364 Phil. 497
PANGANIBAN, J.:
"WHEREFORE, judgment is rendered finding the accused CHENG HO CHUA GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the [v]iolation of Section 15, Article III, of Republic Act No. 6425,[2] as amended, otherwise referred to as the [s]ale of [r]egulated [d]rugs, involving [o]ne [t]housand (1,000) grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. He is meted the penalty of LIFE IMPRISONMENT AND a FINE OF TWENTY THOUSAND PESOS (P20,000.00).On March 26, 1993, State prosecutor Archimedes V. Manabat charged appellant in an Information which reads:
"The dangerous drugs subject of this case [are] ordered forfeited in favor of the [g]overnment, and it is directed that th[ese] be submitted forthwith to the Dangerous Drugs Board."[3]
"On about March 14, 1993 in Manila and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously dispense, transport, distribute, sell and deliver to a buyer without authority of law approximately 1,000 grams of [m]ethamphetamine [h]ydrochloride, a regulated drug popularly known as `shabu'."[4]Chua, assisted by Counsel de Parte Wilfredo T. Garcia, entered a plea of not guilty when arraigned on May 5, 1993. On May 28, 1993, the lower court denied appellant's application for bail. Trial proceeded in due course. Thereafter, the court a quo rendered its assailed Decision.
"Prosecution evidence shows that based on police surveillance against a group of Chinese-Filipino drug traffickers known as the Dama de Noche Gang, the name of Ben Chua, also identified as Cheng Ho Chua, cropped up as a suspected drug dealer operating in the Binondo area.
"On March 13, 1993, at 2:00 in the afternoon, an unnamed police informant allegedly contacted appellant at the lobby of Fortune Hotel in Salazar Street, Binondo, Manila, and negotiated with him for the purchase of shabu. The informant introduced SPO2 Jeffrey Inciong to appellant as the alleged prospective buyer of shabu. After some discussion, appellant agreed to sell to SPO2 Inciong one kilo of shabu for P600,000.00. Appellant then instructed SPO2 Inciong to return to the hotel at 9:00 that evening for the exchange and consummation of their agreement.
"Backed up by a team of eight policemen who positioned themselves strategically in various places outside the hotel where they could observe the activities, SPO2 Inciong, together with the police informant and SPO1 Retubado [sic], returned to Fortune Hotel at 9:00 that evening. Soon, SPO2 Inciong and the informant met appellant outside the entrance of the hotel. They told appellant that they had the money with them. Appellant told them to wait for him as he went inside the hotel.
"After three to five minutes, appellant came out of the hotel carrying a shopping bag. He approached SPO2 Inciong and asked the latter to join him at the side of the hotel building. Arriving thereat, SPO2 Inciong asked to see the shabu first and appellant handed to him the shopping bag. After checking the content of the bag, SPO2 Inciong handed over to him the purchase money which was actually `boodle money' because it consisted of a bundle of cut papers sandwiched between two genuine P1,000.00. The `boodle money' was in a brown leather clutch bag.
"While examining the contents of the leather clutch bag, SPO2 Inciong gave the signal for his companions to come forward. They introduced themselves as police officers and arrested appellant who went quietly with them to their headquarters at Camp Bagong Diwa. At the headquarters, they turned over appellant and the `boodle money' to the investigator-in-charge, SPO3 Florentino Tasara. They also requested the Philippine National Police (PNP) Crime Laboratory to make a chemistry analysis of the seized kilo of shabu. After examination by Chief Superintendent Marlene Salangad, the substance was determined to be methamphetamine hydrochloride, the scientific name for shabu."[8]
"The accused was a businessman from Butuan City. On March 14, 1993, he had lunch in Ongpin at Binondo with Luisito Go from whom he had been renting a townhouse on Ortigas Street in San Juan for over a year. After lunch, the accused asked Go to drop him at the Fortune Hotel in Binondo where he had a tryst with his girlfriend, Menchie Tolentino. Menchie left his hotel room (Room 380) at about 6:00 o'clock in the evening and the accused settled for the night.
"At 12:15 o'clock in the early morning of March 15, 1993, the accused heard persistent knocking at his hotel room door but when he asked who it was, no one answered him. When he finally opened the door, six or seven men who were shouting that they were policemen pushed open the door and searched his room. The men wore plain clothes and had Luisito Go and a reporter with them. After the search, the raiding team brought the accused and Go with them to their camp in Bicutan. They mauled the accused for about half an hour and asked him if he had shabu in his possession. He denied knowing anything about the drug. During this time, the police did not allow the accused to get in touch with a lawyer. While he was being mauled, a policeman told the accused that his problem could be fixed and that he could be released for P1.0 million.
"at 7:00 o'clock in the morning of March 15, 1993, the police brought the accused back to his room at Fortune Hotel where they gave him a cellular phone so he could ask his friends to come to the hotel. The accused called Anthony Co and Lolita Lee but only Anthony came. The accused called Lolita about four times telling her to call up friends so she could raise P1.0 million for his release or he would be killed. Lee was aghast but at about 10:30 o'clock in the evening she told the accused that she was able to raise only P700,000.00. The police officers at the other end of the line then talked to Lee and told her where to deliver the money. After discussing the details of the delivery, L[ee] brought the money to Bicutan and gave it to a man who waited for her near the gate of the police camp. The latter promised to release the accused shortly but this did not happen.
"On March 16, 1993 Vice President Joseph Estrada presented the accused, Luisito Go, Anthony Co, another man, and a woman to the press for a photo session where they were paraded with their names hanging around their necks. From the time of his arrest, the accused had not been allowed to get in touch with any lawyer. Only on March 17, 1993 when police presented him at the Department of Justice before State Prosecutor Manabat for inquest was the accused allowed to get in touch with his lawyer."[10]
"The investigative efforts [of the NBI] were superficial and misdirected. Butuan City is not the place where the accused plied his drugs, and their queries should have gone beyond just the hometown narcotics agent and the step-brother of the accused. It was predictable that no derogatory record but only favorable endorsements of the accused would turn out from such cursory and off-track investigation.
"Neither can much faith and credence be given [to] the statements and testimonies of the staff at Fortune Hotel, nor in the entries in its record and logbook. The accused was their frequent and regular customer, xxx who they claim was forcibly taken out of his room in the middle of the night by several strangers in civilian clothes. Yet no measure of protection or concern was given him, and the alarming event was not even reported to the authorities, not even when their guest was supposedly brought back hours later and his captors reoccupied his room. Instead what the hotel supervisor merely did was to declare their guest as `checked- out'. Said nonchalance of the hotel personnel [was] not the normal reaction to such a startling occurrence if indeed it took place. As to the hotel logbook and record, entries in these can [be] easily fabricated to suit a particular purpose and are of dubious accuracy and unclear authorship.x x x x x x x x x
"Lolita Lee said she collected the P700,000.00 from about ten (10) relatives and friends of the accused who[m] she phoned and saw at their places. She started her task after the 3:00 p.m. call, and when he made phone contact at 10:30 p.m., the money was ready. It was a Sunday and banks were closed[;] she was but a casual friend of the contributors whom she refused to name[;] they lived in separate homes spread in Metro Manila[;] she had but a sketchy inkling of why the accused required money[;] the time frame was short, and the amount to be raised was not something to sneeze at. How Lolita Lee got hold of the amount against such constraints, could be a good lesson to any aspiring fund raiser. It is intriguing why the accused chose Lolita Lee to raise the money[;] they were not close friends but just casual business associates. He could have just easily talked directly with any of his relatives and friends who put up the amounts anyway, while she did not chip in a single centavo. It is a wonder how Lolita Lee could convince these people to give money when they were mere acquaintances and she had but cryptic messages from the accused with which to justify the dole. It is similarly puzzling how under the tenuous given circumstances Lolita Lee could agree to face grave perils for the accused."[11]
"1. The trial court erred in finding that the police officers in the case arrested the accused and seized a kilo of prohibited drugs from him in a buy-bust operation outside his hotel at 9 o'clock in the evening of March 14, 1993;Briefly stated, appellant questions (1) the sufficiency of the prosecution evidence; and (2) his arrest, the search of his personal belongings, and the alleged extortion by the police.
"2. The trial court erred in not finding that, in truth, the police officers forcibly barged into the accused's hotel room at 12:15 o'clock in the morning of March 15, 1993, searched it without a search warrant, and arrested him without lawful ground; and
"3. The trial court erred in not finding that the accused [was] entitled to an acquittal given the absence of any credible evidence that he had been engaged in the distribution of prohibited drugs."[12]
"PROSECUTOR TEVES:Corroborating Inciong, Witness Rebaldo testified in this wise:[15]
Q At what particular place did you meet Mr. Ben Chua or Cheng Ho Chua?
A In front of the entrance of the Fortune Hotel, Ma[`]am.
Q And that was about what time?
A More or less 9:00 o'clock in the evening, ma[`]am.
Q After you met Mr. Cheng Ho Chua in front of the entrance of the hotel, what happened?
A My informant and I approached Ben Chua in front of the Fortune Hotel and I told him that the money [even] already, ready ma[`]am.
Q And what was the reply of Mr. Ben Chua, Mr. [Wit]ness?
A Mr. Ben Chua told us to wait for a moment and he went inside the hotel, and he back came about more or less 3 to 5 minutes carrying a shopping bag, ma[`]am.
Q And, what happened after he came back having a shopping bag?
A He asked me to go with him at the side of the Fortune Hotel building, ma[`]am.
Q So you transacted business with the accused outside the Fortune Hotel?
A Yes, ma[`]am.
Q What happened after you went to the side of the Fortune Hotel?
A I told him I [would] look first for the stuff and he showed me the stuff. Then I gave to him the boodle money placed inside a brown leather attache bag, ma[`]am.
Q [P]laced inside a what?
A [L]eather clutch bag, ma[`]am.
Q Brown leather attache bag. How much was that money supposed to be?
A The boodle money representing SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS, ma[`]am.x x x x x x x x x
Q And, who in particular received this boodle money from you?
A It was Ben Chua, ma[`]am.
Q After Ben Chua received the boodle money, [w]hat happened?
A I signaled the rest of my companions, my back up, to arrest Ben Chua, ma[`]am.
Q And were you able to arrest Mr. Ben Chua?
A Yes, ma[`]am.
Q What happened after your backup team came forward to assist you?
A We introduced ourselves as policemen and Ben Chua did not resist and he came with us quietly and we brought him to our office headquarters for investigation, ma[`]am."[14]
"Q After having informed your [c]hief [o]fficer, what happened now, Mr. [W]itness?The clear, straightforward and consistent testimonies of the two arresting officers, which are concurrent on material points and replete with relevant details, sufficiently support the trial court's conclusions.
A We formed a team to effect the arrest of the accused and the buy bust operation will be continuing, ma[`]am.
Q On March 14, 1993, did you actually [go] back to Fortune Hotel?
A Yes, ma[`]am.
Q And, who were your companions when you went back to Fortune Hotel?
A We boarded xxx my car together with SPO2 Jeffrey Inciong and our civilian informant. And we arrived at Fortune Hotel at around 8:55 in the evening, ma`am.
Q So aboard your car SPO2 Inciong, you and the informant xxx proceeded [to] Fortune Hotel, and you arrived there at 8:55 in the evening. A[l]right, upon arriving thereat, where did you position yoursel[ves]?
A When we arrived at the Fortune Hotel[,] Ben Chua was already beside the hotel, ma[`]am.
Q Alright, upon seeing Ben Chua, what did you do?
A SPO2 Inciong approached the suspect and the suspect said in [T]agalog [`]Hintayin ninyo lang ako sa baba[`], then after that he went upstairs, ma[`]am.
Q Where were you then Mr. Rebaldo when SPO2 Inciong and the accused were talking?
A I alighted from my car and then I positioned myself at about one arm leng[th] away from the two, ma[`]am.
Q How about the civilian informant, where was he?
A I was with the civilian informer, ma[`]am.
Q Now, what happened after Ben Chua, the accused left and went up in the hotel?
A After about 5 minutes h[e] went back to the place where we were and he was carrying a plastic shopping bag, ma[`]am/
Q What kind of plastic shopping bag, white, blue or black?
A Probably blue, ma[`]am.
Q Was the place where Mr. Chua then lighted?
A It was not properly lighted. It was partially lighted because the light was far from our place, ma[`]am.
Q From where you were, could you see Mr. Chua, as well as SPO2 Inciong?
A Yes, ma[`]am.
Q Where were you when you saw Mr. Chua carrying a plastic bag?
A We were together, I and the civilian informant, ma[`]am.
Q How far were you from Inciong then?
A We were then an arm leng[th] away from SPO2 Inciong, ma[`]am.
Q And SPO2 Jeffrey Inciong was supposed to be the poseur buyer?
A Yes, ma[`]am.
Q Now, what happened when Mr. Chua arrived carrying a plastic bag?
A He approached SPO2 Inciong and handed the plastic bag and SPO2 Inciong handed also the clutch bag containing the buy-bust money, ma[`]am."[16]
"Q. Mr. Witness, why did you prepare this affidavit of arrest earlier even before having the result of the examination?Nor is there an inconsistency between the Chemistry Report and the testimony of the policemen. Contrary to the appellant's claim, the arresting officers did not state that, after making the arrest, they turned over the seized substance to the PNP Crime Laboratory. Rather, in the transcript cited by appellant himself,[21] SPO2 Inciong merely declared that "we also brought [the substance] to our headquarters and we immediately made a request for the examination if it is positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride."[22] Indeed, Inciong submitted the seized substance not to the PNP Crime Laboratory but to SPO3 Florentino Tasara, the unit investigator. For his part, Tasara testified that he delivered the substance to the PNP Crime Laboratory on March 16, 1993.[23]
A. Because it's our SOP in our headquarters [that] after the arrest of the suspect we ma[k]e our affidavit of arrest after we [bring] in the said evidence to the investigator, ma`am
Q. Please tell this Court [if] you just prepared all the documents necessary relative to the apprehension of Mr. Cheng Ho Chua?
A. Yes, ma`am.
Q. But it does not necessarily follow that you have already affirmed and subscribed [to] this statement you prepared on the same day?
A. Yes, ma`am."[20] (Underscoring supplied.)
"PROSECUTOR MANABAT:In his Reply Brief, appellant further maintains that the testimonies of Rebaldo and Inciong were inconsistent with each other. Inciong allegedly stated that he met appellant "in front of the entrance" of the Fortune Hotel. Rebaldo, however, averred that Inciong and appellant met "beside" the hotel. This inconsistency is minor and insignificant and does not affect the claim of the prosecution that a buy-bust operation was conducted at the time.
Q And upon receiving this evidence Exhibit `F-3' [the shabu], what did you do with this evidence as an investigator?
A As an investigator, sir, I prepared all the necessary papers with regards to the cases, and one of them was the Request for laboratory examination addressed to the PNP Criminal Laboratory Service, Camp Crame.
x x x x x x x x x
Q And after you prepared this request for laboratory examination, what did you do?
A I also made a letter request for laboratory examination of the other suspects [who] were arrested by the other teams, [because] at the time there were series of operations conducted.
Q after preparing these other laboratory requests and particularly this one Request with respect to Mr. Cheng, marked as Exhibit `A-1', what did you do?
A I prepared the other [--] all the other things, the Joint Affidavit of arrest of the arresting officers [which] they stated to me and I decided to submit all the evidences submitted in [a] series of operations at the same time. I decided to have them submitted at the Crime Lab at the same time.
Q And what are these evidences?
A The suspected methamphetamine hydrochloride. These substances or suspected drugs xxx and the boodle money that were confiscated from each of the suspects that were turned over to me by the arresting officers.
Q Where did you submit this evidence, particularly the suspected methamphetamine hydrochloride marked as Exhibit `F-3' relating to the case of Cheng Ho Chua?
A I, together with SPO3 Cesar Pilosopo and PO3 Miguel Abong and other operatives, were the ones who delivered the evidence submitted to us to the PNP Crime Laboratory Services for laboratory examinations.
Q Do you recall the date?
A It was only on March 16, 1993.
Q How about the time?
A It was already nighttime at about 8:00 or 8:30, sir.
Q And why was it that it was xxx submitted [only] on the night of March 16 by you?
A There [was a] series of operations conducted by different teams regarding violation of Republic Act No. 6425, with different venues and I decided to submit all the evidences at the same time to the Crime laboratory Services to save time and effort."[25]