Plaintiff-Appellee Accused-Appellant: People of The Philippines, Jhon de Chavez Y Cuevas
Plaintiff-Appellee Accused-Appellant: People of The Philippines, Jhon de Chavez Y Cuevas
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution
dated May 14, 2021 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 239779 (People of the Philippines v. Jhon De Chavez y
Cuevas) .
The present Appeal 1 seeks to reverse and set aside the January 12,
2018 Decision 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09086.
The CA affirmed the January 23, 2017 Judgment 3 of the Regional Trial Court,
Pasig City, Branch 164 (RTC), finding Jhon De Chavez y Cuevas (accused-
appellant) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of Illegal Sale and
Possession of Dangerous Drugs under Sections 5 and 11, Article II of
Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165.
The Antecedents
In two (2) separate Informations, accused-appellant was charged with
the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs under
Secs. 5 and 11, Art. II of R.A. No. 9165. The accusatory portions respectively
read as follows:
Criminal Case No. 20966-D-PSG
xxx xxx xxx
On or about December 11, 2015, in Pasig City and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused, and not being
lawfully authorized to sell, possess or otherwise use any dangerous
drug, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell,
deliver and give away to Police Officer Michael A. Palattao, a police
poseur[-]buyer, one (1) heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet with
markings '(1MAP-TOTO/12/11/15, with signature),' containing zero
point zero five (0.05) gram of white crystalline substance, which was
found positive to the test for Methamphetamine Hydrochloride, a
dangerous drug, in violation of the said law.
Contrary to Law. 4
The RTC held that the prosecution was able to prove all the elements of
the crimes charged; that there was satisfactory compliance with the
requirements of the law on the proper chain of custody of dangerous drugs;
that although the confiscated drugs were not inventoried, marked, and
photographed in the presence of the National Prosecution Service (NPS)
and/or media, the prosecution was able to prove that the integrity of the
evidence was preserved; and that accused-appellant's defense of denial was
unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence.
The CA Ruling
In the now appealed decision, the CA affirmed the RTC ruling that the
prosecution was able to establish all the elements of illegal sale and
possession of dangerous drugs. The fallo reads:
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED and the assailed January
23, 2017 Judgment of Branch 164 of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig
City is AFFIRMED in toto.
SO ORDERED. 14
By:
Footnotes
5. Id. at 3.
6. CA rollo, p. 55.
7. Rollo , p. 4.
8. Id. at 4-5.
9. Id. at 5.
10. Records, p. 19; Physical Sciences Report No. D-674-15E.
22. People v. Climaco , 687 Phil. 593, 603 (2012), citing People v. Alcuizar , 662 Phil.
794 (2011).
23. People v. Alon-Alon y Lizarda, G.R. No. 237803, November 27, 2019, citing
People v. Bartolini , 791 Phil. 626, 634 (2016).
24. People v. Climaco , supra note 22 at 609 (2012), citing Mallillin v. People, 576
Phil. 576 (2008).
25. Section 1 (b) of Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No. 1, Series of 2002.
34. 807 Phil. 1017 (2017) as cited in People v. Omamos , G.R. No. 223036, July 10,
2019.
41. 833 Phil. 822 (2018), as cited in People v. Labadan , G.R. No. 237769, March 11,
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
2019.
42. Id. at 836.