People vs Doria

Facts
 In November 1995, members of the North Metropolitan District, PNP Narcotics
Command received information from two 2 civilian informants that one “Jun” was
engaged in illegal drug activities in Mandaluyong City. The Narcom agents decided to
entrap and arrest “Jun” in a buy-bust operation.
 The Narcom team composed of PO3 Celso Manlangit, as the poseur-buyer and other
police officers.
 They prepared for the buy-bust operation set up by one of the CI between Manlangit as
the poseur-buyer and “Jun” at E. Jacinto Street in Mandaluyong City.
 On the morning of December 5, 1995, “Jun” appeared and the CI introduced officer
Manlangit as interested in buying 1 kilo worth of marijuana.
 Manlangit handed “jun” the marked bills worth 1,600 pesos.
 “Jun” instructed manlangit to wait for him at the corner of shaw boulevard and jacinto
street while gets the marijuana from his associate.
 After an hour, jun appeared at the agreed place where Manlangit, the CI and the rest of
the team were waiting.
 “Jun” took out from his bag an object wrapped in plastic and gave it to Manlangit.
Officer Manlangit forthwith arrested “Jun” as the others rushed to help in the arrest.
 They frisked “Jun” but did not find the marked bills on him.
 Upon inquiry, “Jun” revealed that he left the money at the house of his associate named
“Neneth.”
 Later on, it was found out that the real name of “jun” is Florencio Doria
 The RTC found Florencio Doria guilty in violation of RA 9165.
(I did not include the other half of the facts kay irrelevant na hiya. Although connected an
facts but an mga facts nga waray ko gin include is about na kan nenet invalid warrantless
arrest resulting from illegal warrantless search)
(baga kase hiya hin two different cases but magkasunod la an panhitabo. Main point nga is
irrelevant hiya ha topic)
Issue:
Whether the operation that led to the arrest of Doria was by of entrapment or instigation?
Held/Ruling:
 The SC ruled that the operation was a valid entrapment or a valid buy-bust operation.
 The court held that there is a wide difference between entrapment and instigation. In
instigation, the accused is lured into the commission of the offense charged in the
order to prosecute him. In entrapment, ways and means are resorted to by the peace
officer for the purpose of trapping and capturing the lawbreaker in the execution of
his criminal plan. Entrapment is not a defense available to the accused while
instigation is a defense and considered as an absolutory clause.
 On the case at bar, Doria already has the idea to commit the crime regardless if it was
an officer poseur-buyer or not. Officer Manlangit and the other members of the
 operation team merely facilitate the apprehension of the criminal by employing ruses
and schemes.
 The SC added that even though the team of Manlangit waited for almost one hour for
the accused to give them the one kilo of marijuana after he paid and that the exchange
of money and marijuana did not happen simultaneously, it will still be considered as a
valid buy-bust operation because of the fact that there is no law which requires that in
“buy-bust” operations there must be a simultaneous exchange of the marked money
and the prohibited drug between the poseur-buyer and the pusher. Again, the decisive
fact is that the poseur-buyer received the marijuana from the accused-appellant.
Fallo:
Wherefore, the decision of the RTC is modified. Accused-appellant Florencio Doria is
sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay a fine of five hundred
thousand pesos.