Gerald F.

Baltazar

BSCRIM 3 – Block C

G.R. No. 215943, November 16, 2016 PEOPLE v. RANDY CLOMA y CABANA

FACTS:

Cloma was the subject of an information filed with the RTC alleging a violation of Section 5,
Article II of RA 9165. SPO1 Ellevera and PO2 Daleon, two members of the buy-bust squad, were
introduced by the prosecution. They claim that members of the Cagayan de Oro City Police Office's City
Mobile Group ("CMG") engaged in an entrapment operation against Cloma in Isla Delta. Poseur-buyer
duties were given to SPO1 Ellevera. SPO1 Ellevera approached Cloma and negotiated the purchase of
shabu for 500 pesos (500) during the operation. The tagged currency with serial number PB789713 was
subsequently given to Cloma by SPO1 Ellevera, who also received a clear sachet from her. A white
crystalline substance was within the sachet. Cloma was detained following the purchase. SPO1 Ellevera
inscribed the letter "A" on the sachet on Isla Delta. He put his name on the sachet and turned it over to
PO2 Daleon at Maharlika Headquarters. The PNP Crime Laboratory received the sachet for testing.
Methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu), a hazardous narcotic, was detected in the material. Shabu
was also found in the urine sample that was taken from Cloma. During the trial, the Chemistry Report
demonstrating the positive outcome of the drug and urine was presented. Also, a forensic chemical
officer's affidavit supporting the conclusions in the Chemistry Report was displayed.

The CA upheld the trial court's decision to declare Cloma guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Cloma is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense charged.

HELD:

Yes, the following elements must be established in order to successfully prosecute the offense of
illegal sale of dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of RA 9165: (1) the buyer and seller's identities,
the object of the transaction, and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the item sold and the
associated payment. Along with presenting evidence of the corpus delicti in court, the prosecution must
show that the transaction or sale actually occurred.

All the necessary components are there in the case at hand. SPO1 Ellevera testified that he
participated in the buy-bust operation as the poseur-buyer. He recognized Cloma as the shabu's vendor.
The exchange of the 500 peso ($500) marked money and shabu was verified by SPO1 Ellevera. Hence,
the drug trade was completed illegally. The Court additionally found that the buy-bust transaction
between the entrapment officers and the accused was completed when the contraband was delivered to
the poseur-buyer and the marked money was received. As soon as the sale transaction is completed, the
crime of selling deadly narcotics illegally is committed.
 G. R. No.181249, March 14, 2011 PEOPLE VS.SALAK

FACTS:

The NBI Special Task Force (STF) learned through one of their assets on May 23, 2001, that a
certain "Baida" was selling shabu at Litex Market in Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City. NBI-STF agents
immediately assembled a group that included Atty. A surveillance operation will be carried out by Cesar
Bacani, together with Supervisory Agents Rommel Vallejo and Dominador Villanueva III, Special
Investigators Raoul Manguerra, Job Gayas, Charlemagne Veloso, Eric Isidro, Eduardo Villa, Rolan
Fernandez, and Edgardo Kawada, Sr. Around midday, a briefing was held before the team headed to Litex
Market. They came there at 2:00 p.m. While their asset spoke with the appellant there, the NBI agents
waited in key spots so they could watch their asset. The asset informed the NBI team that the appellant
was in possession of shabu and was prepared to conduct a trade following a brief talk with the appellant.
Therefore, the Chief of the NBI-STF, Atty., gave the go-ahead to carry out a buy-bust operation. Max
Salvador, and Special Investigator Kawada was recognized as a poseur-buyer. A buyer has been found;
the asset then informed the appellant. The asset was directed by the appellant to accompany the buyer
to Greenwich Pizza Shop in Fairview, Quezon City. As directed, the asset and Kawada drove to Greenwich
Pizza, followed by the rest of the team. However, the appellant afterwards called the asset on the latter's
mobile phone and told him to go to McDonald's instead, which was located right across from Greenwich
Pizza. Kawada and the asset complied. At an interval of time, the appellant showed up with two men,
whom she later identified as her husband Karim Salak and a certain Boy Life. Kawada was introduced to
the appellant by the asset, and the two men spoke about the terms of the deal. For the 300 grams that
the appellant will deliver, Kawada promised to pay P180,000, or P60,000 per 100 grams of shabu.
Kawada recommended holding the exchange in the Ever Gotesco Mall parking lot along Commonwealth
Avenue, but the appellant was adamant that Litex Market be the location. Kawada agreed, so the
appellant boarded his car with the NBI asset, and the three of them drove to Litex Market.

At Litex Market, appellant disembarked and went out to get the drugs. She came again 30
minutes later, this time carrying a plastic bag, and was followed by Karim and Boy Life. While her two
companions remained watch outside, the appellant got into Kawada's automobile. The appellant
displayed to Kawada three little heat-sealed plastic sachets that were contained inside a larger plastic
bag inside the vehicle. Kawada received the plastic bag holding the three heat-sealed sachets from the
appellant, who then received P180,000 in real banknotes from the latter. The cash was combined with
three bills for one hundred pesos that had previously been inscribed with "ECK 5/23/01," which stands
for Kawada's initials and the date of the entrapment scheme. The appellant was engaged counting the
money when Kawada, posing as an NBI agent, arrived and arrested him. Although other NBI agents
sprinted towards the position of Kawada's vehicle, the appellant's two male companions, possibly
suspecting something was strange, immediately took off and blended in with the crowd at Litex Market.
At 7:15 a.m. on May 24, 2001, NBI Agent Raoul Manguerra delivered the appellant to the NBI office
while submitting the three heat-sealed plastic sachets, labeled "REM 1," "REM 2," and "REM 3," for
chemical analysis to the NBI Forensic Chemical Division with Kawada's approval.NBI Forensic Chemist II
Juliet Gelacio-Mahilum certified on May 24, 2001 that the white substance found in the three heat-
sealed plastic sachets labeled "REM 1," "REM 2," and "REM 3 — totaling 305.4604 grams — tested
positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride, also known as shabu, a controlled substance.
ISSUES:

The defense submitted a motion on October 11, 2001, asking for a quantitative or purity study of
the shabu sample that was allegedly taken from the appellant. The NBI Forensic Chemist Juliet Gelacio-
Mahilum then issued a Certification, even though it was dated August 1, 2001, stating that the RTC had
granted the aforementioned motion and instructed her to conduct the required tests.

This attests that representative samples from the DD-01-480 specimen labelled "REM-1," "REM-
2," and "REM-3, when put through quantitative analysis using HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID
CHROMATOGRAPHY, were accurate (HPLC).

Held: The RTC issued its ruling on February 18, 2002, finding the appellant guilty of the charged offence
beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court's decision's last paragraph goes as follows:

ACCORDINGLY, a judgment is hereby issued finding BAIDA SALAK OR SADAK, GUILTY beyond a
reasonable doubt as the principal in the sale of methylamphetahmine (sic) hydrochloride or shabu
weighing 305.4604 grams[,] in violation of RA 6425 as charged, and she is sentenced to serve a reclusion
perpetua prison term and pay a fine of P500,000.00. Expense vs. accusation
 G. R. No.121087, March 14, 2011 PEOPLE VS. NAVARRO

FACTS:

On February 4, 1990, at around 8:40 p.m., Stanley Jalbuena and Enrique "Ike" Lingan, reporters
for the Lucena City radio station DWTI, traveled to the Entertainment City in response to information
that it was displaying naked dancers. A scantily dressed dancer entered the stage and started to do a
strip performance after the three had settled down at a table and ordered beers. Jalbuena pulled out his
camera as she took off her brassieres and snapped a photo.

Dante Liquin, the floor manager, and Alex Sioco, a security guard, then approached Jalbuena and
questioned him about why he had taken the photo. "Wala kang pakialam, since this is my work,"
Jalbuena said. Sioco then shoved Jalbuena towards the table while threatening to kill him. Jalbuena and
his friends fled the establishment as soon as they noticed Sioco getting ready to draw his gun.

To report the incident, Jalbuena and his friends proceeded to the police station. In front of the
police station, three of the on-duty police officers, including petitioner Navarro, were enjoying beverages
when they invited Jalbuena and his companions to join them. Jalbuena declined and reported the
incident to the desk officer, Sgt. Aonuevo. After some while, a motorcycle carrying Liquin and Sioco
pulled up.

After greeting Sioco and Liquin, petitioner Navarro engaged them in conversation in a nearby
corner for about fifteen minutes. After that, petitioner Navarro turned to Jalbuena and pushed him
against the wall before asking him, "Putang ina, kinakalaban mo si Kabo Liquin, anak... yan ni Kabo
Liquin, hindi mo ba kilala?" He then took out his gun, cocked

At this time, Lingan stepped in and addressed petitioner Navarro, saying: "I'm here to mediate,
wag namang ganyan, pumarito kami para magpa-blotter.

Respondent Navarro stated: "Press, press, press—kayo pa mag-sampu.

After a heated exchange, Lingan finally said: "Masyado kang... abusado, alisin mo yang baril mo
at magsuntukan na lang tayo." Petitioner Navarro responded: "Ah, ganoon?" As Lingan was about to turn
away, petitioner Navarro struck him with the handle of his pistol above the left eyebrow. Lingan tripped
and fell on the ground, his face covered in blood. He attempted to stand up, but petitioner Navarro
knocked him to the ground with a fist to the forehead. The station commander, Capt. Coronado,
summoned petitioner Navarro to his office as a police officer drove Lingan to the Quezon Memorial
Hospital. Boy Casaada, the DWTI station manager, came and went to the hospital after learning that
Lingan had been transported there. But, Lingan's wounds caused his death. Jalbuena was able to tape-
record the conversation between the petitioner and the deceased, which was unknown to petitioner
Navarro. He then turned to Sgt. Aonuevo and instructed him to note Jalbuena and Lingan's actions.

ISSUES:

Considering R.A., whether the tape is acceptable Specifically, No. 4200 forbids wiretapping.
RULING:

In the affirmative, is the response. The statute specifies:

Division 1. It is forbidden for anybody to tap any wires or cables, use any other equipment or
arrangements to covertly listen to, intercept, or record any private communication, even if they have the
consent of all persons involved. or spoken word recorded on a recording medium such as a tape
recorder, dictaphone, dictagraph, walkie-talkie, or other similar device:

It is also forbidden for anyone, regardless of whether they took part in the act or acts that are
punishable in the preceding clause, to knowingly own any tape recorder, wire recorder, disc recorder, or
other similar recording device, or copies of such a recording, of any spoken word or communication. the
same for any other person or persons; to disclose the contents thereof, either verbally or in writing; or to
provide transcriptions thereof, whether done before or after the implementation date of this Act in the
manner forbidden by this law. complete or incomplete, to anyone else: Nevertheless, this restriction
does not apply to the use of such records or any copies of them as evidence in any civil or criminal
inquiry or trial involving the offenses listed in section 3 of this agreement.

SEC. 4. The existence, substance, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of any communication
or spoken word, or any information included therein gained or secured by anybody in violation of the
previous sections of this Act, must not be admissible as evidence in any legislative, administrative, or
judicial hearing or inquiry. Hence, it is against the law to overhear, intercept, or record private
discussions. The tape recording of the conversation between petitioner Navarro and Lingan is not
forbidden because it was not a private conversation.

There is no doubt that it was properly validated, either. A witness's evidence that he personally
recorded the discussion, that the tape played in court was the one he recorded, and that the voices on
the tape are those on the recording serve as the basis for the authenticity of the audio file. of the people
to whom they are said to belong. Jalbuena provided testimony in the present case stating that the voice
recording was created by him, that the tape heard in court was the one he recorded, and that
the Petitioner Navarro and Lingan were the only speakers on the tape. Hence, a solid foundation was
established for the prosecution's tape to be verified.

Hence, with the adjustment that petitioner Felipe Navarro is now SENTENCED to serve a prison
term of at least 8 years in prision mayor and at most 14 years and 8 months in temporary exclusion, the
Court of Appeals' ruling is upheld.