[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
101 views1 page

People Vs Ismael Case Digest

This case involved Ismael Salim who was accused of selling methamphetamines. Undercover police officers conducted a buy-bust operation where Salim sold drugs to an undercover officer. However, the police officers failed to immediately mark the seized drugs and did not mark the drugs in Salim's presence. This broke the chain of custody and cast doubt on whether the drugs presented in court were the same ones seized from Salim. While the lower courts convicted Salim, the Supreme Court acquitted him, finding that due to the breaks in the chain of custody, Salim's guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Uploaded by

Lord Jester Aguirre
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
101 views1 page

People Vs Ismael Case Digest

This case involved Ismael Salim who was accused of selling methamphetamines. Undercover police officers conducted a buy-bust operation where Salim sold drugs to an undercover officer. However, the police officers failed to immediately mark the seized drugs and did not mark the drugs in Salim's presence. This broke the chain of custody and cast doubt on whether the drugs presented in court were the same ones seized from Salim. While the lower courts convicted Salim, the Supreme Court acquitted him, finding that due to the breaks in the chain of custody, Salim's guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Uploaded by

Lord Jester Aguirre
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

People of the Philippines vs Ismael Salim

G.R. No. 208093

Facts:

 On August 25, 2003, a confidential informant reported to SPO4 Araneta, Chief of the Intelligence Division
of the Culianan Police Station in Zamboanga City, that Ismael Salim was engaged in selling shabu at
Barangay Talabaan near the Muslim cemetery. After verifying the report, SPO4 Araneta formed a buy-bust
team. It was then agreed that SPO1 Santiago would act as poseur buyer with SPO1 Rodriguez as back up.
 Upon arrival at Barangay Talabaan, SPO1 Santiago, the confidential informant and SPO1 Rodriguez
alighted from their vehicle then walked towards appellant and told the latter that he wanted to buy
shabu. He then gave appellant the ₱100.00 marked money and the latter took from his left pocket one
plastic sachet containing a white crystalline substance which he handed over to SPO1 Santiago. Upon
seeing the exchange, SPO1 Rodriguez, rushed in and arrested appellant. The police officers then brought
appellant to the Culianan Police Station. At the station, the plastic sachet containing white crystalline
substance subject of the buy-bust operation, the two plastic sachets also containing white crystalline
substance, and marked money were respectively turned over by SPO1 Santiago and SPO1 Rodriguez to,
PO3 Napalcruz, who likewise turned these over to the Duty Investigator, PO2 Tan, the latter then placed
his initial on the items recovered from appellant. Appellant on the other hand denied both charges.
 The RTC finds the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of having violated Sections 5 and 11,Article II
of RA 9165, and sentenced the accused to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment. Appellant appealed to
the CA, but the CA affirmed in toto the RTC's Judgment.

Issue:

 Whether or not the court a quo gravely erred in convicting accused- appellant when his guilt was not
proven beyond reasonable doubt

Ruling:

Yes. In cases of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs, the dangerous drug seized from the accused
constitutes the corpus delicti of the offense. Thus, it is of utmost importance that the integrity and identity of the
seized drugs must be shown to have been duly preserved. "The chain of custody rule performs this function as it
ensures that unnecessary doubts concerning the identity of the evidence are removed."

It is clear from the testimonies that SPO1 Rodriguez and SPO1 Santiago did not mark the seized drugs immediately
after they were confiscated from appellant. At this stage in the chain, there was already a significant break such
that there can be no assurance against switching, planting, or contamination. The Court has previously held that,
"failure to mark the drugs immediately after they were seized from the accused casts doubt on the prosecution
evidence warranting an acquittal on reasonable doubt."

The arresting officers also failed to show that the marking of the seized drugs was done in the presence of the
appellant to assure that the identity and integrity of the drugs were properly preserved. They likewise failed to
make an inventory and take photographs of the seized drugs. These break in the chain tainted the integrity of the
seized drugs presented in court.

Wherefore, the SC reversed and set aside the decision of the CA. Accordingly, appellant Salim R. Ismael is acquitted
based on reasonable doubt.

You might also like