Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
*
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee, vs.
MEDARIO CALANTIAO y DIMALANTA, accused
appellant.
_______________
*FIRST DIVISION.
21
_______________
1 Rollo, pp. 218 penned by Associate Justice Amelita G. Tolentino
with Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Samuel H. Gaerlan,
concurring.
2 CA Rollo, pp. 2229 penned by Judge Victoriano B. Cabanos and
docketed as Criminal Case No. 69566.
23
3Records, p. A.
24
25
26
and their wallets and money were taken. PO1 Mariano then
prepared some documents and informed them that they will be
charged for drugs. A newspaper containing marijuana was shown
to them and said police officer told them that it would be
sufficient evidence against them. They were detained and
subjected to medical examination before they were submitted for
inquest at the prosecutors office.4
_______________
4CA Rollo, pp. 2324.
5Id., at p. 29.
6Id., at p. 28.
7Records, p. 326.
27
I
THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE
ACCUSEDAPPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE
DOUBT FOR VIOLATION OF SECTION 11, ARTICLE II,
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT
THAT THE ALLEGEDLY SEIZED ITEMS ARE INADMISSIBLE
IN EVIDENCE.
II
THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE
ACCUSEDAPPELLANT DESPITE THE ARRESTING
OFFICERS PATENT NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPER CUSTODY OF SEIZED
DANGEROUS DRUGS.
III
THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE
ACCUSEDAPPELLANT DESPITE THE PROSECUTIONS
FAILURE TO PROVE THE PROPER CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF
THE SEIZED DANGEROUS DRUGS.8
_______________
8CA Rollo, p. 46.
9Rollo, pp. 710.
28
_______________
10Id., at p. 13.
11 Id., at pp. 3739.
12CA Rollo, pp. 5052.
29
_______________
13Valeroso v. Court of Appeals, 614 Phil. 236, 252 598 SCRA 41, 58 (2009).
14Id., at p. 251 pp. 5556.
30
_______________
15Id., at p. 252 p. 57.
31
_______________
16People v. Leangsiri, 322 Phil. 226, 248 252 SCRA 213, 230 (1996).
17Valeroso v. Court of Appeals, supra note 13 at p. 253 p. 58, citing
People v. Cubcubin, Jr., 413 Phil. 249, 271272 360 SCRA 690, 709 (2001)
People v. Leangsiri, supra at pp. 249250 p. 231.
18CA Rollo, p. 53.
32
33
_______________
19People v. Ocfemia, G.R. No. 185383, September 25, 2013, 706 SCRA
312.
20Id.
34
_______________
21Rollo, p. 14.
22People v. Amansec, G.R. No. 186131, December 14, 2011, 662 SCRA
574, 594595.
23Rollo, p. 40
35
theory, from the very beginning, was that he did not do it,
and that he was being framed for having offended the
police officers. Simply put, his defense tactic was one of
denial and frameup. However, those defenses have always
been frowned upon by the Court, to wit:
Judgment affirmed.
_______________
24People v. Lazaro, Jr., G.R. No. 186418, October 16, 2009, 604 SCRA
250, 269.
25People v. Valencia, 439 Phil. 561, 568 390 SCRA 696, 702 (2002).
36
o0o
Copyright2017CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.