FACTS
Hernald Bermillo was charged with violation of Section 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 for allegedly possessing one heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet containing 0.019 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. The prosecution alleged that Bermillo was arrested after a buy-bust operation against Vilma Matias. When the police officers approached Matias and Bermillo, they allegedly saw Bermillo attempting to take something from his pocket and throw it away. The officers recovered a sachet containing a white crystalline substance from him.
The seized sachet was turned over to PO1 Mark Anthony Alviar, who marked it with the initials “HB.” The items seized from Matias and Bermillo were subsequently inventoried and photographed in the presence of the required witnesses. The sachet was then brought to the PNP Crime Laboratory, where Police Forensic Chemist Angelito Angel examined it and found it positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
The RTC convicted Bermillo, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court initially denied his petition and found that the prosecution had established the crucial links in the chain of custody. Bermillo filed a Motion for Reconsideration, arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish the fourth link in the chain of custody because the forensic chemist's testimony had been dispensed with through stipulation.
The stipulation concerning the forensic chemist merely stated that the chemist received from PO1 Alviar the request for laboratory examination and the seized items bearing the markings “HB” and “HB-1,” examined them, found them positive for shabu, and reduced his findings into a Chemistry Report. It did not state how the drugs were handled or stored after their receipt by the forensic chemist until their presentation in court.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution established the unbroken chain of custody of the seized dangerous drug, particularly the fourth link, from the forensic chemist to its presentation in court.
HELD
The Supreme Court GRANTED the Motion for Reconsideration and ACQUITTED Bermillo. It held that the prosecution failed to establish with moral certainty the identity and integrity of the dangerous drug because the fourth link in the chain of custody was not established.
The Court reiterated that the chain of custody consists of four links: first, the seizure and marking of the illegal drug by the apprehending officer; second, the turnover of the seized drug by the apprehending officer to the investigating officer; third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and fourth, the turnover and submission of the marked drug by the forensic chemist to the court.
The Court found that the prosecution established the first three links but failed to establish the fourth link. Because the forensic chemist's testimony was dispensed with, the stipulation had to contain sufficient details concerning the handling of the specimen after the laboratory examination. The stipulation did not state whether the sachet was properly sealed and intact when received, whether the forensic chemist resealed and marked it after examination, or who received the specimen after the examination and how it was eventually brought to court.
The Court emphasized that when the forensic chemist does not testify, the stipulation must establish facts necessary to preserve the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drug. These include the condition of the specimen upon receipt, the identifying marks or labels accompanying it, the method of examination, and the manner by which the specimen was preserved and subsequently delivered to the court.
The absence of these details created serious doubt regarding the identity and integrity of the seized drug. The Court stressed that the dangerous drug itself constitutes an integral part of the corpus delicti. Thus, the prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of custody from the time of seizure until presentation in court.
The Court also considered the minuscule quantity of the seized drug—0.019 gram. Citing its jurisprudence, the Court held that although the small quantity of narcotics is not itself a ground for acquittal, it underscores the need for strict compliance with the chain-of-custody requirements because small, fungible substances are particularly susceptible to tampering, loss, or mistake.
Accordingly, because the prosecution failed to establish the fourth link and therefore failed to prove the identity of the corpus delicti with moral certainty, the Court found reasonable doubt and acquitted Bermillo
No comments:
Post a Comment