Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

8th Judicial Region
Bulwagan ng Katarungan
Branch 25, Maasin City, Southern Leyte
~o0o~

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Crim. Case No. 15-06-4353

Plaintiff, For:

- versus - VIOLATION OF SEC. 5 OF

RA 9165

VINCENT CONSAD MARQUEZ

alias Ai-Ai,
Accused.
x---------------------/
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Crim. Case No. 15-06-4354
Plaintiff, For:

- versus - VIOLATION OF SEC. 11 OF

RA 9165

VINCENT CONSAD MARQUEZ

alias Ai-Ai,
Accused.
x---------------------/

DECISION

Accused Vincent Consad Marquez alias Ai-Ai is charged in

two separate Informations of violating Sections 5 and 11 of Republic Act

No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act

of 2002, allegedly committed as follows:

in Criminal Case No. 15-06-4353:

That on or about the 12th day of June 2015 in the City

of Maasin, Southern Leyte, Philippines, a place within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, without being authorized by law to sell or otherwise
 2

dispose of any dangerous drug, did, then and there, wilfully,

unlawfully and knowingly sell, deliver and give away to a
poseur buyer, a 0.05 gram of white crystalline substance,
contained in one (1) transparent plastic sachet with markings
VCM-1, which substance was found positive to the tests for
Methyl Amphetamine Hydrochloride, locally known as
shabu, a dangerous drug, in violation of the above-cited
law.

CONTRARY TO LAW.

and in Criminal Case No. 15-06-4354:

That on or about the 12th day of June 2015 in the City

of Maasin, Southern Leyte, Philippines, a place within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, without being authorized by law to possess or
otherwise use any dangerous drug, did, then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly have in his possession,
custody and control, a total of 0.09 gram of white crystalline
substance, contained in two (2) transparent plastic sachets
with markings VCM-2 and VCM-3, and which substance
was found positive to the tests for Methyl Amphetamine
Hydrochloride, locally known as Shabu, a dangerous drug,
in violation of the above-cited law.

CONTRARY TO LAW.

When arraigned separately for the two offenses, the accused

pleaded not guilty to both charges.

Considering that these offenses involve the same accused

and arose from the same set of facts, the proceedings after the

arraignment of the accused in the two above-entitled cases were ordered

consolidated upon joint motion of the prosecution and the defense.

Except for the territorial jurisdiction of the court over the

offenses charged and the identity of the accused in both cases, the
 3

parties arrived at no other stipulation during the joint pre-trial

conference.

During the consolidated trial, the prosecution presented the

following evidence:

Police Senior Inspector (PSI) Robbie Charles P. Villagen,

Provincial Chief of Western Samar Provincial Crime Laboratory Office

and Forensic Chemist of Regional Crime Laboratory Office 8, testified

that on June 15, 2015, he was on duty at the Regional Crime Laboratory

Office 8 when he received from PO2 Dequinto of the Maasin City Police

Station a request for chemical analysis.1 He checked the request letter,

the Chain of Custody Register Form2 of the police station and the

specimens indicated in the request letter and the Chain of Custody

Form. He made the requesting party accomplish the crime laboratorys

own Chain of Custody Form and acknowledgment receipt. After

accomplishing the documents, he went inside the laboratory and

conducted examinations on the specimens submitted. He examined

three (3) specimens marked VCM-1, VCM-2 and VCM-3,3 the result

of which revealed that the specimens all contained Methamphetamine

Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug. He prepared Chemistry Report No. D-

421-20154 containing his findings.

1 Exhs. F to F-1

2 Exhs. L to L-1

3 Exhs. N to N-3

4 Exhs. G to G-2
 4

PO2 Mark Lowell Dequinto, intelligence operative, testified

that he is one of the members of the City Anti-Illegal Drug Special Task

Operations Group (CAIDSTOG) of Maasin City Police Station. On June

12, 2015, at about 11:45 o'clock in the evening, a buy-bust operation

was conducted against accused Vincent Consad Marquez (Marquez) in

Barangay Mantahan, Maasin City. Before the operation, he received

information from his confidential informant that Marquez has numerous

stocks of shabu and offering them for sale. He informed their team

leader, Police Chief Inspector (PCI) Francisco Calumba, Jr. who, in turn,

instructed him to tell his confidential informant that they would buy

shabu worth Three hundred pesos (P300.00) at a designated place. The

confidential informant secured an agreement with Marquez to meet at

the vacant lot in the seaside of Barangay Mantahan, Maasin City at

around 12:00 midnight of June 12, 2015. PCI Calumba, Jr. then formed

a team composed of PO2 Dequinto as the poseur-buyer, PO3 Roderick

Ingeniero (PO3 Ingeniero) as arresting officer and PO3 Arvin Caberte

(PO3 Caberte) as photographer. On June 12, 2015, at about 9:00 o'clock

in the evening, PCI. Calumba, Jr. conducted a briefing regarding the

conduct of the operation. Thereafter, PO2 Dequinto and the confidential

informant went to the agreed place of transaction and arrived there at

around 11:40 o'clock in the evening. After a short while, Marquez arrived

and approached PO2 Dequinto and the confidential informant. The

latter introduced PO2 Dequinto to Marquez as the buyer of shabu. PO2

Dequinto then handed to Marquez the three (3) pieces marked money

bearing Serial Nos. RC878731, RQ567074 and AT982358.5 In turn, the

latter gave him one (1) piece heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet

5 Exh. I
 5

containing suspected shabu. PO2 Dequinto then raised his hands as the

pre-arranged signal that the sale was already consummated. The rest

of the team rushed towards their location, introduced themselves as

police officers and arrested Marquez. PO3 Ingeniero held Marquez and

apprised him of his constitutional rights. When PO3 Ingeniero was

about to handcuff Marquez, the latter tried to escape but PO3 Ingeniero

got hold of his t-shirt, which was ripped. PO2 Dequinto searched the

body of Marquez and recovered from his possession two (2) pieces heat

sealed transparent plastic sachet containing suspected shabu from

inside the right pocket of his short pants and the three (3) pieces One

hundred peso (P100.00) bills from the left pocket also of his short pants.

An inventory of the suspected drug items was conducted in the area,

witnessed by barangay kagawad Braulio Montederamos and media

representative Ma. Lorina Cua, which was photographed by PO3

Caberte.6 PO2 Dequinto marked the sachet of suspected shabu he was

able to buy from the accused as well as the two pieces heat-sealed

transparent plastic sachets containing suspected shabu as VCM-1,

VCM-2 and VCM-3.7 PO2 Dequinto took custody of the three (3)

pieces One hundred peso (P100.00) marked money. PO2 Dequinto

submitted the drug items to the Regional Crime Laboratory Office 8,

Campetic, Palo, Leyte for laboratory examination. Based on the

Chemistry Report No. D-421-2015,8 the submitted suspected drugs

specimen yielded positive result for the presence of Methamphetamine

Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug, with a total weight of 0.14 grams.

6 Exhs. M to M-11

7 Exhs. N to N-2

8 Exhs. G to G-2
 6

Police Chief Insp. Francisco Calumba, Jr., Chief of

CAIDSTOG, testified that in the morning of June 12, 2015, PO2 Mark

Lowell Dequinto (PO2 Dequinto) relayed to him the information given by

a confidential informant that accused Vincent Marquez (Marquez) was

engaged in illegal drug activities. He then conducted a briefing about the

planned buy-bust operation against the accused with the members of

the CAIDSTOG, after which, he informed his Chief of Police, Police Supt.

Doncillo that the team would conduct a buy-bust operation on that day.

He designated PO2 Mark Lowell Dequinto to act as poseur buyer and

evidence custodian while he assigned PO3 Ingeniero as arresting officer.

Marked money used in the operation had already been prepared and

certified by the prosecutor's office on May 25, 2015, before the actual

operation. A police officer also coordinated with the PDEA that the team

would conduct the buy-bust operation against Marquez. The agreed time

of the operation was at 12:00 oclock midnight of June 12, 2015 in the

vacant lot at the seaside of Mantahan, Maasin City. At 11:35 o'clock that

evening, members of the CAIDSTOG, on board a motorcycle, arrived at

the agreed place of transaction ahead of PO2 Dequinto and the

confidential informant. The team members positioned themselves at a

vantage point where they could see the target area. PO2 Dequinto and

the confidential informant soon followed. At around 11:45 oclock,

Marquez arrived and approached PO2 Dequinto and the confidential

informant. The three had a short conversation and not long after, PO2

Dequinto raised his hands, which was the pre-arranged signal that the

selling of drugs was already finished. The team immediately rushed to

Marquez and arrested him. After PO3 Ingeniero handcuffed Marquez,

PO2 Dequinto body searched Marquez and recovered from him two (2)
 7

sachets of shabu at his right pocket and the marked money used in the

operation from the left pocket of his short pants. An inventory was

conducted at the crime scene. PO2 Dequinto placed markings VCM-1,

VCM-2 and VCM-3 and date of arrest on the drug items. The

designated photographer also took pictures9 during the inventory.

Thereafter, the items were brought to the police station for further

documentation. PO2 Dequinto delivered the drug items to Palo, Leyte.

From the time of the buy-bust operation, to the conduct of the body

search and until the time when the sachets of suspected shabu were

brought to the Regional Crime Laboratory, PO2 Dequinto was the only

one in possession of the same. Police Inspector Villagen, a member of

the SOCO, informed him that the test-buy was positive. He executed an

Affidavit10 in connection with this case.

PO3 Roderick Ingeniero, Intelligence Operative of Maasin

City Police Station since 2012, testified that on June 12, 2015, at

around 9:00 o'clock in the evening, PCI Calumba conducted a briefing

for the buy-bust operation against Marquez in Barangay Mantahan. He

was designated as arresting officer while police officers Caberte and

Dequinto were designated as photographer and poseur buyer,

respectively. At about 11:00 o'clock in the evening, the team went to the

agreed area of transaction. PO2 Ingeniero positioned himself near the

target area. At around 11:30 o'clock in the evening, the confidential

informant and Dequinto approached Marquez. The latter was alone at

the time. Shortly thereafter, he noticed Dequinto executing the pre-

9 Exhs. M to M-11

10 Exhs. A to A-1
 8

arranged signal so he immediately rushed to Marquez and arrested him.

Marquez tried to evade arrest but he was able to neutralize him.

Dequinto then conducted a body search on Marquez and recovered from

him certain items.

The defense, for its part, presented Aljon Dagasdas and the

accused himself to rebut the evidence of the prosecution.

Aljon Dagasdas (Aljon), a 17 year old student and a resident

of Barangay Mantahan, Maasin City, testified that he and the accused

Vincent Marquez are neighbors. He had known the accused since he was

ten (10) years old. On June 12, 2015, at about 11:00 o'clock in the

evening, he was sitting in a bench at the waiting shed near the seaside

in Barangay Mantahan conversing through cellular phone with his sister

in Manila. He saw Marquez walk past him on his way home. He called

Marquez since Marquez' cousin had inquired from him if Marquez

already went home. Marquez sat beside him. Aljon was still talking to his

sister over the phone when two big men on board a motorcycle arrived.

When he and Marquez asked the men who they were looking for, they

said to Vincent Marquez, Here you are. They then arrested Marquez,

who resisted and asked the men what was his fault. Two other men

came and handcuffed Marquez. He knew the men to be police officers

Pagangpang, Caberte, Ingeniero and Dequinto because he had seen

them before when they arrested a certain Jovemer Alaras near the

chapel Brgy. Mantahan. The policemen told Aljon to leave so he left.

However, since he left his slippers behind, he remained in the vicinity,

around five to six meters away. He saw Marquez being body searched
 9

but the police recovered nothing from him. After a while, they put a

transparent plastic sachet and three (3) One hundred peso (P100.00)

bills on the bench where he and Marquez were seated. When Marquez

asked the police who owned those items, the police officers told him that

the items were theirs. As people came to watch them, a patrol car

arrived and the police officers boarded Marquez inside. He called the

mother of Marquez. Aljon refuted the testimony of Dequinto that

Marquez sold to him (Dequinto) shabu as the reason why Marquez was

arrested because Marquez had just come from a computer station

(internet cafe). He knew this as he saw Marquez at the computer station

when he went there in order to play but there was no available computer

unit. He also denied that Dequinto recovered from Marquez two (2)

sachets of shabu as police officers did not get anything from Marquez.

He believed that Marquez also knew the men to be police officers as he

addressed them as sirs.

Vincent Consad Marquez testified that on June 12, 2015, at

around 8:00 o'clock in the evening, he went to a computer shop or

internet cafe near his house located at Purok Talisay, Barangay

Mantahan. He stayed there for about two (2) hours, or until past 10:00

o'clock in the evening. He then went home. On his way home, he saw

Aljon sitting in the waiting shed located along the highway on the side of

the seashore near Marquez house. Aljon told Marquez that his cousin

was looking for him. He sat beside Aljon, who was talking with somebody

with his cellphone. He waited for Aljon to finish his conversation over the

phone as he wanted to use the latters phone to text his cousin that they

would go home together. Less than five (5) minutes later, two (2)
 10

motorcycles stopped in front of him. Mark Dequinto and Rodel

Pagangpang immediately alighted from one of the motorcycles. He knew

the two as they were the ones who served a warrant for his arrest in

September 2014 when he was charged with robbery before this court in

Criminal Case No. 14-04-4072. Even before that, in January of 2014,

while the robbery case was still being investigated, the two, Dequinto

and Pagangpang, arrested him and forced him to go with them to the

police station. He and Aljon greeted Dequinto and Pagangpang and

asked them who they were looking for, but they suddenly held him.

Dequinto told him dia ra ka. (Here you are.) While the two tried to

handcuff him, policemen Roderick Ingeniero and Arvin Caberte arrived.

He also knew them to be police officers as they were also present when

the warrant of arrest for the robbery case was served on him. He even

filed a case against these policemen for arbitrary detention. While

Caberte held him, he heard Ingeniero telling Aljon to run as he was not

involved. He resisted arrest and cried for help. He also called his mother

for help but he was subsequently handcuffed. As people started coming

out of their houses, the police officers told them not to go near him. Then

the police officers made him sit on the bench. After about thirty (30)

minutes, the police officers called the media representative. When the

media representative arrived, the police officers cordoned the area off so

that people could not go near him. Dequinto body searched him but he

did not recover anything from him. Caberte took pictures while he was

standing. When he turned his head towards the bench, he was surprised

when there were already three (3) sachets of shabu. He did not know

who placed the sachets of shabu on the bench. Barangay Kagawad

Braulio Montederamos (Montederamos) was also called. They signed a

document after the arrival of kagawad Montederamos. Afterwards, the

 11

police officers brought him inside the police car. He refuted the

testimony of Calumba, Jr. that he was the team leader and was there

when he was arrested as only four (4) police officers Dequinto,

Pagangpang, Ingeniero and Caberte were present during the incident. He

saw Calumba, Jr. for the first time only in the police station. He also

refuted the testimony of Dequinto that there was an agreement among

him, Dequinto and the confidential informant to meet at the place where

he would sell the shabu as he was only sitting beside Aljon waiting for

him to finish talking over the phone so that he could text his cousin. He

denied that he sold to Dequinto one (1) sachet of shabu on June 12,

2015 at about 11:45 oclock in the evening.

The courts ruling

Jurisprudence has firmly entrenched that in the prosecution

for illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the following essential elements must

be proven: (1) that the transaction or sale took place; (2) the corpus

delicti or the illicit drug was presented as evidence; and (3) that the

buyer and seller were identified.11 Implicit in all these is the need for

proof that the transaction or sale actually took place, coupled with the

presentation in court of the confiscated prohibited or regulated drug as

evidence. On the other hand, in prosecuting a case for illegal possession

of dangerous drugs, the following elements must concur: (1) the accused

is in possession of an item or object which is identified as a prohibited or

11
People v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 177222, October 29, 2008.
 12

dangerous drug; (2) that such possession is not authorized by law; and

(3) the accused freely and consciously possessed the drug.12

An assiduous evaluation of the evidence on record in its

totality exposes flaws in the prosecution evidence which raises doubt as

to its claim of an entrapment operation. Not all the elements necessary

for the conviction of the accused for illegal sale and possession of shabu

were clearly established in this case.

The most glaring flaw is the fact that the accused knew the

poseur buyer to be a policeman even prior to the alleged buy-bust

operation. The accused admitted that he was arrested, not once but

twice, by PO2 Dequinto, together with the other arresting officers, in two

separate occasions in 2014 for a charge of robbery. He even filed a

complaint against the said police officers. This was not refuted by the

prosecution. The prosecutions version portrayed the accused to have

approached the poseur buyer and the confidential informant at their

agreed meeting place after a purported appointment for the purchase of

shabu earlier set up by the confidential informant. There is no showing

that PO2 Dequinto employed some means of disguise to hide his identity

from the accused when they met. In fact, the photographs proffered by

the prosecution taken shortly after the arrest of the accused did not

indicate any such attempt to mask or conceal his identity. Both the

prosecution and the defense were in agreement that although it was

nighttime, the place where the operation took place was well-lit enough

12
People v. Sembrano, GR No. 185848, August 16, 2010.
 13

for them to perceive what went on. Granting that there was an

agreement for the purchase of shabu, it would then be ludicrous for the

accused to proceed with the sale after being confronted with someone he

knew to be a policeman.

The dubiousness of the prosecutions claim of a valid buy-

bust operation would have been mitigated had the prosecution presented

the barangay official and the media representative who allegedly

witnessed the body search of the accused and the recovery from his

actual possession of the two sachets of shabu. Without any such

independent corroborating evidence, however, the defense assertion that

all the drug evidence were planted becomes more believably truthful.

Nonetheless, even assuming that said sachets of shabu were in fact

taken from the possession of the accused, the same is inadmissible in

evidence as his arrest was without legal justification in the absence of

credible proof that a buy-bust had preceded the warrantless search of

his body.

A buy-bust operation is a form of entrapment, which in

recent years has been accepted as valid and effective mode of arresting

violators of the Dangerous Drugs Law.13 It has been proven to be an

effective way of unveiling the identities of drug dealers and of luring

them out of obscurity.14 To determine whether there was a valid

13
People v. Agulay, G.R. No. 181747, September 26, 2008

14
People v. Concepcion, G.R. No. 178876, June 27, 2008.
 14

entrapment or whether proper procedures were undertaken in effecting

the buy-bust operation, it is incumbent upon the courts to make sure

that the details of the operation are clearly and adequately established

through relevant, material and competent evidence. The courts cannot

merely rely on, but must apply with studied restraint, the presumption

of regularity in the performance of official duty by law enforcement

agents. Courts are duty-bound to exercise extra vigilance in trying drug

cases and should not allow themselves to be used as instruments of

abuse and injustice lest innocent persons are made to suffer the

unusually severe penalties for drug offenses.15 Courts must employ

heightened scrutiny, consistent with the requirement of proof beyond

reasonable doubt, in evaluating cases involving miniscule amounts of

drugs that can readily be planted and tampered.16

While frame-up and denial have invariably been considered

as weak defenses, in the light of the incredulousness of the prosecution

version of the alleged buy-bust, the plausibility of the defenses claim

that there was no such buy-bust deserves credence, especially when it

was corroborated by a witness who has not been shown to be biased in

favor of the accused and against the prosecution. Indeed, jurisprudence

has established that the defenses of denial and frame-up assume

significance only when the prosecutions evidence is such that it does not

prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt,17 as in the instant cases.

15
Valdez v. People, G.R.No. 170180, November 23, 2007.

16
People v. Holgado, et al., G.R. No. 207992, August 11, 2014.

17
People v. Mejia, G.R. No. 185723, August 4, 2009
 15

Weighed by these exacting standards set in jurisprudence,

the evidence adduced by the prosecution in the above-entitled cases

sadly fall short of persuading the court that the accused is guilty of the

offenses charged against him. Thus, this court is duty bound to acquit

the accused of both charges.

In fine, it is fitting to repeat what the Supreme Court held

in People v. Ong, a case similarly involving a buy-bust operation, thus:

The Constitution mandates that an accused shall be

presumed innocent until the contrary is proven beyond reasonable
doubt. While appellants defense engenders suspicion that he
probably perpetrated the crime charged, it is not sufficient for a
conviction that the evidence establishes a strong suspicion or
probability of guilt. It is the burden of the prosecution to overcome
the presumption of innocence by presenting the quantum of
evidence required.

In the case at bar, the basis of acquittal is reasonable doubt,

the evidence for the prosecution not being sufficient to sustain and
prove the guilt of appellants with moral certainty. By reasonable
doubt is not meant that which of possibility may arise but it is
that doubt engendered by an investigation of the whole proof and
an inability, after such an investigation, to let the mind rest easy
upon the certainty of guilt. An acquittal based on reasonable
doubt will prosper even though the appellants innocence may be
doubted, for a criminal conviction rests on the strength of the
evidence of the prosecution and not on the weakness of the
evidence of the defense. Suffice it to say, a slightest doubt should
be resolved in favor of the accused.18

WHEREFORE, all of the foregoing premises considered, the

court hereby ACQUITS the accused Vincent C. Marquez of the offenses

18
G.R. No. 175940 [Formerly G.R. Nos. 155361-62], February 6, 2008.
 16

charged, violations of Sections 5 and 11, Art. II of Republic Act 9165, on

the basis of reasonable doubt.

The said accused is hereby ordered immediately released,

unless there is some other legal cause for his continued detention.

SO ORDERED.

GIVEN this 27th day of July 2017 at Maasin City, Southern

Leyte, Philippines.

MA. DAISY PALER GONZALEZ

J u d g e
17