Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence: Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence

11/18/2020 G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
llee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVA…
Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence
April 2018 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court

Jurisprudence
Search
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2018 >
April 2018 Decisions > G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018
ChanRobles - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
Professional MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAREZ Y
Review, Inc. LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y MOLIANEDA, Accused-
Appellants.:
G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y
FLORES, ALVIN ALVAREZ Y LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y
MOLIANEDA, Accused-Appellants.
ChanRobles On-Line
Bar Review
THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAREZ Y
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2018aprildecisions.php?id=321 1/40
11/18/2020 G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVA…
LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y MOLIANEDA,

Accused-Appellants.
DECISION
GESMUNDO, J.:
This is an appeal from the May 19, 2017 Decision1 of the

Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 07568 which
affirmed the March 1, 2015 Decision2 of the Regional

Trial Court (RTC) of Parañaque City, finding accused-
appellant Malou F. Alvarado (Malou) guilty beyond
reasonable doubt for violating Sections 5 and 11, Article
II of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165, while Alvin L. Alvarez
(Alvin) and Ramil M. Dal (Ramil) [collectively referred to
ChanRobles CPA
as appellants] were found guilty beyond reasonable
Review Online
doubt of violating Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165.
The Antecedents
In Criminal Case No. 11-0124, Malou was charged with

Violation of Section 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The
accusatory portion of the Information states:
That on or about the 26th day of January

2011, in the City of Parañaque, Philippines
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, not being
authorized by law, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in
her possession and under her control and
custody four (4) pieces of small heat-sealed
ChanRobles Special
transparent plastic sachets containing white
Lecture Series
crystalline substance weighing 0.01 gram
each or a total of0.04 gram, marked as "RB-
1" to "RB-4", which when tested was found to
be positive for Methylamphetamine
Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug.3
In a separate Information, docketed Criminal Case No.

11-0125, Malou, Alvin and Ramil were charged with
Violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, the

accusatory portion of which states:
That on or about the 26th day of January

2011, in the City of Parañaque, Philippines
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, conspiring
and confederating together and all of them
mutually helping and aiding one another, not
being lawfully authorized by law, did then and
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell,
trade, administer, dispense, deliver, give
away to another, distribute, dispatch in
transit or transport one (1) heat-sealed
transparent plastic sachet containing white
crystalline substance weighing 0.01 gram,
marked as "RB", to Police Poseur PO2 ROLLY
BURGOS, which content of the said plastic
sachet when tested was found to be positive
for Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride, a
dangerous drug.4
In another Information, docketed as Criminal Case No.

11-0123, Beata E. Lonquias (Beata) was also charged
with violation of Section 12, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 or
illegal possession of drug paraphernalia.
When arraigned, appellants pleaded not guilty. Trial

ensued.
From the evidence presented at the trial court, the CA

summarized the respective versions of the parties, as
follows:
Version of the Prosecution
The prosecution presented Forensic Chemist

Police Inspector Richard Mangalip (P/Insp.
Mangalip), PO3 Eric Sarino, PO2 Rolly Burgos,
and PO3 Edwin Plopinio and from their
testimonies, the following events were

gathered:
On 26 January 2011, around 2:00 o'clock in

the afternoon, an Informant reported to the
Parañaque City Police Station Anti-Illegal
Drug Special Operations Task Group
(SAIDSOTG) about the illegal drug activity of
certain [Betsy] and Malou at Sampaloc Site,
Barangay BF Homes, Parañaque City. The
police immediately formed a team, headed by
Senior Inspector Roque Tome (P/Sr.
Insp.Tome), to conduct a buy-bust operation
against the suspects, with PO2 Rolly Burgos
(PO2 Burgos) as poseur buyer and PO3 Eric
Sarino (PO3 Sarino), and PO3 (Edwin]
Plopinio as back-up. The Team Leader
provided PO2 Burgos with [buy]-bust money
consisting of 5 pieces of P100.00 bills, which
were marked with "RB" on the upper left
portion of the bills. After coordinating with
the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
(PDEA), the team, together with the
Informant, proceeded to Sampaloc Site,
Barangay BF Homes, Parañaque City to
conduct a buy-bust operation. Upon reaching
the target area, PO3 Sarino and PO3 Plopinio
strategically positioned themselves as
perimeter back-up officers while PO2 Burgos
and the Informant went ahead and when they
reached Chico Street, the Informant and PO2
Burgos spotted two men and a woman in blue
blouse standing at the side of the street. The
Informant identified the woman in blue
blouse as Malou Alvarado, their target, while
the two men were identified as Alvin Alvarez
(the live-in partner of Malou) and Ramil Dan
(Ramil), their runner. Ramil approached them
and offered them shabu from Malou, who he
boasted had ample supply (of drugs). PO2

Burgos handed the five P100.00 bills to Ramil
to buy P500.00 worth of shabu. Ramil gave
the money to Alvin and then approached
Malou, who handed him a small plastic
sachet, containing white crystalline substance
suspected to be shabu, which he (Ramil)
handed to PO2 Burgos, who immediately
executed the pre arranged signal of throwing
his cigarette to alert the rest of the team that
the transaction was consummated. PO2
Burgos introduced himself as a police officer
and then arrested Ramil and Malou, from
whom he confiscated a canister containing
four (4) sachets of suspected shabu.
Meanwhile, Alvin immediately ran away but
PO3 Plopinio chased and apprehended him
inside the house of Beata Lonquias alias Betty
(the subject of the buy-bust operation and
later identified as Alvin's mother). PO3
Plopinio recovered the buy-bust money from
Alvin. Beata likewise ran and was chased and
apprehended by PO3 Sarino, who confiscated
from her a small plastic container containing
numerous aluminum foil strips, which he did
not bother to count. P/Sr. Insp. Tome
contacted the barangay authorities and thus,
in the presence of Barangay Kagawad Noel
Azarcon and the four suspects, PO2 Burgos
placed markings on the seized items at the
scene of the arrest - RB on the plastic sachet
subject of the sale, RB-5 on the white
canister and RB-1 to RB-4 on the [four] 4
sachets inside said canister. Meanwhile, PO3
Sarino marked the plastic container of
aluminum foils with ES and placed his initials
thereon. While SPO2 Burgos was preparing
the inventory of the seized item, PO2 Julaton
took photographs of the arrested suspects
and the seized items. Thereafter, the team
criminal case brought the accused-appellants to the police

station for documentation and to submit the
drugs for ra confiscated items to the PNP Crime
Laboratory for examination.
civil cases
After a request for laboratory examination
arrest warrants was made by PO2 Julaton, PO2 Burgos
personally brought the confiscated specimens
legal court cases
to the PNP Crime Laboratory for examination.
Forensic Chemist P/Insp. Richard Mangalip
found the sachets (in the possession of
Malou) and the sachets subject of the sale
positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride
or shabu. However, the aluminum foils inside
the plastic canister seized from Beata E.
Lonquias alias Betty were found negative of
shabu.5
Version of the Accused
Malou Alvarado and her common-law

husband Alvin Alvarez were at their house at
Chico Street, Sampaloc Site, Sucat,
Parañaque City at around 3 o'clock in the
afternoon of 26 January 2011. Alvin was
watching television when PO2 Burgos kicked
open their door and together with Police
Officers Sarino and Plopinio entered and
searched their house without any warrant and
without their consent. PO2 Burgos poked a
gun at Alvin and though the police found
nothing, they proceeded to handcuff the
April-2018 accused-appellants and brought them
Jurisprudence outside. While outside, Malou saw her

mother-in-law Beata and a man (Ramil) she
did not know, who was also handcuffed. Then
A.C. No. 9676, they saw PO2 Burgos brought out from a
April 02, 2018 - IN black bag small plastic sachets and money.
RE: DECISION DATED Subsequently, their pictures were taken and
SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 they were forced to board a police mobile

IN OMB-M-A-10-023- that brought them to Manila Memorial Park.
A, ETC. AGAINST The police officers then told them to alight
ATTY. ROBELITO* B. from the vehicle and demanded P30,000.00
DIUYAN from each of them to settle their case. When
they told them that they had no money, the
G.R. No. 215305, police officers brought them to the police
April 03, 2018 - station. At the police station, they were
MARCELO G. ordered to call their relatives so that they
SALUDAY, Petitioner, v. could bring the money. When they were
PEOPLE OF THE brought for inquest, they admitted that they
PHILIPPINES, did not tell the prosecutor that the police
Respondent. were extorting money from them. They
claimed that they did not file any case
A.M. No. MTJ-18- against the police officers who apprehended
1911 (formerly A.M. them because they had no money.
No. 17-08-98-MTC),
Ramil, who testified on 18 December 2014,
April 16, 2018 -
declared that he was on his way to a friend's
OFFICE OF THE
house at Sampaloc Site, for possible
COURT
employment in a construction project, when
ADMINISTRATOR,
he met six men (who turned out to be police
Complainant, v.
officers), one of whom (PO3 Plopinio) poked a
WALTER INOCENCIO
gun at him and told him to face the wall.
V. ARREZA, JUDGE,
When he did not follow, he was hit on the
MUNICIPAL TRIAL
stomach and handcuffed. Thereafter, he saw
COURT, PITOGO,
a man (Alvin), a woman (Malou) and an
QUEZON, Respondent.
elderly woman (whom he later identified as
Beata) coming from an alley. Then the four of
G.R. No. 218703,
them were gathered together and they were
April 23, 2018 -
made to sign a document. He saw a police
PEOPLE OF THE
officer handed to PO2 Burgos several plastic
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-
sachets and five P100.00 bills from his small
Appellee, v. ANTONIO
bag. Thereafter, they were photographed,
LLAMERA Y ATIENZA,
accused of selling illegal drugs and made to
Accused-Appellant.
board a vehicle. They were brought to Manila
Memorial Park, where policemen asked them
G.R. No. 230751,
to produce P30,000.00 each but they were
April 25, 2018 -
not able to give them any money.
ESTRELLITA TADEO-
MATIAS, Petitioner, v. Consequently, the police brought them to the

REPUBLIC OF THE police station, where they were detained.
PHILIPPINES,
Beata testified that: on 26 January 2011, she
Respondent.
was alone in her house when several men
forcibly entered their house, searched it and
G.R. No. 212866,
then arrested her; the police did not have
April 23, 2018 -
any warrant with them and she did not know
SPOUSES
why they arrested and detained her; Malou
FREDESWINDA
was just a neighbor.6
DRILON YBIOSA AND
ALFREDO YBIOSA,
Ruling of the RTC
Petitioners, v.
INOCENCIO DRILON, On March 1, 2015, the RTC rendered its decision finding
Respondent. appellants guilty as charged. It, however, acquitted

Beata based on reasonable doubt.
G.R. No. 215387,

The RTC held that all the elements of the crimes of illegal
April 23, 2018 -
possession and illegal sale of shabu were clearly
NORTHERN
established by the prosecution. It gave credence to the
MINDANAO
testimonies of police officers who composed the buy-bust
INDUSTRIAL PORT
team, particularly PO2 Burgos who testified on the
AND SERVICES
conduct of the buy-bust operation that resulted in the
CORPORATION,
arrest of the appellants. As to the failure of the arresting
Petitioner, v. ILIGAN
officers to strictly comply with the requirements under
CEMENT
Section 21 of R.A. 9165, it was noted that a barangay
CORPORATION,
kagawad was present during the inventory and hence
Respondent.
there was substantial compliance with the law and that
the integrity of the drugs seized from appellants was
G.R. No. 221029,
preserved.
April 24, 2018 -
REPUBLIC OF THE On the other hand, the defenses of denial and frame-up
PHILIPPINES, failed to convince the RTC, which noted that none of the
Petitioner, v. MARELYN appellants filed a complaint against the police officers
TANEDO MANALO, who allegedly arrested them on false charges and even
Respondent. tried extorting money from them.
However, the RTC ruled that the prosecution failed to

G.R. No. 218255,
establish its case against accused Beata who was not
April 11, 2018 -
involved or present during the conduct of the buy-bust.
PEOPLE OF THE
Also, none of the 114 aluminum foils allegedly found in
Appellee, v. JERRY her possession was marked by PO3 Sarino who searched
BUGNA Y BRITANICO, her person after he spotted her leaving the house of
Accused-Appellants. Malou.
The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision reads:

G.R. No. 203435,
April 11, 2018 - WHEREFORE, premises considered the court
PEOPLE OF THE renders judgement as follows:
1. In Criminal Case No. 11-0123 for Violation
Appellee, v. MARDY
of Sec. 12, Art. II, RA 9165, the court finds
AQUINO, MARIO
accused BEATA ESCUADRA LONQUIAS is
AQUINO, RECTO
hereby ACQUITTED on ground of reasonable
AQUINO, INYONG
doubt;
NARVANTE, ROMY
FERNANDEZ, FELIX 2. In Criminal Case No. 11-0124 for Violation
SAPLAN, BONIFACIO of Sec. 11, Art. II, RA 9165, the court finds
CAGUIOA AND accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO, GUILTY
JUANITO AQUINO, beyond reasonable doubt and is hereby
Accused.; MARDY sentenced to Imprisonment of twelve (12)
MARIO AQUINO, years and one (1) day as minimum to
Accused-Appellants. seventeen (17) years and four (4) months as
maximum and to pay a fine of Php
G.R. No. 219957, 300,000.00 and;
April 04, 2018 -
PEOPLE OF THE 3. In Criminal Case No. 11-0125 for Violation
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- of Sec. 5, Art. II, RA 9165, the Court finds
Appellee, v. accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO, ALVIN
ELEUTERIO URMAZA Y LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA
TORRES, Accused- DAL, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt and
Appellants. are hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of

life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Php
G.R. No. 213225, 500,000.00 each;
April 04, 2018 -

It appearing that the accused MALOU FLORES
PEOPLE OF THE
ALVARADO, ALVIN LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and
RAMIL MOLIANEDA DAL are detained at the
Appellee, v. RENANTE
Parañaque City Jail and considering the
COMPRADO
penalty imposed, the OIC Branch Clerk of
FBRONOLA, Accused-
Court is directed to prepare the Mittimus for
Appellant.
the immediate transfer of accused ALVIN
G.R. No. 210446, LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA

April 18, 2018 - DAL from the Parañaque City Jail to the New
ANGELICA G. CRUZ, Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa City and the
ANNA MARIE KUDO, transfer of accused MALOU FLORES
ALBERT G. CRUZ AND ALVARADO from the Paranaque City Jail to
ARTURO G. CRUZ, the Women's Correctional Facility in
Petitioners, v. Mandaluyong City.
MARYLOU TOLENTINO
The bail bond posted by accused BEATA
AND THE OFFICE OF
ESCUADRA LONQUIAS is hereby cancelled.
THE REGISTER OF
DEEDS OF The specimens consisting of five (5) sachets
MANDALUYONG CITY, of shabu marked "RB" to "RB-4" each
Respondents. weighing 0.01 gram for a total of 0.05 gram,
as well as the one hundred fourteen (114)
G.R. No. 200075, pieces of aluminum foil strips placed inside a
April 04, 2018 - SALIC plastic container marked as "ES", are
MAPANDI Y forfeited in favor of the government and the
DIMAAMPAO, OIC-Branch Clerk of Court is likewise directed
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE to immediately turn over the same to the
OF THE PHILIPPINES, Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA)
Respondent. for proper disposal pursuant to Sec. 21 of RA
9165 and Supreme Court OCA Circular No.
G.R. No. 216714, 51-2003.
April 04, 2018 -
SPOUSES GODFREY SO ORDERED.7
AND MA. TERESA

Ruling of the CA
TEVES, Petitioners, v.
INTEGRATED CREDIT On appeal, the CA affirmed the decision of the RTC. It
& CORPORATE held that based on the totality of the evidence, the
SERVICES, CO. (NOW prosecution was able to prove that the illegal sale of
CAROL AQUI), shabu took place, and that Malou then had in her
Respondent. possession shabu contained in four (4) heat-sealed
transparent plastic sachets. The appellate court likewise
G.R. No. 217805, concluded that there was compliance with the chain of
April 02, 2018 - custody rule which clearly showed that the drug
PEOPLE OF THE specimens presented in court were the same items in the
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- possession of Malou at the time of the buy-bust
Appellee, v. ALSARIF operation. On the other hand, appellants failed to show
BINTAIB Y FLORENCIO that the shabu seized from Malou, were tampered with,
A.K.A. "LENG," or switched before they were delivered to the PNP Crime
Accused-Appellant. Laboratory for examination.
The appellate court observed that the appellants

G.R. No. 189590,
"repeatedly harped on the absence of [sic] the accused,
April 23, 2018 -
media and DOJ representatives during the inventory of
REPUBLIC OF THE
the seized items." Citing People v. Salvador,8 the CA
PHILIPPINES,
ruled that failure to strictly comply with Section 21 of
Petitioner, v. HON.
R.A. 9165 was not fatal.
SANDIGANBAYAN,
ROMEO G.
As to appellants' defense of denial, the CA said that
PANGANIBAN, FE L.
aside from being self-serving, the same was unsupported
PANGANIBAN,
and unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence.
GERALDINE L.
Even their testimonies regarding the incident were found
PANGANIBAN, ELSA P.
conflicting.
DE LUNA AND PURITA
P. SARMIENTO, Dissatisfied with the affirmance of the decision, the
Respondents. appellants filed this appeal before the Court.
In compliance with the Court's Resolution,9 the Public

G.R. No. 219240,
Attorney's Office (PAO), on behalf of the appellants, filed
April 04, 2018 -
a manifestation stating that they are adopting and re-
PEOPLE OF THE
pleading all the arguments raised in their appeal brief
filed with the CA. A similar manifestation was filed by the
Appellee, v. BRYAN
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
GANABA Y NAM-AY,
Accused-Appellant. Arguments of the Parties
In their appeal brief, appellants assail the CA in

G.R. No. 211273,
upholding their conviction despite the police officers'
April 18, 2018 -
non-compliance with procedural safeguards prescribed
RAYMOND A. SON,
by Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165. They assert that no
RAYMOND S.
evidence was presented showing that the inventory and
ANTIOLA, AND
photographing of the seized items were conducted in
WILFREDO E.
their presence and/or their representative, and
POLLARCO,
representatives from the media and the DOJ. No
Petitioners, v.
justifiable ground could be found in the testimonies of
UNIVERSITY OF
prosecution witnesses that would excuse non compliance
SANTO TOMAS, FR.
with the said provision.
ROLANDO DELA
ROSA, DR. CLARITA
CARILLO, DR.
CYNTHIA LOZA, FR. Appellants further contend that such failure of the
EDGARDO ALAURIN, arresting officers to show that they followed the required
AND THE COLLEGE OF procedure in the chain of custody constitutes a deviation
FINE ARTS AND that destroys the presumption of regularity in the
DESIGN FACULTY performance of duty. And although the defense of denial
COUNCIL, is weak, appellants assert that they should nonetheless,
Respondents. be acquitted. They stress that the presumption of
innocence stands as a fundamental principle of both
G.R. Nos. 192595- constitutional and criminal law, imposing a rule on
96, April 11, 2018 - evidence, a degree of proof that demands no less than
NATIONAL total compliance.10
ELECTRIFICATION
On the other hand, the OSG, as Peoples' counsel,
ADMINISTRATION
maintains that appellants' guilt in the crimes they were
(NEA), Petitioner, v.
convicted was proven beyond reasonable doubt. All the
MAGUINDANAO
elements for both crimes of illegal sale and illegal
ELECTRIC
possession of shabu have been sufficiently proven by the
COOPERATIVE, INC.,
evidence presented. The drugs subject of the buy-bust
REPRESENTED BY
sale and those seized from the possession of Malou were
MAGUINDANAO
the same drugs presented and identified in the trial
ELECTRIC
court. Contrary to appellants' assertion, there was
COOPERATIVE-PALMA
substantial compliance with Section 21 (a) of R.A. No.
AREA (MAGELCO-
9165 and the chain of custody, as well as the
PALMA),
presentation of the corpus delicti in court, had likewise
REPRESENTED BY
been sufficiently established.
ATTY. LITTIE SARAH A.
AGDEPPA, ANTONIO As to the alleged absence of appellants when the
U. ACUB, EDGAR L. LA
inventory was being conducted by the arresting officers,
VEGA, RET. JUDGE
this issue was not raised before the trial court during the
TERESITA CARREON
stipulations made by the parties regarding Bgy. Kgd.
LLABAN, EMILY
Azarcon's testimony. As shown by the transcript of
LLABAN, ARMANDO C.
stenographic notes, appellants admitted that the
LLABAN, AUDIE D.
barangay kagawad was present during the inventory and
MACASARTE,
apart from stipulating on Azarcon's lack of personal
WILFREDO Q.
knowledge on the source of the specimen and the
LLABAN, EVANGELINE
circumstances surrounding the arrest of the appellants,
A. VARILLA, CORAZON
the latter did not stipulate nor make it of record that
TUMANG, AND when the barangay kagawad was there to witness the
PRESCILLA LANO,
inventory, appellants were not around at the time.
Respondents.; G.R.
Nos. 192676-77, April The OSG underscores the previous rulings of this Court
11, 2018 - COTABATO that non compliance by the apprehending/buy-bust team
ELECTRIC with Section 21 is not fatal for as long as there is
COOPERATIVE, INC. justifiable ground therefor, and as long as the integrity
(COTELCO), and the evidentiary value of the confiscated/seized
REPRESENTED BY items, are properly preserved. In particular, the absence
ALEJANDRO Q. of the representative from DOJ and media was already
COLLADOS AS explained by the arresting officers. Thus, if despite their
GENERAL MANAGER, efforts it was only Bgy. Kgd. Azarcon who arrived at the
Petitioner, v. scene to witness the photographing and inventory, this
MAGUINDANAO predicament is obviously beyond the control of the
ELECTRIC arresting team who had no choice but to proceed with
COOPERATIVE-PALMA the tasks at hand. What is essential was that the police
AREA (MAGELCO- officer had done all they could to safeguard the integrity
PALMA), and evidentiary value of the items involved.
REPRESENTED BY
On appellants' defense of denial, the OSG argues that
ATTY. LITTIE SARAH A.
such denial cannot overcome the positive assertions of
AGDEPPA, ANTONIO
the members of the buy-bust team. The well-entrenched
U. ACUB, EDGAR L. LA
principle is that, over and above the accused's denial,
VEGA, RET. JUDGE
greater weight is given to the positive testimonies of the
TERESITA CARREON
prosecution witnesses especially when these corroborate
LLABAN EVANGELINE
each other on material points, particularly the positive
A. VARILLA, AND
identification of the appellants as the ones who sold and
CORAZON TUMANG;
delivered the shabu to the poseur-buyer and that on the
AND MAGUINDANAO
occasion of their arrest, more plastic sachets of shabu
ELECTRIC
were recovered from one of them.11
COOPERATIVE, INC.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
Issue
PRESIDENT, DATU
TUMAGANTANG Whether or not the CA erred in affirming appellants'
ZAINAL, Respondents. conviction for illegal sale and illegal possession of shabu.
The Court's Ruling

G.R. No. 232892,
April 04, 2018 - The appeal is meritorious.
ALFREDO MALLARI
To secure a conviction for illegal sale of shabu, the
MAGAT, Petitioner, v.
following essential elements must be established: (a) the
INTERORIENT
identities of the buyer and the seller, the object of the
MARITIME
sale, and the consideration; and (b) the delivery of the
ENTERPRISES, INC.,
INTERORIENT thing so] d and the payment for the thing. What is
MARITIME material in prosecutions for illegal sale of shabu is the
ENTERPRISE LIBERIA proof that the transaction or sale actually took place,
FOR DROMON E.N.E. coupled with the presentation in court of the corpus
AND JASMIN P. delicti as evidence.12
ARBOLEDA,
In this case, the prosecution narrated that PO2 Burgos,
Respondent.
the poseur buyer, accompanied by their informant, and
G.R. No. 208284, the rest of the buy-bust team, went to the area where
Malou and Betty (Beata) supposedly engaged in selling
April 23, 2018 - THE
shabu. It was Ramil who approached PO2 Burgos and
IGLESIA DE
offered him shabu, and when PO2 Burgos gave the
JESUCRISTO
payment (in marked money) for P500.00 worth of
JERUSALEM NUEVA OF
shabu, Ramil handed the money to Alvin. Malou then
MANILA, PHILIPPINES,
gave Ramil one plastic sachet containing suspected
INC., REPRESENTED
shabu, which Ramil handed to PO2 Burgos.
BY ITS PRESIDENT,
FRANCISCO GALVEZ,
With the sale consummated, PO2 Burgos threw his
Petitioner, v. LOIDA
cigarette as pre-arranged signal for the rest of the buy-
DELA CRUZ USING
bust team. He then introduced himself as a police officer
THE NAME CHURCH
and arrested appellants with the aid of his back-up, PO3
OF JESUS CHRIST,
Plopinio and PO3 Sarino. Four (4) more plastic sachets of
"NEW JERUSALEM"
shabu placed inside a plastic canister were recovered
AND ALL PERSONS
from Malou. Alvin tried to run towards their nearby
CLAIMING RIGHTS house but he was chased by PO3 Plopinio. On the same
UNDER HER,
day, the five plastic sachets containing white crystalline
Respondents.
substance seized from appellants were submitted for
chemical analysis to the PNP Crime Laboratory and the
G.R. No. 223321,
results confirmed the presence of methylamphetamine-
April 02, 2018 -
hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous drug. The shabu
ROGELIO M. FLORETE,
contained in one plastic sachet weighing 0.01 gram,
SR., THE ESTATE OF
marked "RB" sold by appellants to PO2 Burgos was duly
THE LATE TERESITA F.
identified and presented as evidence in court. The other
MENCHAVEZ,
four (4) plastic sachets containing shabu, which were
REPRESENTED BY
seized from Malou on the same occasion marked as "RB-
MARY ANN THERESE F. 1", "RB-2", "RB-3"and "RB-4", were likewise presented
MENCHAVEZ, ROSIE
as evidence.
JILL F. MENCHAVEZ,
MA. ROSARIO F. For illegal possession of a dangerous drug, like shabu,
MENCHAVEZ, the elements are: (a) the accused is in possession of an
CRISTINE JOY F. item or object that is identified to be a prohibited or

MENCHAVEZ, AND dangerous drug; (b) such possession is not authorized
EPHRAIM by law; and (c) the accused freely and consciously
MENCHAVEZ, AND possessed the drug.13
DIANE GRACE F.
We have held that the confiscation of additional quantity
MENCHAVEZ,
of illegal drugs, other than those subject of the
Petitioners, v.
MARCELINO M. consummated sale, from the person of the accused
during the buy-bust, was legally authorized after said
FLORETE, JR. AND
accused had been lawfully arrested for committing drug
MA. ELENA F. MUYCO,
Respondents pushing.14
Nonetheless, the Court has ruled that even when the

G.R. No. 233325,
illegal sale of a dangerous drug was proven by the
April 16, 2018 -
prosecution, the latter is still burdened to prove the
PEOPLE OF THE
integrity of the corpus delicti. Thus, even if there was a
sale, the corpus delicti is not proven if the chain of
Appellee, v.
custody was defective.15 The corpus delicti is the body of
PASTORLITO V. DELA
the crime that would establish that a crime was
VICTORIA, Accused-
committed. In cases involving the sale of drugs, the
Appellant.
corpus delicti is the confiscated illicit drug itself, the
G.R. No. 218584, integrity of which must be preserved.16
April 25, 2018 -

Proof beyond reasonable doubt demands that
PEOPLE OF THE
unwavering exactitude be observed in establishing the
corpus delicti: every fact necessary to constitute the
Appellee, v. DENNIS
crime must be established. The chain of custody
MANALIGOD Y
requirement performs this function in buy-bust
SANTOS, Accused-
operations as it ensures that doubts concerning the
Appellant.
identity of the evidence are removed. In a long line of
cases, we have considered it fatal for the prosecution to
G.R. No. 234048,
fail to prove that the specimen submitted for laboratory
April 23, 2018 -
examination was the same one allegedly seized from the
PEOPLE OF THE
accused.17
Appellee, v. MALOU The preservation of the chain of custody is therefore
ALVARADO Y FLORES, essential in a successful prosecution for the illegal sale of
ALVIN ALVAREZ Y dangerous drug. The adoption of a special rule in the
LONQUIAS AND RAMIL handling of the dangerous drugs in particular is
necessitated by the nature of the dangerous drug itself
DAL Y MOLIANEDA, which is likely to be tampered, altered, contaminated, or

Accused-Appellants. substituted.18
Section 1(b) of Dangerous Drug Board (DDB) Regulation

G.R. No. 219113,
April 25, 2018 - No. 1, Series of 2002,19 defines chain of custody as
PEOPLE OF THE follows:
b. "Chain of Custody" means the duly
Appellee, v. ROLAND
recorded authorized movements and custody
MIRAÑA Y ALCARAZ,
of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or
Accused-Appellant.
plant sources of dangerous drugs or
laboratory equipment of each stage, from the
G.R. No. 202217,
time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the
April 25, 2018 -
forensic laboratory to safekeeping to
PABLO C. HIDALGO,
presentation in court for destruction. Such
Petitioner, v. SONIA
record of movements and custody of seized
VELASCO,
item shall include the identity and signature
Respondent.
of the person who held temporary custody of
the seized item, the date and time when such
G.R. No. 199161,
transfer of custody were made in the course
April 18, 2018 -
of safekeeping and used in court as evidence,
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL
and the final disposition[.]
BANK, Petitioner, v.
JAMES T. CUA, The apprehending team is required to "document the
Respondent. chain of custody each time a specimen is handled,
transferred or presented in court until its disposal, and
G.R. No. 197645, every individual in the chain of custody shall be identified
April 18, 2018 - following the laboratory control and chain of custody
CARLOS JAY form."20
ADLAWAN, Petitioner,
Section 21, paragraph 1 of R.A. No. 9165 provides for
v. PEOPLE OF THE
the custody and disposition of confiscated, seized,
PHILIPPINES,
and/or surrendered drugs and/or drug paraphernalia.
Respondent.
Said provision has been amended by R.A. No. 10640.21
G.R. No. 231053, Since the alleged offense was committed on January 26,
April 04, 2018 - 2011, the old law and its corresponding implementing
DESIDERIO DALISAY rules and regulations shall be applied, being more
INVESTMENTS, INC., favorable to the appellants. The original Section 21 reads
Petitioner, v. SOCIAL as follows:
SECURITY SYSTEM, SEC. 21. Custody and Disposition of

Respondent. Confiscated, Seized, and/or Surrendered
Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of
G.R. No. 192797, Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors and
April 18, 2018 - Essential Chemicals, Instruments/
EXCELLENT Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment.
ESSENTIALS - The PDEA shall take charge and have
INTERNATIONAL custody of all dangerous drugs, plant sources
CORPORATION, of dangerous drugs controlled precursors and
Petitioner, v. EXTRA essential chemicals, as well as
EXCEL instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
INTERNATIONAL equipment so confiscated, seized and/or
PHILIPPINES, INC., surrendered, for proper disposition in the
Respondent. following manner:
(1) The apprehending team having initial

G.R. No. 218108,
custody and control of the drugs shall,
April 11, 2018 -
immediately after seizure and confiscation,
PEOPLE OF THE
physically inventory and photograph the
same in the presence of the accused or
Appellee, v. RODOLFO
the person/s from whom such items
ADVINCULA Y
were confiscated and/or seized, or
MONDANO, Accused-
his/her representative or counsel, a
Appellant.
representative from the media and the
Department of Justice (DOJ), and any
G.R. No. 195814,
elected public official who shall be
April 04, 2018 -
required to sign the copies of the
EVERSLEY CHILDS
inventory and be given a copy thereof[.]
SANITARIUM,
(emphasis supplied)
REPRESENTED BY DR.
GERARDO M. AQUINO, This is implemented by Section 21(a), Article II of the
JR. (NOW DR. PRIMO Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of R.A. No.
JOEL S. ALVEZ) CHIEF 9165, which reads:
OF SANITARIUM,
(a) The apprehending officer/team having
Petitioner, v. SPOUSES
initial custody and control of the drugs shall,
ANASTACIO AND
immediately after seizure and confiscation,
PERLA BARBARONA,
physically inventory and photograph the
Respondents.
same in the presence of the accused or
the person/s from whom such items
G.R. No. 212785, were confiscated and/or seized, or

April 04, 2018 - his/her representative or counsel, a
REPUBLIC OF THE representative from the media and the
PHILIPPINES, Department of Justice (DOJ), and any
Petitioner, v. GO PEI elected public official who shall be
HUNG, Respondent. required to sign the copies of the
inventory and be given a copy thereof:
G.R. No. 199513, Provided, that the physical inventory and
April 18, 2018 - photograph shall be conducted at the place
TERESA GUTIERREZ where the search warrant is served; or at the
YAMAUCHI, Petitioner, nearest police station or at the nearest office
v. ROMEO F. SUÑIGA, of the apprehending officer/team, whichever
Respondent. is practicable, in case of warrantless seizures;
Provided, further that non-compliance
G.R. No. 226727, with these requirements under
April 25, 2018 - justifiable grounds, as long as the
UNIVERSITY OF THE integrity and the evidentiary value of the
EAST AND DR. ESTER seized items are properly preserved by
GARCIA, Petitioners, the apprehending officer/team, shall not
v. VERONICA M. render void and invalid such seizures of
MASANGKAY AND and custody over said items. (emphasis
GERTRUDO R. supplied)
REGONDOLA,
In this case, after the plastic sachets containing white
Respondents.
crystalline substance were seized by the arresting
officers, they were marked by PO2 Burgos with his
G.R. No. 209031,
initials and brought to the nearby house of Malou. It is
April 16, 2018 -
there where an inventory of the seized items was done in
ABIGAEL AN ESPINA-
the presence of appellants and Kgd. Azarcon, as shown
DAN, Petitioner, v.
in the pictures taken by PO2 Julaton.22 However, only a
MARCO DAN,
barangay kagawad was present during the inventory and
Respondent.
photographing of the seized items.
G.R. No. 214367,

Section 1(A.1.6) of the Chain of Custody Implementing
April 04, 2018 -
Rules and Regulations states that "[a] representative of
REPUBLIC OF THE
the [National Prosecution Service] is anyone from its
PHILIPPINES,
employees, while the media representative is any media
Petitioner, v.
practitioner. The elected public official is any incumbent
LAUREANA MALIJAN-
public official regardless of the place where he/she is
JAVIER AND IDEN
MALIJAN-JAVIER, elected." The presence of these three (3) persons

Respondents. required by law can be ensured in a planned operation
such as a buy-bust operation.23

G.R. No. 220146,
Here, the buy-bust operation was arranged and
April 18, 2018 -
scheduled in advance. The police officers formed an
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- apprehending team, coordinated with the Philippine Drug
Enforcement Agency (PDEA), prepared the buy-bust
Appellee, v. GLEN
money, and held a briefing. Yet, they failed to ensure
ABINA Y LATORRE
that a DOJ representative and a media practitioner,
AND JESUS LATORRE
would witness the inventory and photographing of the
Y DERAYA, Accused-
seized drugs.
Appellants.
Securing the presence of these persons is not

G.R. No. 202784,
impossible. Indeed, it is not enough for the
April 18, 2018 -
apprehending officers to merely mark the seized pack of
JONNEL D.
shabu; the buy-bust team must also conduct a physical
ESPALDON, Petitioner,
inventory and take photographs of the confiscated item
v. RICHARD E. BUBAN
in the presence of these persons required by law.24
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
Relevantly, under the Revised PNP Manual on Anti-Illegal
GRAFT
Drugs Operations and Investigation,25 on specific rules
INVESTIGATION AND
and procedures for planned operations such as a buy-
PROSECUTION
bust operation, the designated Team Leader is required
OFFICER II, MEDWIN
"to see to it that he has the contact numbers of
S. DIZON IN HIS
representatives from the DOJ, Media and any Local
CAPACITY AS
Elected Official in the area for inventory purposes as
DIRECTOR, PIAB-A,
ALEU A. AMANTE IN required under Section 21, Article II of R.A. No. 9165."26
HIS CAPACITY AS
The OSG suggests that the absence of the DOJ and
ASSISTANT
media representative may be overlooked, explaining that
OMBUDSMAN, PAMO
"this predicament is obviously beyond the control of the
I, AND CONCHITA
arresting team who had no choice but to proceed with
CARPIO MORALES IN
the tasks at hand."
HER CAPACITY AS
OMBUDSMAN OF THE The Court cannot agree to such proposition.
REPUBLIC OF THE
In the recent case of People v. Macud,27 we stressed the
PHILIPPINES, PETER
importance of this requirement, thus:
L. CALIMAG,
ASSISTANT We cannot even declare that there was
SECRETARY, REVENUE substantial compliance with the law in this
AFFAIRS AND LEGAL case as the police officers invited no other

AFFAIRS GROUP, person to witness the procedures that were
DEPARTMENT OF done after the buy-bust operation, i.e., the
FINANCE, RENATO M. marking, inventory, and photography of the
GARBO III, MA. seized drugs. There was no representative
LETICIA of the media or the DOJ and no allegation
MALMALATEO, that these people could similarly compromise
MARLON K. TAULI, the operation if they had been informed of
FRAYN M. BANAWA, and present before, during, and after the
AND JOHNNY operation.
CAGUIAT, ALL NBI
The presence of the persons who should
AGENTS, NATIONAL
witness the post-operation procedures is
BUREAU OF
necessary to insulate the apprehension
INVESTIGATION,
and incrimination proceedings from any
ROGELIO M. SABADO,
taint of illegitimacy or irregularity. The
AND PRUDENCIO S.
insulating presence of such witnesses
DAR, JR., RAILWAY
would have preserved an unbroken chain
POLICE, PHILIPPINE
of custody. We have noted in several cases
NATIONAL RAILWAYS,
that a buy-bust operation is susceptible to
ANTONIO MARIANO
abuse, and the only way to prevent this is to
ALMEDA, IRENEO C.
ensure that the procedural safeguards
QUIZON, ARIEL
provided by the law are strictly observed. In
SARMIENTO,
the present case, not only have the
DOMINGO BEGUERAS,
prescribed procedures not been followed, but
JOHN DOES/JANE
also (and more importantly) the lapses not
DOES, NBI AND/OR
justifiably explained. In People v. Dela Cruz
PNR, Respondents.
where there was a similar failure to comply
with Section 21 of RA No. 9165, the Court
G.R. No. 216065,
declared:
April 18, 2018 -
PEOPLE OF THE "xxx This inexcusable non-
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- compliance effectively
Appellee, v. invalidates their seizure of and
REYNANTE custody over the seized drugs,
MANZANERO Y thus, compromising the
HABANA A.K.A. identity and integrity of the
"NANTE," MARIO same. We resolve the doubt in
TANYAG Y the integrity and identity of the
MARASIGAN A.K.A. corpus delicti in favor of appellant
"TAGA," ANGELITO as every fact necessary to

EVANGELISTA Y constitute the crime must be
AVELINO A.K.A. established by proof beyond
"LITO," ARTHUR reasonable doubt. Considering
FAJARDO Y that the prosecution tailed to
MAMALAYAN, MARIO present the required quantum of
EVANGELISTA A.K.A. evidence, appellants acquittal is in
"TIKYO," PATRICK order."
ALEMANIA A.K.A.
As in Dela Cruz, and in view of the foregoing,
"BOBBY PATRICK,"
the Court finds the acquittal of Macud in
TOYING PENALES
order. (emphasis supplied, citations omitted)
A.K.A. "TOYING,"
A.K.A. "REY," AND The Court has recognized the saving clause provided in
A.K.A. "MARLON," the last paragraph of Section 21 (a), Article II of the IRR
ACCUSED, ARTHUR of R.A. No. 9165 such that failure to strictly comply with
FAJARDO Y the said directive is not necessarily fatal to the
MAMALAYAN, prosecution's case. Strict compliance with the legal
Accused-Appellant. prescriptions of R.A. No. 9165 may not always be
possible given the field conditions in which the police
A.C. No. 11821 officers operate. However, the lapses in procedure must
(formerly CBD Case be recognized, addressed and explained in terms of their
No. 15-4477), April justifiable grounds, and the integrity and evidentiary
02, 2018 - DARIO value of the evidence seized must be shown to have
TANGCAY,
been preserved.28
Complainant, v.
HONESTO ANCHETA In People v. Cayas,29 the Court reiterated this rule:
CABARROGUIS,
While recent jurisprudence has subscribed to
Respondent.
the provision in the Implementing Rules and
Regulations (IRR) of R.A. 9165 providing that
G.R. No. 193572,
non-compliance with the prescribed
April 04, 2018 -
procedure is not fatal to the prosecution's
TSUNEISHI HEAVY
case, we find it proper to define and set the
INDUSTRIES (CEBU),
parameters on when strict compliance can be
INC., Petitioner, v. MIS
excused.
MARITIME
CORPORATION, As a rule, strict compliance with the
Respondent. prescribed procedure is required
because of the illegal drug's unique
characteristic that renders it indistinct,
G.R. No. 199353, not readily identifiable, and easily open

April 04, 2018 - to tampering, alteration, or substitution
LEVISTE either by accident or otherwise.
MANAGEMENT
The exception found in the IRR of R.A. 9165
SYSTEM, INC.,
comes into play when strict compliance with
Petitioner, v. LEGASPI
the proscribed procedures is not observed.
TOWERS 200, INC.,
This saving clause, however, applies only
AND VIVIAN Y.
(1) where the prosecution recognized
LOCSIN AND PITONG
the procedural lapses, and thereafter
MARCORDE,
explained the cited justifiable grounds,
RESPONDENTS.
and (2) when the prosecution
ENGR. NELSON Q.
established that the integrity and
IRASGA, IN HIS
evidentiary value of the evidence seized
CAPACITY AS
had been preserved. The prosecution, thus,
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
loses the benefit of invoking the presumption
OFFICIAL OF MAKATI,
of regularity and bears the burden of proving
METRO MANILA AND
— with moral certainty — that the illegal drug
HON. JOSE P. DE
presented in court is the same drug that was
JESUS, IN HIS
confiscated from the accused during his
CAPACITY AS
arrest. 30 (emphases supplied)
SECRETARY OF THE
DEPT. OF PUBLIC
During his cross examination, PO2 Burgos was asked
WORKS AND
regarding the absence of the DOJ and media
HIGHWAYS, THIRD
representative but he failed to give any justifiable
PARTY, Respondents.;
reason. The pertinent portions of his testimony are
G.R. NO. 199389, herein reproduced:
April 04, 2018 -
LEGASPI TOWERS xxx xxx xxx
200, INC., Petitioner,

v. LEVISTE Q: And you would agree, as stated in
MANAGEMENT Section 21 of RA 9165, the actual
SYSTEM, INC., ENGR. inventory must be witnessed by an
NELSON Q. IRASGA, elected public official?
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
A: Yes, sir.
MUNICIPAL BLDG.
OFFICIAL OF MAKATI,
METRO MANILA, AND
Q: And in this case, Kgd. Noel Azarcon
HON. JOSE P. DE
was present?
JESUS, IN HIS
CAPACITY AS A: Yes, sir.

SECRETARY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS AND Q: And aside from that, there must also
HIGHWAYS, be a witness coming from the DOJ
Respondents. and media?
G.R. No. 185530, A: Yes, sir.
April 18, 2018 -

MAKATI TUSCANY
CONDOMINIUM Q: In these pictures, can you tell the
CORPORATION, court if a media man or DOJ
Petitioner, v. MULTI- representative was present during the
REALTY inventory?
DEVELOPMENT
A: No representative from the media and
CORPORATION,
DOJ.
Respondent.
G.R. No. 223399,

April 23, 2018 - Q: What was the reason why there were
FATIMA O. DE no representatives from the media
GUZMAN-FUERTE, and DOJ?
MARRIED TO
A: It was our team leader who
MAURICE GEORGE
coordinated with the barangay
FUERTE, Petitioner, v.
and only Kgd. Azarcon together
SPOUSES SILVINO
with the two barangay tanods
S.ESTOMO AND
arrived.
CONCEPCION C.
ESTOMO,
Respondents.
Q: You would admit that your team
leader contacted the barangay
G.R. No. 213617,
kagawad together with the barangay
April 18, 2018 -
tanods during the actual inventory?
ARCH. EUSEBIO B.
BERNAL, DOING A: Yes, sir.
BUSINESS UNDER
THE NAME AND STYLE
CONTEMPORARY
Q: But he did not contact
BUILDERS, Petitioner,
v. DR. VIVENCIO representatives from the DOJ and

VILLAFLOR AND DRA. media?
GREGORIA
A: I cannot remember, sir.
VILLAFLOR,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 214803, x x x31 (emphases supplied)

April 23, 2018 -
ALONA G. ROLDAN, In the recent case of People v. Carlit32 there was a DOJ
Petitioner, v. SPOUSES representative who witnessed the inventory but no
CLARENCE I. BARRIOS media representative and an elected official present. We
AND ANNA LEE T. held that the prosecution failed to prove every link in the
BARRIOS, ROMMEL chain of custody:
MATORRES, AND HON.
In the case at bar, PO3 Carvajal testified that
JEMENA ABELLAR
he marked the alleged shabu at the police
ARBIS, IN HER
station, instead of doing so immediately at
CAPACITY AS
the place where the arrest was effected as
PRESIDING JUDGE,
required by law. Moreover, the arresting
BRANCH 6, REGIONAL
officers failed to strictly observe Section 21 of
TRIAL COURT, AKLAN,
RA. 9165 that requires that "an elected public
Respondents.
official and a representative of the National
Prosecution Service or the media" be present
G.R. No. 228470,
during the inventory, and be given a copy of
April 23, 2018 -
the report of the seized items. Such failure
LOADSTAR
of the police officers to secure the
INTERNATIONAL
presence of a representative from the
SHIPPING, INC.,
media or a barangay official raises
Petitioner, v. ERNESTO
serious doubts on whether the chain of
AWITEN YAMSON,
custody was actually unbroken.
SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
HEIRS GEORGIA M. Notably, PO3 Carvajal did not offer any
YAMSON AND THEIR explanation for these lapses. Rather, he
CHILDREN, NAMELY: admitted that they were no longer able to
JENNIE ANN MEDINA coordinate with the media and the local
YAMSON, KIMBERLY official because he was instructed by their
SHEEN MEDINA team leader to immediately bring Carlit to the
YAMSON, JOSHUA police station. To Our mind, this does not
MEDINA YAMSON AND constitute justifiable ground for skirting the
ANGEL LOUISE statutory requirements under Section 21 of
MEDINA YAMSON, R.A. 9165. We are therefore constrained to

Respondents. rule as We did in Bartolini, viz:
"The failure to immediately

G.R. No. 201414,
mark the seized items, taken
April 18, 2018 -
together with the absence of a
PEDRO PEREZ,
representative from the media
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE
to witness the inventory,
OF THE PHILIPPINES,
without any justifiable
Respondent.
explanation, casts doubt on
whether the chain of custody
G.R. No. 198393,
is truly unbroken. Serious
April 04, 2018 -
uncertainty is created on the
REPUBLIC OF THE
identity of the corpus delicti in
PHILIPPINES,
view of the broken linkages in the
Petitioner, v.
chain of custody. The prosecution
RODOLFO M. CUENCA,
has the burden of proving each
FERDINAND E.
link in the chain of custody - from
MARCOS, IMELDA R.
the initial contact between buyer
MARCOS, ROBERTO S.
and seller, the offer to purchase
CUENCA, MANUEL I.
the drug, the payment of the buy-
TINIO, VICTOR
bust money, and the delivery of
AFRICA, MARIO K.
the illegal drug. The prosecution
ALFELOR, DON M.
must prove with certainty each
FERRY AND OSCAR
link in this chain of custody and
BELTRAN,
each link must be the subject of
Respondents.
strict scrutiny by the courts to
ensure that law-abiding citizens
G.R. No. 208091,
are not unlawfully induced to
April 23, 2018 -
PEOPLE OF THE commit an offense."33 (emphasis
supplied)
Appellee, v. BENITO Indeed, the prosecution's unjustified non-compliance
MOLEJON, Accused-
with the safeguards of the chain of custody constitutes a
Appellant. fatal procedural flaw that destroys the reliability of the
corpus delicti.34
G.R. No. 211232,
April 11, 2018 - The CA clearly disregarded the operative phrase—that
COCA-COLA the prosecution must provide "justifiable grounds" for
BOTTLERS PHILS., non-compliance, in addition to showing that the
INC., Petitioner, v. prosecution maintained the integrity of the seized

SPOUSES EFREN AND item.35
LOLITA SORIANO,
The appellate court further failed to take note of Sections
Respondents.
1(A.1.9) and 1 (A.1.10) of the Chain of Custody
A.C. No. 9186, Implementing Rules and Regulations, which provide:36
April 11, 2018 - ATTY.

JUAN PAULO A.1.9. Noncompliance, [a] under
VILLONCO, justifiable grounds, with the
Complainant, v. ATTY. requirements of Section 21 (1) of
ROMEO G. ROXAS, RA No. 9165, as amended, shall
Respondent. not render void and invalid such

seizures and custody over the
G.R. No. 226590, items [b] provided the
April 23, 2018 - integrity and the evidentiary
SHIRLEY T. LIM, MARY value of the seized items are
T. LIMLEON AND properly preserved by the
JIMMY T. LIM, apprehending officer/team.
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent. A.1.10. Any justification or explanation in
cases of noncompliance with the
G.R. No. 206529, requirements of Section 21 (1) of
April 23, 2018 - RA No. 9165, as amended, shall
RENANTE B. be clearly stated in the sworn
REMOTICADO, statements/affidavits of the
Petitioner, v. TYPICAL apprehending/seizing
CONSTRUCTION officers, as well as the steps
TRADING CORP. AND taken to preserve the
ROMMEL M. ALIGNAY, integrity and evidentiary
Respondents. value of the
seized/confiscated items.
G.R. No. 229047, Certification or record of
April 16, 2018 - coordination for operating units
PEOPLE OF THE other than the PDEA pursuant to
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- Section 86 (a) and (b), Article IX
Appellee, v. of the IRR of RA No. 9165 shall
RAMONCITO CORNEL be presented. (emphasis
supplied)
Y ASUNCION,
Accused-Appellants. The Implementing Rules and Regulations on the chain of
custody thus require that the apprehending officers not
G.R. No. 211187, simply mention a justifiable ground, but also clearly
April 16, 2018 - state this ground in their sworn affidavit, coupled with a
SCANMAR MARITIME statement on the steps they took to preserve the
SERVICES, INC. AND integrity of the seized item.37 In this case, there was no
CROWN justifiable ground given by the arresting officers for the
SHIPMANAGEMENT, absence of DOJ and media representatives in their
INC., Petitioners, v. Pinagsamang Salaysay.38 PO2 Burgos' testimony in court
CELESTINO M. further highlighted the lack of justifiable ground for the
HERNANDEZ, JR., buy-bust team's failure to strictly comply with the
Respondent. requirements of Section 21.
The CA likewise erred in simply relying on the

G.R. No. 216922,
prosecution's claim that the integrity of the evidence was
April 18, 2018 -
preserved in accordance with the chain of custody
JAYLORD DIMAL AND
requirements for proper handling of the drug specimen.
ALLAN CASTILLO,
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE In People v. Sanchez,39 the Court said:
OF THE PHILIPPINES,
For greater specificity, "marking" means the
Respondent.
placing by the apprehending officer or the
poseur-buyer of his/her initials and signature
G.R. No. 230249,
on the item/s seized. If the physical inventory
April 24, 2018 - ATTY.
and photograph are made at the nearest
PABLO B. FRANCISCO,
police station or office as allowed by the
Petitioner, v.
rules, the inventory and photography of the
COMMISSION ON
seized items must be made in accordance
ELECTIONS AND ATTY.
with Sec. 2 of Board Resolution No. 1, Series
JOHNIELLE KEITH P.
of 2002 but in every case, the apprehended
NIETO, Respondents.
violator or counsel must be present. Again,
this is in keeping with the desired level of
G.R. No. 196020,
integrity that the handling process requires.
April 18, 2018 -
Thereafter, the seized items shall be
MANILA ELECTRIC
placed in an envelope or an evidence bag
COMPANY, VICENTE
unless the type and quantity of the
MONTERO, MR.
seized items require a different type of
BONDOC, AND MR.
handling and/or container. The evidence
BAYONA, Petitioners,
bag or container shall accordingly be
v. NORDEC
PHILIPPINES AND/OR signed by the handling officer and

MARVEX INDUSTRIAL turned over to the next officer in the
CORP. REPRESENTED chain of custody.40 (emphasis supplied)
BY ITS PRESIDENT,
PO2 Burgos had testified that after marking with his own
DR. POTENCIANO R.
MALVAR, initials the confiscated plastic sachets containing
Respondents.; G.R. suspected shabu, they conducted the inventory and

photographing of the seized items in front of Malou's
No. 196116, April 18,
2018 - NORDEC house. Thereafter, appellants were brought to their
PHILIPPINES station for proper documentation and preparation of

request for the PNP Crime Laboratory. From the crime
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT, DR. scene, he, together with appellants, boarded the same
car; all this time the seized items were in his
POTENCIANO R.
MALVAR, Petitioner, v. possession.41 However, no details were provided by PO2
MANILA ELECTRIC Burgos as to how the seized items were carried or
COMPANY, VICENTE handled during the transfer to the police station.

MONTERO, MR.
While the small transparent plastic canister taken from
BONDOC, AND MR.
Malou where the four plastic sachets of shabu were
BAYONA,
found has been marked as "RB-5", there was no
Respondents.
testimony as to whether all five sachets of the drug
specimen (marked "RB" to "RB-4") seized from her were
G.R. No. 191310,
actually placed inside the said canister and sealed during
April 11, 2018 -
the transfer to the police station and submission to the
PRINCESS TALENT
PNP Crime Laboratory. Forensic Chemist P/Chief Insp.
CENTER
Richard Allan B. Mangalip testified that the small
PRODUCTION, INC.,
transparent plastic canister marked "RB-5" was received
AND/OR LUCHI SINGH
by their office together with the plastic sachets of the
MOLDES, Petitioners,
drug specimen, but when asked what the said canister
v. DESIREE T.
contained, he answered none.42 Describing the condition
MASAGCA,
of the items submitted to him by their Desk Officer NUP
Respondent.
Arthur Relos, PCI Mangalip stated that the Request for
Laboratory Examination "described the specimen subject
G.R. No. 232131,
for examination and the Letter Request there was also
April 24, 2018 - REY
NATHANIEL C. an attached specimen."43 This confirms that the five
IFURUNG, Petitioner, plastic sachets of the drug specimen were not sealed and
v. HON. CONCHITA C. placed inside the transparent plastic canister when it was
CARPIO MORALES IN transported to the police station and submitted to the
HER CAPACITY AS THE crime laboratory, as similarly reflected in the Physical
OMBUDSMAN, HON. Science Report No. D-047-119 describing the items

MELCHOR ARTHUR H. submitted by apprehending team.44
CARANDANG, HON.
GERARD ABETO The above lapses cast doubt on the prosecution's claim
of an unbroken chain of custody. Despite the submission
MOSQUERA, HON.
PAUL ELMER M. of a duly accomplished Chain of Custody Form,45 the
CLEMENTE, HON. prosecution failed to establish that the plastic sachets
RODOLFO M. ELMAN, containing shabu were properly handled and sealed in a

HON. CYRIL container or evidence bag during the transfer to the
ENGUERRA RAMOS IN police station and until their submission to the crime
THEIR CAPACITIES AS laboratory.

DEPUTIES
The prosecution cannot rely on the presumption of
OMBUDSMAN, AND
regularity in the performance of official functions and
THE OFFICE OF THE
weakness of the defense's evidence to bolster its case.
OMBUDSMAN,
Any doubt on the conduct of the police operations cannot
Respondents.
be resolved in the prosecution's favor by relying on the
presumption of regularity in the performance of official
G.R. No. 223660,
functions. The failure to observe the proper procedure
April 02, 2018 -
negates the operation of the regularity accorded to
LOURDES
police officers. Moreover, to allow the presumption to
VALDERAMA,
prevail notwithstanding clear lapses on the part of the
Petitioner, v. SONIA
police is to negate the safeguards precisely placed by the
ARGUELLES AND
law to ensure that no abuse is committed.46
LORNA ARGUELLES,
Respondents. Under the current Section 21, non-compliance with the
requirements shall not render void and invalid such
G.R. No. 219953, seizures and custody over the seized items as long as
April 23, 2018 - the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized
PEOPLE OF THE items are properly preserved by the apprehending
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- officer/team. It must be stressed, however, that the non-
Appellee, v. ANGELITA compliance must be for "justifiable grounds." In this
REYES Y GINOVE AND case, the arresting officers failed to convince the Court
JOSEPHINE SANTA that they had justifiable reasons not to strictly comply
MARIA Y SANCHEZ, with the provisions of the law requiring the presence of
Accused-Appellants. an elected official, DOJ and media representatives during
the physical inventory and photographing of the seized
G.R. Nos. 232197- shabu. Also fatal to the prosecution's case is the absence
98, April 16, 2018 - of testimony on how the plastic sachets containing white
PEOPLE OF THE crystalline substance suspected to be shabu were
PHILIPPINES, handled from the time of arrest/seizure until their

Petitioner, v. submission to the crime laboratory and to ensure that
HONORABLE their evidentiary value is not compromised.
SANDIGANBAYAN
We have held that the buy-bust team "should have been
(FOURTH DIVISION),
more meticulous in complying with Section 21 of
ALEJANDRO E.
Republic Act No. 9165 to preserve the integrity of the
GAMOS, AND
seized shabu," most especially where the weight of the
ROSALYN G. GILE,
seized item is a miniscule amount that can be easily
Respondents.
planted and tampered with.47 "Law enforcers should not
trifle with the legal requirement to ensure integrity m
G.R. No. 214759,
the chain of custody of seized dangerous drugs and drug
April 04, 2018 -
PEOPLE OF THE paraphernalia. This is especially true when only a
miniscule amount of dangerous drugs is alleged to have
Appellee, v. DINA been taken from the accused."48
CALATES Y DELA
As a final word, the Court reiterates its ruling in People
CRUZ, Accused-
v. Holgado, et al.:49
Appellants.
It is lamentable that while our dockets are

G.R. No. 194765, clogged with prosecutions under Republic Act
April 23, 2018 - No. 9165 involving small-time drug users and
MARSMAN & retailers, we are seriously short of
COMPANY, INC., prosecutions involving the proverbial "big
Petitioner, v. RODIL C. fish." We are swamped with cases involving
STA. RITA, small fry who have been arrested for
Respondent. miniscule amounts. While they are certainly a
bane to our society, small retailers are but
A.M. No. MTJ-15- low-lying fruits in an exceedingly vast
1860 (Formerly OCA network of drug cartels. Both law enforcers
I.P.I. No. 09-2224- and prosecutors should realize that the more
MTJ), April 03, 2018 - effective and efficient strategy is to focus
ROSILANDA M. resources more on the source and true
KEUPPERS, leadership of these nefarious organizations.
Complainant, v. Otherwise, all these executive and judicial
JUDGE VIRGILIO G. resources expended to attempt to convict an
MURCIA, MUNICIPAL accused for 0.05 gram of shabu under
TRIAL COURT IN doubtful custodial arrangements will hardly
CITIES, BRANCH 2, make a dent in the overall picture. It might in
ISLAND GARDEN CITY fact be distracting our law enforcers from
OF SAMAL, their more challenging task: to uproot the

Respondent. causes of this drug menace. We stand ready
to assess cases involving greater amounts of
IPI No. 17-267-CA- drugs and the leadership of these cartels.50
J, April 24, 2018 - RE:
WHEREFORE, the appeal is GRANTED. The Decision
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
dated May 19, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R.
OF FERNANDO
CASTILLO AGAINST CR No. 07568 is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE for
failure of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
MARIFLOR PUNZALAN- doubt the guilt of accused-appellants Malou F. Alvarado,
CASTILLO, COURT OF Alvin L. Alvarez and Ramil M. Dal. They are accordingly
ACQUITTED of the crime(s) charged against them and
APPEALS, MANILA.
ordered immediately RELEASED from custody, unless
G.R. No. 210518, they are being held for some other lawful cause.
April 18, 2018 - The Director of the Bureau of Corrections is ORDERED

REPUBLIC OF THE
to implement this decision and to inform this Court of
PHILIPPINES, the date of the actual release from confinement of the
Petitioner, v. MARTIN accused-appellants within five (5) days from receipt
NIKOLAI Z. JAVIER
hereof.
AND MICHELLE K.
MERCADO-JAVIER, SO ORDERED.
Respondents.
Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Bersamin, Leonen, and
Martires, JJ., concur.
G.R. No. 210580,
April 18, 2018 -
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Petitioner, v. LUDYSON May 23, 2018
C. CATUBAG,
Respondent.
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT
G.R. Nos. 201225- Sirs/Mesdames:

26 (From CTA-EB Nos.
Please take notice that on April 23, 2018 a Decision,
649 & 651), April 18,
copy attached hereto, was rendered by the Supreme
2018 - TEAM SUAL
Court in the above-entitled case, the original of which
CORPORATION
was received by this Office on May 23, 2018 at 10:58
(FORMERLY MIRANT
a.m.
SUAL CORPORATION),
Petitioner, v.
COMMISSIONER OF Very truly yours,

INTERNAL REVENUE,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
Respondent.; G.R. No.
Division Clerk of Court
201132 (From CTA-EB
No. 651), April 18,
2018;
COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE,
Petitioner, v. TEAM
SUAL CORPORATION ORDER OF RELEASE
(FORMERLY MIRANT
SUAL CORPORATION),
Respondent.; G.R. No.
TO: Director General Ronald Dela Rosa
201133 (From CTA-EB
BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS
No. 649), April 18,
1770 Muntinlupa City
2018;
COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE, GREETINGS:
Petitioner, v. TEAM
SUAL CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Supreme Court on April 23, 2018
(FORMERLY MIRANT promulgated a Decision in the above-entitled case, the
SUAL CORPORATION), dispositive portion of which reads:
Respondent.
"WHEREFORE, the appeal is GRANTED. The
Decision dated May 19, 2017 of the Court of
G.R. No. 197930,
Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 07568 is hereby
April 17, 2018 -
REVERSED and SET ASIDE for failure of the
EFRAIM C. GENUINO,
prosecution to prove beyond reasonable
ERWIN F. GENUINO
doubt the guilt of accused-appellants Malou F.
AND SHERYL G. SEE,
Alvarado, Alvin L. Alvarez and Ramil M. Dal.
Petitioners, v. HON.
They are accordingly ACQUITTED of the
LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN
crime(s) charged against them and ordered
HER CAPACITY AS
immediately RELEASED from custody, unless
SECRETARY OF
they are being held for some other lawful
JUSTICE, AND
cause.
RICARDO V. PARAS
III, IN HIS CAPACITY The Director of the Bureau of Corrections is
AS CHIEF STATE ORDERED to implement this decision and to
COUNSEL, CRISTINO inform this Court of the date of the actual
L. NAGUIAT, JR. AND release from confinement of the accused-
THE BUREAU OF appellants within five (5) days from receipt

IMMIGRATION, hereof.
Respondents.; G.R.
SO ORDERED."
No. 199034, April 17,
2018 - MA. GLORIA NOW, THEREFORE, You are hereby ordered to
MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, immediately release MALOU F. ALVARADO, ALVIN L.
Petitioner, v. HON. ALVAREZ AND RAMIL M. DAL unless there are other
LEILA M. DE LIMA, AS lawful causes for which they should be further detained,
SECRETARY OF THE and to return this Order with the certificate of your
DEPARTMENT OF proceedings within five (5) days from notice hereof.
JUSTICE AND
GIVEN by the Honorable PRESBITERO J. VELASCO,
RICARDO A. DAVID,
JR., Chairperson of the Third Division of the Supreme
JR., AS
COMMISSIONER OF Court of the Philippines, this 23rd day of April 2018.
THE BUREAU OF
IMMIGRATION,
Very truly yours,
Respondents.; G.R.
No. 199046, April 17, (SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
2018 - JOSE MIGUEL Division Clerk of Court
T. ARROYO, Petitioner,
v. HON. LEILA M. DE
LIMA, AS SECRETARY
Endnotes:
OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE AND
1Rollo, pp. 2-15; penned by Associate Justice
RICARDO V. PARAS
III, AS CHIEF STATE Leoncia Real-Dimagiba and concurred in by
COUNSEL, Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and
DEPARTMENT OF Renato C. Francisco.
JUSTICE AND 2 CA rollo, pp. 54-65; penned by Judge

RICARDO A. DAVID,
Danilo V. Suarez.
JR., IN HIS CAPACITY
AS COMMISSIONER, 3 Records, p. 2.
BUREAU OF
4 Id. at 3.
IMMIGRATION,
Respondents.
5Rollo, pp. 4-6.
G.R. No. 210475, 6 Id. at 6-8; CA rollo, pp. 97-99.

April 11, 2018 -
RAMON K. ILUSORIO, 7 CA rollo, pp. 64-65.
MA. LOURDES C. 8 726 Phil. 389 (2014).

CRISTOBAL, ROMEO
9Rollo, pp. 24-25.
G. RODRIGUEZ,
EDUARDO C. ROJAS,
10 CA rollo, pp. 44-50.
CESAR B. CRISOL,
VIOLETA J. JOSEF, 11 Id. at 79-84.
ERLINDA K.
ILUSORIO, SHEREEN 12People v. Bautista, 682 Phil. 487, 497-498
K. ILUSORIO, AND (2012), citing People v. Naquita, 582 Phil.
CECILIA A. BISUÑA, 422, (2008); People v. Del Monte, 575 Phil.
Petitioners, v. SYLVIA 576, 587 (2008); and People v. Santiago,
K. ILUSORIO, 564 Phil. 181, 193 (2007).
Respondent.
13People v. Bautista, supra at 498.
G.R. No. 232247,

14 Id.
April 23, 2018 -
PEOPLE OF THE 15 See People v. Saragena, G.R. No. 210677,
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- August 23, 2017,
Appellee, v. RONILLO
16People v. Saragena, supra; citing People v.
LOPEZ, JR. Y
MANTALABA @ Pagaduan, 641 Phil. 432, 447 (2010); People
"DODONG", Accused- v. Caiz, 790 Phil. 183, 196 (2016).
Appellant.
17People v. Sanchez, 590 Phil. 214, 235
(2008).
G.R. No. 226481,
April 18, 2018 - 18People v. Macud, G.R. No. 219175,
PEOPLE OF THE
December 14, 2017, citing Malillin v. People,
576 Phil. 576 (2008).
Appellee, v. JAYCENT
MOLA Y SELBOSA 19 Guidelines on the Custody and Disposition
A.K.A. "OTOK", of Seized Dangerous Drugs, Controlled
Accused-Appellant. Precursors and Essential Chemicals, and
Laboratory Equipment.
G.R. No. 222861,
20 Guidelines on the Implementing Rules and
April 23, 2018 - PO2
JESSIE FLORES Y DE Regulation (IRR) of Section 21 of Republic Act
LEON, Petitioner, v. No. 9165 as Amended by Republic Act No.
PEOPLE OF THE 10640, Sec. 1.B.5.
PHILIPPINES, 21 "An Act to Further Strengthen the Anti-

Respondent. Drug Campaign of the Government,
Amending for the Purpose Section 21 of
G.R. No. 214886, Republic Act No. 9165, Otherwise Known as
April 04, 2018 - the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
PEOPLE OF THE 2002". Approved on July 14, 2014.
22 Exhs. H, I, P, Q, R, and S; records, pp.
Appellee, v. BERNIE
CONCEPCION, 359, 363-364.
Accused-Appellant.
23People v. Saragena, supra note 15.
G.R. No. 195320, 24 Id.; citing Lescano v. People, 778 Phil.

April 23, 2018 -
460, 469 (2016).
BUREAU OF INTERNAL
REVENUE, 25 Dated September 2014, incorporating the
REPRESENTED BY THE amendments introduced by RA 10640.
COMMISSIONER OF
26 Chapter 3, Sec. 3.1 (a)(2)(7).
INTERNAL REVENUE,
Petitioner, v. HON. 27 Supra note 18.
ERNESTO D. ACOSTA,
ET AL. OF THE 28People v. Martinez, 652 Phil. 347, 382
SPECIAL FIRST (2010), citing People v. Cervantes, 600 Phil.
DIVISION OF THE 819, 843 (2009).
COURT OF TAX
29 789 Phil. 70 (2009).
APPEALS AND
CHEVRON
30 Id. at 79-80.
PHILIPPINES, INC.
(FORMERLY CALTEX 31 TSN, August 14, 2014, pp. 18-19; records,
PHILIPPINES, INC.),
pp. 317-318.
Respondents.
32 G.R. No. 227309, August 16, 2017.
G.R. No. 195962,
33 Id.
April 18, 2018 -
PRESIDENTIAL
34Dela Riva v. People, 769 Phil. 872, 894
COMMISSION ON
(2015).
GOOD GOVERNMENT,
Petitioner, v. OFFICE 35 Supra note 15.
OF THE OMBUDSMAN,
36 Id.
PLACIDO L. MAPA, JR.,
RECIO M. GARCIA, 37 Guidelines on the Implementing Rules and

LEON O. TY, JOSE R. Regulations (IRR) of Section 21 of Republic
TENGCO, JR., Act No. 9165 as Amended by Republic Act No.
ALEJANDRO 10640, Sec. 1.A.1.10.
MELCHOR, VICENTE
38 Exh. "D"; records, pp, 353-355.
PATERNO, RUBEN
ANCHETA, RAFAEL
39 Supra note 17.
SISON, HILARION M.
HENARES, JR., 40 Id. at 241-242.
CARMELINO G.
ALVENDIA AND 41 TSN, August 14, 2014, pp. 9-10; records,
GENEROSO F. pp. 308-309.
TENSECO,
42 TSN, March 9, 2012, p. 13; records, p. 76.
Respondents.
43 Id. at 5; records, p. 68.

G.R. No. 230473,
April 23, 2018 - 44 Records, p. 352.
SEACREST MARITIME
45 Exh. "O"; records, p. 362.
MANAGEMENT, INC.
AND/OR HERNING
46People v. Macud, supra note 18, citing
SHIPPING ASIA PTE.
People v. Dela Cruz, 589 Phil. 259, 272
LTD., Petitioners, v.
(2008).
ALMA Q. RODEROS,
AS WIDOW AND 47People v. Saragena, supra note 15; citing
LEGAL HEIR OF
People v. Casacop, 155 Phil. 265 (2015).
FRANCISCO
RODEROS, 48People v. Dela Cruz, 744 Phil. 816, 820
Respondent. (2014).
49 741 Phil. 78 (2014).

A.M. No. P-18-3833
(Formerly OCA IPI No.
50 Id. at 100.
14-4370-P), April 16,
2018 - JULIUS E.
PADUGA,
Complainant, v.
ROBERTO "BOBBY" R.
Back to Home | Back to Main
DIMSON, SHERIFF IV,
REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT OF
VALENZUELA CITY,
BRANCH 171,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 226656,

April 23, 2018 -
ARNEL T. GERE,
Petitioner, v. ANGLO-
EASTERN CREW
MANAGEMENT PHILS.,
INC. AND/OR ANGLO-
EASTERN CREW
MANAGEMENT (ASIA),
LTD., Respondents.;
G.R. No. 226713, April
23, 2018 - ANGLO-
EASTERN CREW
MANAGEMENT PHILS.,
INC. AND/OR ANGLO-
EASTERN CREW
MANAGEMENT (ASIA),
LTD., Petitioners, v.
ARNEL T. GERE,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 213994,

April 18, 2018 -
MARGIE SANTOS
MITRA, Petitioner, v.
PERPETUA L.
SABLAN-GUEVARRA,
REMEGIO L. SABLAN,
ET AL., Respondents.
G.R. No. 200256,

April 11, 2018 -
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Petitioner, v.
NORTHERN CEMENT
CORPORATION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 193499,

April 23, 2018 -
BANCO DE ORO
UNIBANK, INC.,
Petitioner, v. VTL
REALTY, INC.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 222070,

April 16, 2018 -
EMMANUEL M. LU,
ROMMEL M. LU,
CARMELA M. LU,
KAREN GRACE P. LU
AND JAMES MICHAEL
LU, Petitioners, v.
MARISSA LU CHIONG
AND CRISTINA LU NG,
Respondents.
A.M. No. 17-12-

135-MeTC, April 16,
2018 - RE: DROPPING
FROM THE ROLLS OF
MR. ARNO D. DEL
ROSARIO, COURT
STENOGRAPHER II,
BRANCH 41,
METROPOLITAN TRIAL
COURT (METC),
QUEZON CITY.
G.R. No. 228890,

April 18, 2018 -
PEOPLE OF THE
Appellee, v. BASHER
TOMAWIS Y ALI,
Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 227982,

April 23, 2018 -
MARIO DIESTA
BAJARO, Petitioner, v.
METRO STONERICH
CORP., AND/OR
IBRAHIM M. NUÑO,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 171101,

April 24, 2018 -
HACIENDA LUISITA
INCORPORATED,
PETITIONER, LUISITA
INDUSTRIAL PARK
CORPORATION AND
RIZAL COMMERCIAL
BANKING
CORPORATION,
Petitioners-in-
Intervention, v.
PRESIDENTIAL
AGRARIAN REFORM
COUNCIL; SECRETARY
NASSER
PANGANDAMAN OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF
AGRARIAN REFORM;
ALYANSA NG MGA
MANGGAGAWANG
BUKID NG HACIENDA
LUISITA, RENE
GALANG, NOEL
MALLARI, AND JULIO
SUNIGA AND HIS

SUPERVISORY GROUP
OF THE HACIENDA
LUISITA, INC. AND
WINDSOR ANDAYA,
Respondents.
Copyright © 1995 - 2020 REDiaz

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence: Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence: Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11/18/2020 G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

llee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVA…

Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence

April 2018 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court

G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE

G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y MOLIANEDA,

This is an appeal from the May 19, 2017 Decision1 of the

affirmed the March 1, 2015 Decision2 of the Regional

In Criminal Case No. 11-0124, Malou was charged with

That on or about the 26th day of January

Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug.3

In a separate Information, docketed Criminal Case No.

Violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, the

That on or about the 26th day of January

In another Information, docketed as Criminal Case No.

When arraigned, appellants pleaded not guilty. Trial

From the evidence presented at the trial court, the CA

Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution presented Forensic Chemist

testimonies, the following events were

On 26 January 2011, around 2:00 o'clock in

boasted had ample supply (of drugs). PO2

and the seized items. Thereafter, the team

criminal case brought the accused-appellants to the police

Version of the Accused

Malou Alvarado and her common-law

April-2018 accused-appellants and brought them

Jurisprudence outside. While outside, Malou saw her

RE: DECISION DATED Subsequently, their pictures were taken and

SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 they were forced to board a police mobile

MATIAS, Petitioner, v. Consequently, the police brought them to the

Respondent. appellants guilty as charged. It, however, acquitted

G.R. No. 215387,

However, the RTC ruled that the prosecution failed to

The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision reads:

PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- of Sec. 5, Art. II, RA 9165, the Court finds

Appellee, v. accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO, ALVIN

ELEUTERIO URMAZA Y LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA

TORRES, Accused- DAL, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt and

Appellants. are hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of

G.R. No. 213225, 500,000.00 each;

April 04, 2018 -

G.R. No. 210446, LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA

AND MA. TERESA

The appellate court observed that the appellants

Respondents. appellants filed this appeal before the Court.

In compliance with the Court's Resolution,9 the Public

In their appeal brief, appellants assail the CA in

The Court's Ruling

MENCHAVEZ, the elements are: (a) the accused is in possession of an

CRISTINE JOY F. item or object that is identified to be a prohibited or

Nonetheless, the Court has ruled that even when the

G.R. No. 218584, integrity of which must be preserved.16

April 25, 2018 -

DAL Y MOLIANEDA, which is likely to be tampered, altered, contaminated, or

Section 1(b) of Dangerous Drug Board (DDB) Regulation

INVESTMENTS, INC., favorable to the appellants. The original Section 21 reads

Petitioner, v. SOCIAL as follows:

SECURITY SYSTEM, SEC. 21. Custody and Disposition of

(1) The apprehending team having initial