People v Arnold Yanga Castro [Velasco, Jr, 2011] RTC guilty, life imprisonment for drug pushing under
for drug pushing under Sec 5, RA 9165. Also
Violation of Sections 5 (drug pushing) and 11 (illegal possession), Article II of
RA 9165 or the Dangerous Drugs Act.
FACTS
At 1am, P/Insp Armenta and PO2 Zamora of the Galas Police Station
received a report from a male informant that a certain alias IDOL had been
selling drugs in the Cordillera and Ramirez streets in Barangay San Isidro,
QC. Armenta relayed the info to their chief, Col. Razon. Col. Razon then
formed a buy-bust operation team composed of 4 members including
Armenta and Zamora. Armenta would be the poseur-buyer and was given a
100-peso bill with the initials JA (Armentas initials). The team was
dispatched in 2 vehicles to Brgy San Isidro. At around 2 am, Armenta and the
informant went to an eskinita with a distance of more than 10 meters.
Zamora saw Armenta talking to a person (accused Castro) near a Meralco
post.
The informant introduced Armenta as the prospective buyer of shabu.
Armenta asked how much. Castro said piso which is equivalent to 100php.
Armenta handed Castro the 100 pesos and Castro gave him a transparent
plastic containing some white crystalline substance which was pulled out
from his pocket.
Armenta then scratched his head, signaling his team members that the
transaction was consummated. The team closed in and arrested Castro. PO2
Zamora informed Castro of his violation, frisked him and recovered 2 more
sachets containing the white crystalline substance.
Chain of Custody
Armenta took custody of the sachet Castro sold to him. Zamora kept the
marked money and the 2 other sachets. Armenta marked the transparent
plastic with JA-AC. Zamora marked the 2 sachets with NZ-AC (the
markings corresponded to the initials of the police officer and the accused).
The 3 sachets were turned over to the investigating police officer Jimenez.
The PNP crime laboratory made a chemical analysis on the seized items.
The 3 sachets were positive for Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride or shabu.
sentenced to suffer a jail term of 12 years and 1 day as a minimum to 13
years + a fine of P 300k.
CA accused was caught in flagrante delicto. RTC ruling affirmed.
ISSUES
WON chain of custody was established YES
Castro: Prosecution failed to preserve the integrity of the seized items and
establish an unbroken chain of custody. After seizure or confiscation, the
items must be physically inventoried and photographed in the presence of
the accused and/or his representative who shall be required to sign the
copies of the inventory and be given a copy.
Court: Perfect chain is not always the standard as it is almost always
impossible. What is important is the preservation of the integrity and
evidentiary value of the seized items. (IRR of RA 9165). The procedural
infirmities Castro mentioned do not affect the prosecution nor renders
Castros arrest illegal nor the items seized inadmissible.
In People v Quiamanlon, the Court held that the integrity of the
evidence is presumed to be preserved, unless there is a showing of bad
faith, ill will, or proof that the evidence has been tampered with.
WON proof beyond reasonable doubt was established YES
Castro failed to show palpable error.
For prosecution under Sec 5 of the DDA the following elements must
concur: (1) the identities of the buyer and seller, object, and
consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment
thereof.
What is material to the prosecution of illegal sale of dangerous drugs is the
proof that the transaction or sale actually occurred, coupled with the
presentation in court of the substance seized as evidence.
With respect to Sec 11 of the DDA (illegal possession), the evidence of
the prosecution must establish the following elements: (1) the accused
is in possession of an item or object which is identified to be an illegal absence of satisfactory explanation for his possession. Burden of evidence is
drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and (3) the accused thus shifted to the accused. Castro failed to discharge burden.
freely and consciously possessed the drug.

Possession of dangerous drugs constitutes prima facie evidence of

knowledge or animus possidendi sufficient to convict and accused in the WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals
in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03800 finding accused-appellant Arnold Castro y
Yanga guilty of the crimes charged is AFFIRMED.