THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 209212. February 10, 2016.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff and appellee, vs. ROMEL

SAPITULA Y PACULAN , accused-appellant.

RESOLUTION

PEREZ , J : p

Before us for review is the Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA G.R. CR.-
H.C. No. 05186 dated 19 February 2013 which dismissed the appeal of accused-
appellant Romel Sapitula y Paculan and af rmed with modi cation the Judgment 2 of
the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Agoo, La Union, Branch 31, in Criminal Case No. A-
6013 nding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of attempted sale of a
dangerous drug in violation of Section 5 in relation to Section 26 of Republic Act (R.A.)
No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Accused-appellant was charged with violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No.
9165. The accusatory portion of the Information reads as follows:
That on or about the 16th day of June 2011, in the Municipality of Sto.
Tomas, Province of La Union, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above named accused, without authority of law, did then
and there, wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly, for and in consideration of the
amount of Three Hundred (Php300.00) Pesos, sell, convey, deliver and give
away to a PO3 Ardie Gayo Palabay one (1) heat sealed plastic sachet
containing shabu with a weight of zero point zero nine hundred forty six
(0.0946) gram, a dangerous and prohibited drug.
Contrary to the provision of Section 5, Art. 2 of R.A. 9165. 3
At his arraignment, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty. Trial ensued.
The prosecution presented as witnesses Police Senior Inspector Diosdado
Gagaoin (PSI Gagaoin), Police Of cer 3 Ardie Palabay (PO3 Palabay), Police Inspector
Maria Theresa Amor Manuel (PI Manuel), PO3 Emmanuel Pimentel, Jr., and PSI Bedalyn
Antonio (PSI Antonio), whose testimonies sought to establish the following facts:
Acting on a tip from a con dential informant that accused-appellant sells shabu,
PSI Gagaoin instructed PO3 Palabay to conduct a surveillance and casing operation on
him. Upon veri cation of accused-appellant's involvement in illegal drug activities, PO3
Palabay and his drug asset made a test-buy operation on 14 June 2011, which yielded a
purchase of Three Hundred Peso (P300.00) worth of shabu from accused-appellant.
Thereafter, PSI Gagaoin headed and organized a buy-bust team composed of PO3
Palabay as poseur-buyer, PO3 Arnel Gravidez as one of the arresting of cers and SPO3
Armando Eisma and PO2 Roger Malag as perimeter security. Six (6) pieces of P50.00
bills were prepared as marked money on which PO3 Palabay placed a marking of "A." 4
TIADCc

At four o'clock in the afternoon of 16 June 2011, the buy-bust team proceeded to
Barangay Ambitacay. PO3 Palabay had already been in communication via short
message system (SMS) with accused-appellant regarding the amount of shabu to be
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com
 purchased. It had also been agreed via SMS that they would meet at Ambitacay
crossing at six o'clock in the evening. 5
At the crossing, at half past ve o'clock in the afternoon when PO3 Palabay
noticed accused-appellant coming his way, he disembarked from the tricycle in which
he had been waiting. He approached accused-appellant who immediately handed to
him a heat-sealed plastic sachet containing a white crystalline substance; and PO3
Palabay, in exchange, gave accused-appellant the marked money. Accused-appellant
then counted the money while PO3 Palabay placed the sachet in his pocket and
removed his cap to signal the arrest to the other police of cers. Accused-appellant
attempted to ee but was subsequently overcome and handcuffed by the other
of cers. PO3 Palabay informed accused-appellant of his constitutional rights; took a
photograph of the latter as well as the area and the plastic sachet which he marked
"AJP-1-11." He also made an inventory of the marked money and the seized plastic
sachet in the presence of the Barangay Captain and another witness. 6
Accused-appellant was thereafter brought to the police station. There, PO3
Palabay executed an af davit of arrest, an af davit of poseur-buyer and a request for
laboratory examination. Then, he brought accused-appellant and the seized items to the
crime laboratory, received by PSI Antonio. 7 Chemistry Report No. D-030-2011 signed
by PI Manuel as Forensic Chemist found the seized plastic sachet positive for the
presence of Methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. 8
Accused-appellant, as the lone witness for the defense, testi ed that on 16 June
2011, on his way home with his wife and child after a day of ferrying passengers in his
tricycle, a male person and his companion agged him down. The man asked accused-
appellant to get down from his tricycle and thereafter, drew out a gun and introduced
himself as a policeman. Accused-appellant tried to run away from him but two (2) other
persons blocked his way and handcuffed him. These two forced him to hold something
and when accused-appellant refused, they rubbed it onto his hands. Thereafter, a patrol
car arrived and he was brought to the police station. 9
On 5 August 2011, the RTC rendered judgment nding accused-appellant guilty
of attempted sale of a dangerous drug. The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision
reads:
The accused is found to have attempted to sell .0946 gram of
methamphetamine hydrochloride beyond reasonable doubt. The court only
found that he attempted to sell.
However, there is a catch provided in Section 26 of R.A. 9165 which
prescribes the same penalty as that provided in Section 5 in case of unlawful
acts that are enumerated in the aforesaid Section 26, thus the penalty for
attempt or conspiracy to commit violations thereof as provided in Section 26 is
the same as that provided in Section 5. HOC QUIDEM PER QUAM DURUM EST,
SED ITA LEX ESCRIPTA EST or DURA LEX SED LEX is invoked.
Hence, accused Romel Sapitula is sentenced to life imprisonment and is
ordered to pay a ne of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500,000.00) for
attempting to sell less than one gram of metamphetamine hydrochloride
"shabu."
The penalty is harsh but that is the law on the matter. Less than one
gram of "shabu" and wham! One has to spend one's life in prison.
But that is the reality. Not an illusion.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com

 So it is best to avoid drugs everytime.
The drug subject of this case is con scated in favor of the government.
10

Accused-appellant led a Notice of Appeal on 10 August 2011. 11 On 19

February 2013, the CA rendered the assailed judgment af rming with modi cation the
trial court's decision. The CA found accused-appellant guilty of the crime charged, or
violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. 9165. The CA ruled that the sale of a dangerous
drug was consummated as there had been an exchange of money and the sachet of
shabu between PO3 Palabay and accused-appellant.
Accused-appellant appealed his conviction before this Court. In a Resolution 12
dated 04 December 2013, accused-appellant and the Of ce of the Solicitor General
(OSG) were asked to le their respective supplemental briefs if they so desired. Both
parties manifested that they will no longer le supplemental briefs as their arguments
in their respective briefs are already sufficient. 13
Upon review of the records, the Court af rms the conviction of accused-
appellant.
The Court agrees with the CA nding that, contrary to the accused-appellant's
assertion, the trial court suf ciently stated the factual and legal bases for its
disposition of the case. In convicting accused-appellant, the trial court explained that it
gave credence to the testimonies of the police of cers pursuant to the presumption of
regularity in the performance of their of cial duties and absent any showing of ill-
motive to plant evidence against accused-appellant. 14 The trial court also stated that it
found accused-appellant's testimony partly incredulous. 15 AIDSTE

The Court, however, upholds the CA's ruling that the crime of sale of a dangerous
drug, in this case shabu, was consummated; different from the trial court's ruling that
the crime had been committed only at its attempted stage. In so holding, the trial court
stated that "[w]hen he realized the trap he was about to backout in the sale.
Nevertheless, the penalty is the same." 16 This Court disagrees.
In every prosecution for illegal sale of shabu, the following elements must be
suf ciently proved: (1) the identity of the buyer and the seller, the object of the sale and
the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. 17
The Court nds that all elements for illegal sale were duly established with
accused-appellant having been caught in agrante delicto selling shabu through a buy-
bust operation conducted by the buy-bust team of PO3 Palabay.
PO3 Palabay, who acted as the poseur buyer, testi ed that accused-appellant
handed to him the plastic sachet containing the prohibited drug in exchange for Three
Hundred Pesos (P300.00), thus:
Q: And at about what time was that when you waited at that waiting shed?
A: Around 5:30 in the afternoon, sir.
Q: And what happened after that?
A: While waiting I noticed the suspect approaching, sir.
Q: So from where did he come home (sic) ?
A: From the road leading to barangay Pongpong, sir.
Q: And when you saw him approaching what did you do if any?
A: I immediately disembark from the tricycle, sir.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com
 xxx xxx xxx
Q: When you alighted from the tricycle where did you go?
A: I immediately approached him also, sir.
Q: And what happened when you approached him, what did you tell him or
what happened?
A: He immediately handed to me the heat sealed plastic sachet containing
white crystalline substance and then afterwards I in hand also the marked
money, sir.
Q: He did not ask how much are you buying?
A: He asked already through text, sir.
Q: And where did you put the sachet that was handed to you?
A: I put in my pocket, sir.
Q: You mentioned you handed the money to the subject, what did the subject
do if any?
A: After he received the money, he counted the money, sir.
Q: And while he was counting the money what did your do next?
A: After counting the money, I frisked him, I said stop and I showed my badge
as an identi cation that I am a police but then he tried to run towards east
direction, sir.
Q: By the way was there any a pre-arranged signal made by you with your
Chief of Police?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: What is your pre-arranged signal?
A: When I removed my bull cup, sir.
Q: What does that indicate?
A: As a sign that the arrest shall be made by the arresting officers, sir. 18
This testimony was corroborated by PSI Gagaoin who was strategically posted
within the perimeter of the target area. 19 The result of the laboratory examination
con rmed the presence of methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu on the white
crystalline substance inside the plastic sachet received from the accused-appellant.
The delivery of the illicit drug to the poseur-buyer and the receipt by the seller of the
marked money successfully consummated the buy-bust transaction. 20
Accused-appellant's denial of the charges and assertion of a frame-up,
uncorroborated by any positive testimony of the people who were allegedly with him
during the incident, are indeed incredulous juxtaposed with the positive evidence for his
prosecution. Besides, as adequately explained by PSI Antonio, the absence of
ultraviolet (UV) powder on accused-appellant's palms (although the dorsal parts of
accused-appellant's hands tested positive for UV powder presence) may have been a
result of perspiration, wiping or rubbing the hand on a hard object. 21 Thus, this matter
does not completely negate accused-appellant's culpability as he so asserts.
This Court has, time and again, deferred to the trial court's factual ndings and
evaluation of the credibility of witnesses, especially when af rmed by the CA, in the
absence of any clear showing that the trial court overlooked or misconstrued cogent
facts and circumstances that would justify altering or revising such ndings and
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com
 evaluation. The trial court's determination proceeds from its rst-hand opportunity to
observe the demeanor of the witnesses, their conduct and attitude under grilling
examination; the trial court is in a unique position to assess the witnesses' credibility
and to appreciate their truthfulness, honesty and candor. 22 And in the instant case,
accused-appellant has not projected any strong and compelling reasons to sway the
Court into rejecting or revising such factual findings and evaluation in his favor. AaCTcI

We now come to accused-appellant's contention that the procedure for the

custody and disposition of con scated drugs as provided in Section 21 of R.A. No.
9165, was not complied with as the police of cers had not conducted an inventory of
the plastic sachet of shabu and the same had not been photographed in the presence
of accused-appellant and representatives from the media and the Department of
Justice. 23
First, it must be underscored that this issue was only brought up on appeal and
was never raised before the trial court. Nevertheless, a review of PO3 Palabay's
testimony shows that the inventory and photograph requirements had been met, thus:
Q: And after the subject was handcuff, what transpired next?
A: After we handcuff the subject, we photographed the suspect, we
photographed the area, we photographed also the evidence and I marked
there with the presence of the Barangay Chairman and the concerned
citizens in the area and then I prepared also the inventory in their presence,
sir. 24
More importantly, the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items were
duly preserved as the chain of custody remained intact.
The Court has ruled in People v. Enriquez, 25 that the links that must be
established in the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation are: rst, the seizure and
marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the
apprehending of cer; second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the
apprehending of cer to the investigating of cer; third, the turnover by the investigating
of cer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and fourth,
the turnover and submission of the marked illegal drug seized from the forensic
chemist to the court.
In the case at bar, PO3 Palabay, the poseur buyer, positively testi ed that he
placed in his pocket the plastic sachet of shabu handed to him by accused-appellant.
At the time of arrest, he photographed accused-appellant, the area and the sachet of
shabu, marked the same and conducted the inventory before the Barangay Chairman
and another witness. PO3 Palabay further testi ed that he brought accused-appellant
and the sachet of shabu to the police station, and there, executed af davits of arrest
and of the poseur buyer and made a request for laboratory examination. PO3 Palabay
then took accused-appellant and the sachet of shabu to the crime laboratory and the
latter was received by PSI Antonio. Chemistry Report No. D-030-2011 signed by PI
Manuel as Forensic Chemist and PSI Antonio as Administering Of cer con rmed that
the sachet is positive for the presence of methamphetamine hydrochloride. 26 And
nally, in open court, PO3 Palabay opened the envelope from the Forensic Chemist and
identi ed its contents as the same sachet of shabu he had purchased from accused-
appellant. 27 The same was offered in evidence and marked as Exhibit "A." 28
All told, it has been established by proof beyond reasonable doubt that accused-
appellant sold shabu. Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, states that the penalty of life
imprisonment to death and ne ranging from P500,000.00 to P1,000,000.00 shall be
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com
 imposed upon any person who, unless authorized by law, shall sell, trade, administer,
dispense, deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in transit or transport any
dangerous drug, including any and all species of opium poppy regardless of the
quantity and purity involved. Thus, the CA correctly imposed the penalty of life
imprisonment and the fine of P500,000.00.
WHEREFORE , the Decision dated 19 February 2013 of the Court of Appeals in
CA G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 05186, af rming with modi cation the conviction of accused-
appellant Romel Sapitula y Paculan by the Regional Trial Court of Agoo, La Union,
Branch 31, for violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 and sentencing
him to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a ne of P500,000.00 is
hereby AFFIRMED .
SO ORDERED.
Velasco, Jr., Mendoza, * Reyes and Perlas-Bernabe, ** JJ., concur.
Footnotes
* Additional Member per Raffle dated 25 January 2016.
** Additional Member per Raffle dated 25 January 2016.
1. Rollo, pp. 2-25; Penned by Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta with Associate
Justices Francisco P. Acosta and Angelita A. Gacutan concurring.
2. Records, pp. 76-122; Presided by Presiding Judge Clifton U. Ganay.

3. Id. at 1.
4. TSN, 20 July 2011, pp. 4-13, TSN, 21 July 2011, pp. 3-13; TSN, 26 July 2011, p. 4.
5. TSN, 21 July 2011, pp. 13-18.
6. Id. at 18-28.
7. Id. at 29-30; TSN, 26 July 2011, p. 8; Records, pp. 1 and 8; Exhibit "I-1" and "B-1."

8. Records, p. 49; Exhibit "B."

9. TSN, 2 August 2011, pp. 3-9.
10. Records, pp. 120-122.
11. Id. at 123-124.

12. Rollo, p. 31.

13. Id. at 104.
14. Records, pp. 116-117.
15. Id. at 99.
16. Id. at 117.

17. People v. Buenaventura, 677 Phil. 230, 238 (2011).

18. TSN, 21 July 2011, pp. 19-20.
19. TSN, 20 July 2011, pp. 15-22.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com
 20. People v. Montevirgen, G.R. No. 189840, 11 December 2013, 712 SCRA 459, 468.

21. TSN, 26 July 2011, pp. 4-6.

22. Medina, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 161308, 15 January 2014, 713 SCRA 311, 320.
23. CA rollo, pp. 96-97.
24. TSN, 21 July 2011, p. 22.
25. G.R. No. 197550, 25 September 2013, 706 SCRA 337, 353 citing People v. Magno , 20
October 2010, 634 SCRA 441, 451.
26. Records, p. 9.

27. TSN, 21 July 2011, pp. 25-26.

28. Records, p. 48.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2016 cdasiaonline.com