G.R. No. 215712 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. CAROL T. YGOY, ACCUSED-.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, this Court finds the accused CAROL TANELON YGOY "alias Carol", GUILTY of violating Section 5 and 12, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. For Criminal Case No. CBU-65732, she is hereby sentenced the penalty of LIFE IMPRISONMENT and to pay a FINE of Php500,000.00 For Criminal Case No. CBU-65733, she is hereby sentenced the penalty of TWO (2) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY, as minimum, to FOUR YEARS, as maximum thereto, and a FINE of Php40,000.00 The single plastic packet of white crystalline substance, positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride, is ordered confiscated and shall be destroyed in accordance with law. The same should also be made with the aluminum tin foils. SO ORDERED . [6] Decision of the CA On appeal, the CA, through the assailed decision promulgated on December 20, 2013, affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant for the violation of Section 5 of R.A. No. 9165 but acquitted her of the violation of Section 12 of R.A. No. 9165, ruling thusly: This Court is of the opinion that the integrity and the evidentiary value of the illegal drugs seized during the buy-bust operation had been preserved. The chain of custody of the drugs or specimen subject matter of the case was not shown to have been broken. Records reveal that SPO1 Rosales placed the seized illegal drugs in a separate pack and the same was marked before the same was brought to the PNP Crime Laboratory. The said item was recorded in the letter-request for laboratory examination which together with the seized item was submitted to the PNP Crime Laboratory for analysis and qualitative examination, the result of which found and confirmed the same to be positive for shabu as indicated in Chemistry Report No. D-551-03. The accused-appellant cannot also argue that the chain of custody of the seized item was broken because PO1 Garcia who submitted the letter-request for laboratory examination and PO1 Rosaldo who received the letter-request and the specimen from the former were not presented in court. The records of the case reveal that the prosecution dispensed with the testimony of PO1 Rosaldo in view of the admission by the defense that PO1 Rosaldo, as clerk on duty at the PNP Regional Crime Laboratory, received the letter-requests and specimens from PO1 Garcia. x x x x x x x The prosecution failed, however, to establish that indeed drugs paraphernalia were recovered from his possession, and even failed to present evidence as to the existence of the same. It must be noted that there was no inventory nor any markings made with regard to the illegal drugs paraphernalia allegedly seized by the arresting officers. After the arresting officers testified that they also seized illegal paraphernalia in the course of the arrest of the accused-appellant, they failed to convey what transpired next as to the existence and custody of these items, thereby jeopardizing its integrity and evidentiary value. Moreover, what was submitted for laboratory ex