GR No 178000 and 178003

Liberato Carabeo vs Court of Appeals

GR No 178000 and 178003           December 4, 2009

Facts:

       Carabeo, then OIC of the Office of Treasurer of Paranaque City, was charged with committing acts in violation of RA No 3019. It was found that his net worth based on his SALNs from the time he commenced employment at the Paranaque Treasurer’s Office has ballooned extraordinarily. It was also noticeable that his net worth’s drastic increase was evidenced by the steady accumulation of various expensive properties ranging from real properties to vehicles to club shares ownership. However, Carabeo did not declare most of the vehicles owned in his SALNs as evidenced by the records in LTO.

            The Office of the Ombudsman Preliminary Investigation and Administrative Adjudication Bureau-Acting Director Dacanay directed Secretary Teves to place Carabeo under preventive suspension without pay. Carabeo filed a petition for certiorari. CA then issued a 60-day TRO enjoining the enforcement of Carabeo’s preventive suspension. Meanwhile, Secretary Teves issued an order directing the detail of Carabeo in the BLGF-CO. The same was assailed by Carabeo to CA but it was denied.

            Hence, the petition before the SC.

Issue:

            WON Carabeo be held guilty of the crime charged against him.

Held:

            SC dismissed the petition. The validity of the executive order issued is immaterial to the validity of the charges against Carabeo. It was also held that the preventive suspension order was legal. Settles is the rule that prior notice and hearing are not required in the issuance of a preventive suspension order, such not being a penalty but only a preliminary step in an administrative investigation.

        The Court also found that Carabeo has not disclosed assets in his SALN. As such, Carabeo’s non-disclosure of assets in his SALN constitutes a violation of RA No 3019, among others.

          As to the purpose of SALN, Section 8 of RA No 3019 speaks of unlawful acquisition of wealth, the evil sought to be suppressed and avoided, and Section 7, which mandates full disclosure of wealth in the SALN, is a means of preventing said evil and is aimed particularly at curtailing and minimizing, the opportunities for official corruption and maintain a standard f honesty in the public service. By the SALN, the public are able to monitor movement in the fortune of a public official; it is a valid check and balance mechanism to verify undisclosed properties and wealth.

          Significantly, Carabeo failed to show any requirement under RA No 3019 that prior notice of the non-completion of the SALN and its correction precede the filing of charges for violation of its provisions.

GR No 206590

People of the Philippines vs Myrna Gayoso

GR No 206590         March 27, 2017

Facts:

            Gayoso was charged with committing acts in violation of Section 5 and 11, Article 2 of RA No 9165 for the illegal sale and illegal possession of a dangerous drug. Police received several reports that a certain Gayoso was peddling prohibited drugs. It was confirmed later on by a police assigned in the actual place where Gayoso was reportedly selling the prohibited drugs. By then, the police decided to conduct a confirmatory test-buy in order to ascertain the culpability of Gayoso before they file for an issuance of a search warrant. Upon successful operation of the confirmatory test-buy, the police proceeded to search the house of Gayoso, armed with a search warrant. Witnesses were also summoned for the procedure.

            The RTC found that Gayoso was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal sale and illegal possession of shabu. It declared that the prosecution ably established the elements of illegal sale and possession of shabu through the testimonies of its witnesses. It also ruled that the evidence sufficiently established the chain of custody of the sachets of shabu from the time they were bought from Gayoso to its turnover to PNP Crime Laboratory for examination. The CA affirmed in toto the RTC ruling in finding Gayoso guilty of the unauthorized sale and possession of shabu.

           Gayoso then filed a Notice of Appeal.

Issue:

           WON Gayoso was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged.

Held:

           The appeal was granted by the SC.

           The SC held that the RTC issues a search warrant after finding a probable cause, hence, the search Gayoso’s residence was valid. The determination of the existence of a probable cause is concerned only with the question of whether the police had reasonable grounds to believe that the accused committed or is committing the crime charged.

            The confirmatory test-buy solicitation does not constitute instigation as well. Accordingly, in inducement or instigation, the criminal intent originates in the min of the instigator and the accused is lured into the commission of the offense charged in order to be prosecuted from the same. Instigation did not exist in this instant case.

            However, the SC found that the chain of custody of evidence was not established. Under RA No 9165, the offense of illegal sale of shabu, the following elements must be present: 1) identities of the buyer and seller, object and consideration of the sale; and 2) delivery of the thing sold and payment therefor. On the other hand, the following elements must be present for the offense of illegal possession of prohibited drugs: 1) the accused is in possession of the prohibited drug; 2) possession is not authorized by law; and 3) the accused freely and consciously possessed said drug. In the prosecutions of these, there must be proof that these offenses were actually committed, coupled with the presentation in court of evidence of corpus delicti.

            The chain of events must be: 1) seizure and marking, if practicable after recovery; 2) turnover of the illegal drug seized to the investigating officer; 3) turnover by investigating officer to the forensic chemist for lab exam; and 4) turnover to court.

GR No 221465

People of the Philippines vs Rodelio Lopez

GR No 221465         November 16, 2016

Facts:

            Lopez was charged to have committed crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of shabu. The police were able to track Lopez and his illegal activities via a tip from an informant which urged the buy-bust team to be established for the entrapment operations against Lopez. As the said entrapment ensued, Lopez was found to have sold one sachet of shabu and two other sachets in his possession. The said sachets were then ordered transmitted to PDEA through DDB for disposal as per RA 9165.

            The trial court held that the prosecution had established all the required elements for illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs through a legitimate buy-bust operation. On appeal, CA affirmed RTC’s findings that all elements of the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs were proven by the prosecution. Defense of denial and alibi were considered weak and cannot prevail the positive declaration of the police.

            Lopez filed a Notice of Appeal.

Issue:

            WON Lopez be held guilty of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs.

Held:

            The Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction of Lopez.

        Under Section 5, Article 2 of RA No 9165, the essential elements in the successful prosecution of offenses involving the illegal sale of dangerous or prohibited drugs are: 1) the identity of the buyer and seller, the object of the sale and the consideration; and 2) the delivery of the thing sold and payment therefor. Material in the successful the prosecution is the proof that the transaction or sale actually took place, coupled with the presentation in the court of evidence of corpus delicti. In the instant case, Lopez was caught in flagrante delicto of selling shabu, a dangerous drug to the poseur-buyer, there having been a completed sale transaction of the same.

In the charge of illegal possession of dangerous drug, the prosecution must prove the following elements: 1) the accused is in possession of an item or object, which is identified to be a prohibited or regulated drug; 2) such possession is not authorized by law; and 3) the accused freely and consciously possessed the drug. The same was met in the entrapment operations that occurred.

In the prosecution of drug cases, it is of paramount importance that the existence of the drug as the corpus delicti of the crime be established beyond doubt. Hence, IRR of RA No 9165 offer some flexible proviso that non-compliance with the requirements set forth under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items.

Thus, although it was found out that the police did not comply with the required physical inventory, what is crucial is that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items be preserved as they will be used in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.

GR No 128777

People of the Philippines vs Ernesto Larin

GR No 128777         October 7, 1998

Facts:

Larin was accused of committing an act in violation of Section 5 (b) in relation to Section 31 (e) of Republic Act No 7610 (An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse Exploitation and Discrimination, Providing Penalties for its Violation and for other Purposes).

            Upon prior sworn complaint, Carla Lenore Calumpang, then 14 years of age, was inside the ladies’ shower room on April 17, 1996. Larin, a public employee of UP Los Banos, by taking advantage of his authority, influence and moral ascendancy as trainer/swimming instructor of Calumpang, committed lascivious conduct against the said minor.

            The trial court found the testimony of Calumpang worthy of full faith and credence. It further reasoned that unless motivated by a genuine desire to seek justice, such minor would not fabricate the story, undergo a medical examination, appear in court and announce to the whole world that she was sexually abused.

            On appeal, Larin assails the sufficiency of the evidence adduced against him.

Issue: WON Larin is guilty of the crime charged against him.

Held:

            The appeal is unmeritorious.

            Under the RA 7610, the elements of the offense penalized are the following: 1) the accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct; 2) the said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; 3) the child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age.

            A child is deemed exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse, when the child indulges in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct for a) money, profit or consideration, or b) under the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group. Persons below 18 years of age are those unable to fully take care of themselves or protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, or exploitation or discrimination because of their age or mental disability or condition.

            As to the credibility of the witness, it is a well-entrenched rule that the trial court’s evaluation of the credibility of the witness and his or her testimony is entitled to the highest degree of respect. The victim’s testimony, given in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous, and candid manner, is worthy of faith and belief. No proof of ill motive on her part to falsely accuse and testify against the appellant has been offered.

            The utter submissiveness of Calumpang to the lascivious conducts of Larin may be derived from psychological coercion which happens when the accused is of a more powerful person who is in power. Apparently, regardless of how intelligent children may be, when faced with these acts, they may react differently. One cannot reasonably expect uniform reactions from victims of sexual assault. Said submissiveness does not exonerate an accused from criminal liability. Moral coercion or ascendance is sufficient.

            As to the imposable penalty, RA 7610 mandates that the penalty provided for in the Act shall be imposed in its maximum period when the offender is a public officer. Larin’s employment at UPLB as a swimming instructor makes him a public officer.