Criminal Case No. CBU-79460, finding Elsie Juguilon3 y Ebrada
(appellant) guilty of violation of Section 5 (Illegal Sale of Shabu), Article II
of Republic Act (RA) No. 9165, otherwise known as The Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
buyer Two (2) heat sealed transparent plastic packs of white crystalline
substance, [with] a total net weight of 48.65 grams known as SHABU,
containing Methamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug.
CONTRARY TO LA W. 4
arrest, the operatives proceeded to the PDEA Office with appellant, along with
her daughter and the latter's yaya who shortly appeared.
At the PDEA Office, the seized plastic packs were marked by PO2
Villarete with the initials "EJ-02-20-07 1" 6 and "EJ-02-20-07 2" and signed
each pack. Thereafter, an inventory of the items 7 was conducted in the
presence of SPOl Cabal, Barangay Sta. Cruz Councilor Elsa V. Iso
(Councilor Iso), Prosecutor Rudolph Joseph Val J. Carillo (Prosecutor Carillo)
and media representative Alan P. Domingo (Domingo) of the GMA-7. A
photograph of appellant and the seized items together with the inventory
witnesses was likewise taken. 8 A letter request for laboratory examination9
together with the marked plastic packs was then transmitted by PO2 Villarete
to the Philippine National Police (PNP) Regional Crime Laboratory Office 7;
this letter-request was received by PO2 Fortes in the crime laboratory. The
qualitative examination conducted on the specimen yielded positive for
methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu per Chemistry Report No. D-213-
200710 of Forensic Chemical Officer Jude Daniel M. Mendoza (Forensic
Chemist Mendoza).
officers who were not ill motivated to charge her with such a serious crime.
The RTC likewise found the chain of custody over the seized items duly
established. Thus, on July 25, 2011, the RTC rendered a Judgment, the
decretal portion of which reads:
The two packs of shabu are forfeited in favor of the government for
proper disposal.
SO ORDERED. 11
Appellant moved for reconsideration but the same was denied by the
CA in its September 7, 2016 Resolution. 12
In our Resolution dated April 24, 2017, we required the parties to file
p
supplemental briefs, but both manifested that they were no longer filing such
briefs.
/
11
Records, p. 322.
12
CA rollo, pp. 158-159; penned by Associate Justice Edward B. Contreras and concurred in by Associate
Justices Edgardo L. Delos Santos and Germano Francisco D. Legaspi.
Decision 5 G.R. No. 229828
Our Ruling
Appellant invokes illegal arrest and search. She avers that her
warrantless arrest was illegal since she was not then committing any crime.
Her averment fails to persuade. Under the circumstances portrayed by the
prosecution's evidence, the arrest of appellant, albeit without warrant, was
effected under Section 5(a), Rule 113 of the Rules ofCourt 14 or the arrest of /4
13
14
Peoplev. Dalawis, 772Phil.406,419-420(2015).
RULES OF COURT, Rule 113, Section 5(a) provides:
/YU
a) when, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing or
is attempting to commit an offense.
Decision 6 G.R. No. 229828
15
People v. Monceda, 721 Phil. 106, 119 (2013).
16
People v. Unisa, 674 Phil. 89, 111 (2011).
17
663 Phil. 132, 143 (2011).
18
People v. Monceda, supra at 119-120.
Decision 7 G.R. No. 229828
Penalty
20
Exhibit "E", records, p. 81.
21
Peoplev. Akmad, 773 Phil. 581, 591-592 (2015).
22
An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines.
Decision 9 G.R. No. 229828
SO ORDERED.
~p'
H~~ ,0 C. DEL CASTILLO
Associate Justice
WECONCUR:
ANDRE
Assa !J IU
REYES, JR.
e Justice
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify that the
conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case
was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court's Division.