People v. Umipang G.R. No.

190321, April 25, 2012

FACTS: On April 1, 2006 at around 6PM, a buy-bust team from the Station Anti-Illegal Drugs-Special Operation Task Force (SAID-SOTF) of the Taguig City Police descended along Cagayan de Oro Street, Maharlika Village, Taguig City after a confidential informant reported a certain Sam was selling drugs upon aforesaid place. PO2 Ruchyl Gasid acted as poseur-buyer and was given PHP 500 marked money. PO2 Gasid and confidential informant, upon finding Sam, asked the latter if they could buy PHP 500 worth of drugs. Sam then took out 3 plastic sachets containing a white crystalline substance with various price tags 500, 300, 100. After making the choice PO2 Gasid paid Sam PHP 500. Upon receipt of money, PO2 Gasid took of his cap as pre-arranged signal that the sale has been consummated. Sensing danger Sam attempted to flee the scene but was promptly accosted by the other members of the buy-bust team. Five more marked sachets containing the same white crystalline substance were recovered from Sam and promptly marked SAU (Sammy A. Umipang) by PO2 Gasid. For the sale of the sachet of 0.05 gram of shabu, which violates Sec. 5, Art. II of RA 9165, the RTC of Pasig City sentenced accusedappellant to life imprisonment and fined PHP 500,000. For possession of 5 sachets of shabu wih a total weight of 0.23 gram, which is a violation of Sec. 11, Art. II of RA 9165, the same court sentenced accused-appellant to an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of 12 years and 1day minimum to 14 years, 21 days as maximum and fined PHP 300,000. On appeal, CA affirmed the lower courts decision in toto.

ISSUE: Did the RTC and the CA err in finding the testimonial evidence of the prosecution witnesses as sufficient to convict accused-appellant of the alleged sale and possession of methylamphetamine HCL, which are violations of Secs. 5 and 11, Art. II of RA 9165 respectively? RULING: No, the Court reiterates once again that buy-bust operations, although proven to be an efficient way to flush out illegal transactions, are also susceptible to police abuse. Hence, strict adherence to procedures laid down by RA 9165, specifically Sec. 21, Art. II must be followed. It is evident that said section was blatantly disregarded by the buy-bust team when no proper inventory was done, no photographs taken and no representatives from the media, the DOJ, and any publicly elected official were present. Section 86 of RA 9165 was also not followed as the PDEA was not contacted with regards to the operation. Although failure to follow Sec. 21, Art. II of RA 9165 ipso facto is not fatal to the prosecutions case, it must be shown why such was not carried out by (1) justifiable cause and (2) preservation of the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were guaranteed. Court maintains that presumption of regularity in the performance of official functions cannot overrule the step- by-step procedure outlined in RA 9165 as it is a matter of substantive law. The court further asserts that the conduct itself of the buy-bust team was defective for the following reasons: (1) material inconsistencies in the marking of the evidence. This is shown by the admission of PO2 Gasid, who marked the seized items with the accused-appellant initials SAU (Sammy Abdul Umipang) allegedly at the scene of the operation. However, PO2 Gasid admits that prior to the operation he did not know of the identity or full name of the accused, the latter being only known as Sam. It was PO2 Saez, in the police station, who got Sams full name. (2) SAID-SOTF did not show genuine and sufficient third party representatives enumerated in Sec. 21, Art. II of RA 9165 as evidenced by PO2 Gasids admission during cross examination that no effort was made to contact the barangay captain or any barangay official of Brgy. Maharlika. (3) SAID-SOTF did not properly accomplish the Certificate of Inventory. PO2 Gasid, who prepared such document, did not sign it. Court sets aside the decision of the CA affirming the July 24, 2007 RTC decision and acquits Sammy A. Umipang of the crimes charged herein and ordered released immediately.