Search for books, audiobooks, sheet music and more...

Upload EN

2 0 RELATED TITLES
Home 57 views

People v Nuarin
Saved
Uploaded by Maureen Co on Oct 17,
2017
Bestsellers
Criminal Law Full description

People v. Laylo People v Havana People v

Books
Enumer
Save Embed Share Print Digest
Audiobooks

Download Search document

Magazines

Documents

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. SONIA BERNEL

Sheet Music NUARIN, Appellant.
G.R. No. 188698 July 22, 2015
BRION, J .:

FACTS:
PO1 Manalo testified that members of the District Drug Enforcement Group of
the Central Police District went to Barangay Old Balara, Quezon City, to conduct
a buy-bust operation against the appellant. When they arrived there at around
12:30 p.m., the informant introduced PO1 Manalo to the appellant. PO1 Manalo
told the appellant that he wanted to buy ₱100.00 worth o f shabu. The appellant
handed a sachet containing white crystalline substances to PO1 Manalo who, in
turn, gave him the marked money. Thereafter, the police brought the appellant
and the seized items to the police station.

ISSUE:
Whether the prosecution was able to comply with Sec. 21, Art. II. Of R.A. 9165
and with the chain of custody requirement of this Act

RULING:
No. A crucial step in proving chain of custody is the marking of the seized drugs
or other related items immediately after they are seized from the accused.
"Marking" means the placing by the apprehending officer or the poseur-buyer of
his/her initials and signature on the items seized. Marking after seizure is the
starting point in the custodial link; hence, it is vital that the seized contraband be
immediately marked because succeeding handlers of the specimens will use the
markings as reference. The marking of the evidence serves to separate the
marked evidence from the corpus of all other similar or related evidence from the
time they are seized from the accused until they are disposedThis document
of at the end is...
of the
criminal proceedings, thus preventing switching, "planting," or contamination of
Read books, audiobooks, and more
Related titlesevidence.
Scribd
Useful Not useful
½ View
In the present case, the prosecution’s lone witness, PO1 Manalo, gave conflicting
GET — On the App Store
statements as to who marked the seized sachets. In his direct testimony, he
claimed that it was the desk officer who marked the sachets. In his cross-
examination, PO1 Manalo stated that he was the one who marked the
confiscated plastic sachets with "RM."

We point out that succeeding handlers of the specimen will use the initial
markings as reference. If at the first instance or opportunity, there are already
doubts on who really placed the markings on the seized sachets (or if the
markings were made in accordance with the required procedure), serious
uncertainty hangs over the identification of the seized shabu that the prosecution
introduced into evidence.

People v. Laylo People v Havana People v SWS vs Asuncion People v Bas

Enumerable…
Digest

In addition, the records do not show that the sachets were marked in the
presence of the appellant. The "marking" of the seized items to truly ensure that
they are the same items that enter the chain and are eventually the ones offered
in evidence should be done (1) in the presence of the apprehended violator (2)
immediately upon confiscation.

The procedure under Sec. 21(1) of Art. II of R.A No. 9165 was also not complied
with as PO1 Manalo himself admitted that the police did not make an inventory
and photograph the seized items either at the place of seizure or at the police
station. In addition, the police did not offer any acceptable reason why they failed
to do a basic requirement like a physical inventory of the seized drugs,
considering that there were only three (3) sachets taken from the appellant. The
SC in a recent case has acquitted an accused for failure of the police to make an
inventory and to photograph the seized shabu as the strict compliance with the
prescribed procedure is required because of the illegal drug's unique
characteristic rendering it indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily open to
tampering, alteration, or substitution either by accident or otherwise.

The totality of all the procedural lapses effectively produced serious doubts on
the integrity and identity of the corpus delicti, especially in the face of allegations
of frame up and extortion. The SC has previously held that these lapses negate
the presumption that official duties have been regularly performed by the police
officers. Any taint of irregularity affects the whole performance and should make
the presumption unavailable.

Reward Your Curiosity

Everything you want to read.
Anytime. Anywhere. Any device.

Read Free For 30 Days

No Commitment. Cancel anytime.

Share this document

Related Interests

Virtue Criminal Law Public Law Common Law

Justice

Documents Similar To People v Nuarin

People v. Laylo People v Havana People v Enumerable SWS vs As

UPLOADED BY UPLOADED BY Digest UPLOADED
Nor Santos Maureen Co UPLOADED BY gianfra
quackers2x

More From Maureen Co

People v Morilla Dela Cruz v People Continental Corp v RCBC v M

UPLOADED BY UPLOADED BY Lim UPLOADED
Maureen Co Maureen Co UPLOADED BY Mauree
Maureen Co

ABOUT SUPPORT LEGAL

About Scribd Help / FAQ Terms

Press Accessibility Privacy

Our blog Purchase help Copyright

Join our team! AdChoices

Contact Us Publishers

Invite Friends

Gifts

Copyright © 2019 Scribd Inc. . Browse Books . Site Directory . Site Language: English