Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 131 views

    Calahi Vs People

    Uploaded by

    tinct
    The document discusses a case where four individuals were arrested for possession of illegal drugs inside a vehicle. While the arresting officers confiscated items related to drug use, they failed to inventory and photograph the seized items in the presence of the accused. This created a gap in establishing the chain of custody of the evidence. The court ultimately ruled that without properly establishing the chain of custody, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Calahi Vs People

    Uploaded by

    tinct
    131 views1 page
    The document discusses a case where four individuals were arrested for possession of illegal drugs inside a vehicle. While the arresting officers confiscated items related to drug use, they failed to inventory and photograph the seized items in the presence of the accused. This created a gap in establishing the chain of custody of the evidence. The court ultimately ruled that without properly establishing the chain of custody, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

    Original Description:

    ARNEL CALAHI ET. AL. vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No. 195043, November 20, 2017

    Original Title

    Calahi vs People

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses a case where four individuals were arrested for possession of illegal drugs inside a vehicle. While the arresting officers confiscated items related to drug use, they failed to inventory and photograph the seized items in the presence of the accused. This created a gap in establishing the chain of custody of the evidence. The court ultimately ruled that without properly establishing the chain of custody, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    131 views1 page

    Calahi Vs People

    Uploaded by

    tinct
    The document discusses a case where four individuals were arrested for possession of illegal drugs inside a vehicle. While the arresting officers confiscated items related to drug use, they failed to inventory and photograph the seized items in the presence of the accused. This created a gap in establishing the chain of custody of the evidence. The court ultimately ruled that without properly establishing the chain of custody, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    ARNEL CALAHI ET. AL. vs.

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES


    G.R. No. 195043, November 20, 2017

    MARTIRES, J.:

    Facts: While serving the search warrant on Elsie Valenzuela, the CIDG
    members noticed an XLT jeep parked near Elsie's house. Suspicious, they
    approached said jeep and saw four (4) persons holding a pot session inside.
    They noticed the following items inside the vehicle: an aluminum foil, an
    improvised tooter, a lighter, and remnants of shabu. SPO3 Padilla and his team
    immediately arrested the four who were later identified as Enrique, Arnel,
    Nicasio, and Nicolas and confiscated the white substance found with them. Then
    they were brought to the police station in Cabanatuan City. Thereafter, SPO3
    Padilla requested a laboratory examination on the confiscated substance by the
    PNP Crime Laboratory, Cabanatuan City. An Information charged petitioners for
    violation of the Dangerous Drugs Law.

    Petitioner posits that the integrity and identity of the seized items were tarnished
    because the arresting officers failed to inventory and photograph the seized
    items in petitioners' presence.

    Issue: Whether or not the petitioners' guilt has been proven beyond reasonable
    doubt.

    Ruling: No. The prosecution failed to establish that the shabu was marked upon
    seizure.

    The chain of custody rule requires proof of every link in the chain, from the
    moment the item was seized to the time it is presented in court and offered into
    evidence, such that witnesses constituting the chain are able to testify on how it
    was given and received, including the precautions taken to ensure that the
    seized item was not altered or tampered with.

    In this case, the facts only establishes that after seizure of the items and arrest of
    the petitioners, the apprehending team took the latter to the police station, then
    requested a laboratory examination of the confiscated items, and eventually
    requested inquest proceedings in connection with the petitioners' arrest. It was
    not in any way established that the items were marked after seizure. While it
    appears that the specimen presented in court were marked with the initials, it
    was not shown who marked the same and when it was done, and whether it was
    done by the apprehending team upon seizure and before submission to the crime
    laboratory for examination or not.

    Ratio Decidendi: The gap in the chain of custody caused by the lack of marking
    upon confiscation undermined the identity and integrity of the confiscated drug.

    Gist: This appeal seeks to reverse the Decision of the CA which affirmed the
    Decision of the RTC, finding petitioners guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal
    use of dangerous drugs.

    You might also like