People&v.

&Garcia&
VIOLATION&OF&THE&CHAIN&OF&CUSTODY&(DDA)&
Doctrine:& Specific'procedures'relating'to'the'seizure'and'custody'of'drugs'have'been'laid'down'in'RA'9165'
for' the' police' to' strictly' follow.' The' prosecution' must' adduce' evidence' that' these' procedures' have' been'
followed'in'proving'the'elements'of'the'defined'offense.'
Chain& of& custody& H& the' duly' recorded' authorized' movements' and' custody' of' seized' drugs' or' controlled'
chemicals' or' plant' sources' of' dangerous' drugs' or' laboratory' equipment' of' each' stage,' from' the' time' of'
seizure/confiscation' to' receipt' in' the' forensic' laboratory' to' safekeeping' to' presentation' in' court' for'
destruction.&&
R.A& 9165& Art.& II& Sec& 21:' The' apprehending' team' having' initial' custody' and' control' of' the' drugs' shall,'
immediately'after'seizure'and'confiscation,'physically)inventory)and)photograph)the)same)in)the)presence)
of) the) accused) or) the) person/s) from) whom) such) items) were) confiscated) and/or) seized,) or) his/her)
representative)or)counsel,)a)representative)from)the)media)and)the)Department)of)Justice)(DOJ),)and)any)
elected) public) official) who) shall) be) required) to) sign) the) copies) of) the) inventory) and) be) given) a) copy)
thereof.'''
RECIT&READY:&
QUICK& FACTS:'Ruiz'was'formally'charged'and'pleaded'not'guilty'to'a'violation'of'the'Dangerous'Drugs'Act'
for' selling' marijuana.' Prosecution' presented' a' single' witness,' PO1' Garcia' who' was' the' poseurLbuyer' in' the'
legitimate'buyLbust'operation.'Ruiz'sold'Marijuana'to'Garcia'during'the'buyLbust'operation.'Ruiz'now'claims'
the'he'was'a'victim'of'a'police'frameLup'and'extortion.'Also,'Ruiz'claims'the'there'was'a'failure'to'comply'with'
Sec.& 21& of& RA& 9165'or'the'chain'of'custody'rule'on'seized'drugs.'Other& than& the& markings& made& by& P01&
Garcia& and& the& police& investigator,& no& physical& inventory& was& ever& made,& and& no& photograph& of& the&
seized&items&was&taken&under&the&circumstances&required&by&RA&9165&and&its&implementing&rules.&&
ISSUE:)W/N)Ruiz)should)be)acquitted)for)failure)of)the)police)to)follow)the)chain)of)custody)requirement?)
YES.& Ruiz& is& acquitted.& While'there'was'testimony'with'respect'to'the'markings'of'the'seized'items'at'the'
police'station,'no'mention'whatsoever'was'made'on'whether'the'marking'had'been'done'in'the'presence'of'
Ruiz'or'his'representatives.'There'was'likewise'no'mention'that'any'representative'from'the'media'and'the'
DOJ,' or' any' elected' official' had' been' present' during' this' inventory,' or' that' any' of' these' people' had' been'
required'to'sign'the'copies'of'the'inventory.'The'procedural'lapses'in'the'handling'and'identification'of'the'
seized'items,'as'well'as'the'unexplained'discrepancy'in'their'markings,'collectively'raise'doubts'on'whether'
the' items' presented' in' court' were' the' exact' same' items' that' were' taken' from' Ruiz' when' he' was'
arrested.'These'constitute'major'lapses'that'are'fatal'to'the'prosecutions'case.'Prosecution'failed'to'establish'
accuseds'guilt'beyond'reasonable'doubt,'specifically,'the'prosecution'failed'to'show'that'the'police'complied'
with'paragraph'1,'Section'21,'Article'II'of'R.A.'No.'9165,'and'with'the'chain'of'evidence'requirement'of'this'
Act.'
'
'
'