PEOPLE VS. GA-A and ADOBAR G.R. NO. 222559 JUNE 6, 2018 J.

CAGUIOA
FACTS:
  A buy-bust operation was conducted by a team of PDEA agents
against Adobar and his live-in partner Ga-a in their residence. In the
prosecution’s version of facts, one of the agents acted as a buyer and bought shabu
worth 500 pesos from Adobar. The latter handed one heat-sealed transparent sachet
containing the shabu. After examining it, the agent signaled her colleagues to
respond to the scene. The team responded and rushed towards Adobar, the latterran
inside his house and locked the front door to which the team forced open. Adobar
escaped and the buy-
bust money wasn’t recovered.
Ga-a was inside and the team seized the 17 sachets of shabu and other drug
paraphernalia on top of a table. Ga-a claimed that the shabu were from Adobar. After
clearing the house and the inventory of the seized items, Tablate called for Acenas,
barangay captain, media representative Cabrejas, and an unidentified DOJ
representative as witnesses. Two of the witnesses signed. After which, they the
team and Ga-a proceeded to the PDEA office.Ga-a was acquitted by the trial
court, holding that the PDEA agents had no probable causeto search and arrest her.
ISSUE:
  W/N Adobar is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of sale of illegal drugs under
Sec.5, Art. 2 of RA 9165.
HELD:
NO. In the context of a buy-bust operation, its elements are 1) that the
transaction or saletook place between the accused and the poseur buyer; and 2) that
the dangerous drugs subject
of the transaction or sale is presented in court as evidence of the “corpus delicti”.
  The prosecution failed to prove the corpus delicti of the crime due to the
serious lapses in observing Sec.21 of RA 9165 and the concomitant failure to trigger
the saving clause. Anent the latter point, the prosecution utterly failed to acknowledge
and credibly justify its procedural lapses and was unable to prove the integrity and
evidentiary value of the seized drugs. Adobar’s innocence, as presumed and
protected by the Constitution, must stand in light of the reasonable doubt on his guilt.
The prosecution arm of the government has the duty to prove, beyond reasonable
doubt, each and every element of the crime charged. In illegal drugs cases, this
includes proving faithful compliance with Sec.21 of RA 9165, being fundamental to
establishing the element of corpus delicti. In the course of proving such compliance
before the trial courts, prosecutors must have the initiative to not only acknowledge,
but also justify, any perceived deviations from the procedural requirements of Sec.
21.
You're reading a preview