648 Phil. 653
VELASCO JR., J.:
On or about February 23, 2006 in Pasig City, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused, not being lawfully authorized by law, conspiring, confederating together, and both of them mutually helping and aiding one another, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell, deliver and give away to PO2 Badalf V. Monte, a police poseur buyer, one (1) pc. heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet containing 0.03 gram of white crystalline substance, which was found positive to the test for methylamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug, in violation of the said law.
Contrary to law.[3]
On or about February 23, 2006 in Pasig City, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused, not being lawfully authorized by law, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and knowingly use, smoke and ingest into his body a methamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug, and that this is the first offense of the accused under Section 15 of the above-cited law, who after a confirmatory urine test, was found positive to the test for methamphetamine, a dangerous drug, in violation of the above-cited law.
Contrary to law.[4]
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered:
(1) In Crim. Case No. 14639-D (violation of Section 5 of R.A. 9165 - sale of dangerous drugs) finding the accused therein EDWARD FELICIANO y Remoblas and ANITA LAURORA y Gonzales GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the offense charged in the information and they are sentenced to suffer LIFE IMPRISONMENT. They are also ordered to pay a fine of ONE MILLION PESOS each.
x x x x
(4) In Crim. Cases Nos. 14641-D to 14645-D (violation of Section 15 - use of dangerous drugs), judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused EDWARD FELICIANO y Remoblas, EDITHA MAGLALANG y Cupin, ANITA LAURORA y Gonzales and ROMELITO RUELO y Gonzales GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of violation of Section 15 of R.A. 9165 as charged in the information and they are hereby sentenced to undergo rehabilitation in a government drug rehabilitation center for a minimum period of ONE (1) YEAR considering that based on the information this is their first offense.
x x x x
SO ORDERED.[18]
WHEREFORE, the foregoing considered, the instant appeal is hereby DISMISSED and the assailed Decision AFFIRMED in toto. No costs.
SO ORDERED.[19]
I.
The trial court gravely erred in admitting the seized dangerous drug as evidence against the accused-appellants despite being the result of an unlawful arrest.II.
The trial court gravely erred in pronouncing the guilt of the accused-appellants despite the arresting officers' non-compliance with the requirements for the proper custody of seized dangerous drugs under R.A. No. 9165.III.
The trial court gravely erred in pronouncing the guilt of the accused-appellants despite the unjustified failure of the arresting officers to preserve the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized dangerous drug.[20]
ENTRAPMENT AND INSTIGATION.¾While it has been said that the practice of entrapping persons into crime for the purpose of instituting criminal prosecutions is to be deplored, and while instigation, as distinguished from mere entrapment, has often been condemned and has sometimes been held to prevent the act from being criminal or punishable, the general rule is that it is no defense to the perpetrator of a crime that facilities for its commission were purposely placed in his way, or that the criminal act was done at the `decoy solicitation' of persons seeking to expose the criminal, or that detectives feigning complicity in the act were present and apparently assisting in its commission. Especially is this true in that class of cases where the offense is one of a kind habitually committed, and the solicitation merely furnishes evidence of a course of conduct. Mere deception by the detective will not shield defendant, if the offense was committed by him, free from the influence or instigation of the detective. The fact that an agent of an owner acts as a supposed confederate of a thief is no defense to the latter in a prosecution for larceny, provided the original design was formed independently of such agent; and where a person approached by the thief as his confederate notifies the owner or the public authorities, and, being authorised by them to do so, assists the thief in carrying out the plan, the larceny is nevertheless committed. It is generally held that it is no defense to a prosecution for an illegal sale of liquor that the purchase was made by a `spotter,' detective, or hired informer; but there are cases holding the contrary.[23]
Q- Mr. Witness, what time did you report for duty on February 23, 2006?
A- 8:00 a.m.[25]
x x x x
Q- Staying in your office, do you remember having conducted an operation, a drug operation?
A- Yes, sir.
Q- What brought about this drug operation?
A- On or about 10:00 P.M. of 22 February 2006, I received a report through telephone call from a concerned citizen that there is an alleged illegal drug trade at Rodriguez Compound, Barangay Rosario, Pasig City.
Q- Before that incident, do you have particular knowledge of the illegal activities for drugs in that compound?
A- Yes, sir.
Q- What is your proof?
A- Before the information coming from that concerned citizen, we received a letter report from the barangay captain.
Q- What is the tenor of that report coming from the barangay captain of Barangay Rosario?
A- The rampant drug-related activities from Rodriguez Compound, GSIS Road at Barangay Rosario.
Q- And you stated that at around 10:00 o'clock of February 22 you received a call from a concerned citizen. What is that in relation to the call of a concerned citizen, what is that document?
A- The letter from the barangay captain.
Q- The call confirmed the report made to you by the barangay captain?
A- Yes, sir.[26]
x x x x
Q- Receiving that information and confirming the report made by the barangay captain that that is the vicinity of illegal drug activity, what did you do then?
A- I informed my team leader, Police Inspector Pamor.
Q- You informed him of this telephone call. What did he do thereafter?
A- He told me that we seek help from the concerned citizen for the immediate apprehension of the suspect. I asked the concerned citizen to help us for the immediate apprehension of alias Janggo.
Q- What was the response of that concerned citizen?
A- He told me that he will ask a certain person to go to our office.
Q- What happened when this concerned citizen informed you that he is sending somebody to help you, assist you with [regard] to that report?
A- We waited for him.
Q- Were you able to wait for that person?
A- At our office.
Q- What time did this person arrive?
A- On or about 12:00 a.m.
Q- 12:00 midnight?
A- Yes, sir.
Q- This person arriving, what did you do next after that?
A- Before the confidential informant arrived, we faxed the coordination report to the PDEA.
Q- Was there any certificate of coordination given to you?
A- Yes, sir. On or about 11:40, we received a certification of coordination.[27]
x x x x
Q- In order to conduct the drug operation on that particular place and on that particular person, what did you do?
A- Police Inspector Pamor conducted a briefing.[28]
x x x x
Q- Who was designated as the police poseur buyer?
A- I was tasked as the poseur buyer, sir.
Q- Who was designated as your immediate back-up officer?
A- PO2 Ronald Caparas.
Q- What operations were you going to conduct on that particular instance?
A- Buy bust operation.
Q- For the buy bust operation, what things did you prepare for the purpose in order that the buy bust operation will be conducted?
A- First, the coordination report from the PDEA and then the buy bust money.
Q- How much money?
A- P200.00.
Q- What did you do with the money given to you?
A- I marked the money.[29]
x x x x
Q- Where did you mark it and what markings did you place?
A- BBM which stands for my initials.[30]
x x x x
Q- The person sent by the concerned or by telephone call, who was she or he?
A- A he.
Q- When this person arrived as said by the concerned citizen, you said at 12:00 midnight, did you ask his name?
A- Alias only.
Q- What is his alias?
A- He said alias Buboy.
Q- What did you do after that, when he arrived?
A- Inspector Pamor talked to him and after that we conducted a briefing.
Q- You briefed also this alias Buboy?
A- Yes, sir.
Q- What happened?
A- Immediately, we proceeded to the area.
Q- How many were you who proceeded to the area?
A- Seven (7) including the confidential informant.
Q- What mode of transportation did you take?
A- A jeepney.[31]
x x x x
Q- Where did you park?
A- We parked more or less 50 meters away from the house of the suspect.[32]
x x x x
COURT:
Q- Your operation is directed against a certain Janggo?
A- Yes, sir.
PROSECUTOR TOLENTINO:
Q- When you arrived at that place, what did you do next?
A- We walked leading the confidential informant and discreetly my colleague positioned themselves at seeing distance.
Q- Were you able to go to the designated place?
A- Yes, sir.
Q- What did you notice?
A- Upon walking, we saw the man standing in front of a doorway.[33]
x x x x
Q- Was he with somebody else at that time?
A- He was alone.
Q- What transpired next when you saw that man standing in the doorway?
A- The confidential informant told me that he was alias Janggo.[34]
x x x x
Q- What happened when this person whom you call asset but sent by concerned citizen to assist you, when he informed you that this man standing near the door was alias Janggo, what happened next?
A- Upon approaching, we saw a woman standing inside the doorway.
Q- You went to approach this woman?
A- Yes, sir.[35]
x x x x
Q- What transpired?
A- I noticed that there are several persons inside the house.
Q- What happened when you were in front of this person, alias Janggo?
A- The confidential informant introduced me as a regular buyer of shabu.
Q- What did alias Janggo answer, if any?
A- He asked me how much I will buy.
Q- What did you say?
A- I said P200.00.[36]
x x x x
Q- When you said you are going to buy shabu worth P200.00, what happened next?
A- Alias Janggo asked the woman inside the doorway.
Q- What did this Janggo ask that woman inside the doorway?
A- He asked the woman if there was any shabu.
Q- What happened when Janggo asked a woman inside the doorway if there is still some shabu left?
A- She dipped her hand into her right pocket and pulled out one (1) piece of plastic sachet of undetermined amount of shabu.
Q- After drawing out a plastic sachet containing shabu, what did this woman do?
A- She handed it to alias Janggo.
Q- What did alias Janggo do?
A- He handed it to me.
Q- That was after you gave the money?
A- Yes, sir.[37]
x x x x
Q- After the shabu was turned over to you by this person whom you recognized as alias Janggo and the accused Edward Feliciano, what happened next?
A- I examined the content of the plastic sachet.
Q- How many seconds elapsed after you have examined the plastic sachet?
A- About five (5) seconds, sir.
Q- After you examined the same, what happened?
A- I gave the pre-arranged signal discreetly to my back-up.
Q- Which was?
A- My bull cap.
Q- Handing and taking it off?
A- Yes, sir.
Q- What happened when you made the pre-arranged signal?
A- I introduced myself to alias Janggo, that I am a police officer and then I grabbed his left arm.
Q- While you were doing this, what happened to your back-up?
A- They rushed in to support me.
Q- Who arrived first?
A- PO2 Ronald Caparas.
Q- What happened when he arrived?
A- I shouted there were some persons inside.
Q- What did Caparas do?
A- He apprehended the woman standing near the doorway.
Q- What about the two other persons, a woman and a man because you said a while ago there were two women and a man?
A- My colleague PO1 Vega and PO2 Mapula cornered three (3) persons inside the house.
Q- Before the cornering of these three persons, what were they doing then?
A- They were seated inside the house.[38]
x x x x
Q- After making the arrest of all these persons including the accused Edward Feliciano and Anita Laurora, what transpired next including these two other persons you have just mentioned?
A- The suspects were subjected to mandatory frisking.
Q- When you say suspect, who did you frisk?
A- Alias Janggo.
Q- What did you recover?
A- I recovered two (2) pieces of P100.00 bill.[39]
x x x x
COURT:
Q- What did you do with the sachet?
A- I marked the sachet with the initials of the subject.
Q- Where did you mark it? In what place?
A- At the house of the subject. At the area itself.[40]
x x x x
PROSECUTOR TOLENTINO:
Q- What else did you do?
A- I informed them of their violation and their rights.
Q- After that, where did you bring these persons?
A- Immediately we brought them to our office for proper disposition of the Investigator.[41]
x x x x
Q- After turning over the persons of the accused, what transpired next?
A- We brought them to the Crime Lab for drug testing.
Q- After that, in order to bring appropriate charges against the accused, what document did you prepare?
A- My affidavit of arrest.[42]
SECTION 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, Seized and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals, Instruments/Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment.¾The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered, for proper disposition in the following manner:
(a) The apprehending officer/team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her 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; Provided, that the physical inventory and photograph shall be conducted at the place where the search warrant is served; or at the nearest police station or at the nearest office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable, in case of warrantless seizures; Provided, further, that non-compliance with these requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items x x x. (Emphasis supplied.)