Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Court of Appeals
Manila
PEOPLE
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
-versus-
APPELLANTS BRIEF
Page 1 of 36
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Name of Document/Title/Subject
Affidavit of Service/Mailing
Parties
Statement of the Case
Statement of the Facts
Assignment of Error
Discussion
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING
ACCUSED APPELLANT WILHELMINA DIAMZON
GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT FOR
VIOLATION OF SECTIONS 5 AND 11, ARTICLE
II OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165.
PRAYER
LAW/AUTHORITIES CITED:
1. Section 21, Republic Act No. 9165
2.
Section 21, Implementing Rules
Regulations of Republic Act No. 9165
Page/s
33
3
4-5
5-11
11
11-30
30
13
and
13-14
15-18
18-21
21-22
Page 2 of 36
24-27
27
8.
People v. Alberto, G.R. No. 179717, 05
February 2010
PEOPLE
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
-versus-
APPELLANTS BRIEF
ACCUSED-APPELLANT WILHELMINA DIAMZON, by
counsel, unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states:
Page 3 of 36
THE PARTIES
Accused-Appellant WILHELMINA DIAMZON (hereinafter,
Diamzon for brevity) is of legal age, Filipino and presently
detained at the Correctional Institute for Women, Correctional
Road, Bagong Buhay, Mandaluyong City. She may be served
with processes of this Court at the address of the undersigned
counsel, at 3rd Floor Gonzalez Building, 1888 Orense
Street, Guadalupe Nuevo, Makati City.
Plaintiff-Appellee PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES is
represented by the OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
with address at Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village, Makati City,
where it may be served with notices, orders and other legal
processes of this Court.
Page 5 of 36
Page 6 of 36
INFORMATION4
Crime Laboratory Office Mandaluyong Physical Sciences Report No. DT718-14E dated 04 December 2014 , Rollo, Page 20
3
Rollo, pages 1-2
4
Rollo, pages 3-4
2
Page 7 of 36
Page 8 of 36
(b)
Rollo, page 18
Rollo, pages 100-101
9
Rollo, page 90
10
Rollo, page 91
11
Rollo, page 88
7
8
Page 9 of 36
(d)
(e)
(f)
On cross-examination, PO1 Nidoy admitted that accusedappellant Diamzon was not the subject of their operation. He
also admitted that during the inventory of the alleged seized
items, the same was conducted without the presence of a
representative from the media and from the Department of
Justice.
Thereafter, the prosecution rested its case.
The defense presented accused-appellant Diamzon. She
testified, inter alia that: (a) on the evening of 03 December
2014, she was inside her house watching teleserye at GMA 7,
(b) she was surprised when several armed men barged into her
house looking for a certain Tolits. When she answered that
she did not know of any person named Tolits, these armed
men dragged her out of her house and brought her to the
Barangay Hall where she was made to sign a prepared
document, which she had no opportunity to read. Thereafter,
Page 10 of 36
Rollo, page 96
Rollo, pade 96
Rollo, pages 109-119
Page 11 of 36
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING
ACCUSED
APPELLANT
WILHELMINA
DIAMZON GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE
DOUBT FOR VIOLATION OF SECTIONS 5 AND
11, ARTICLE II OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165.
DISCUSSION
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING
ACCUSED APPELLANT WILHELMINA DIAMZON
GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT FOR
15
16
Page 12 of 36
Rollo,
Rollo,
Rollo,
Rollo,
page 14
page 14
pages 11-12
page 14
Page 13 of 36
Rollo, page 15
Page 14 of 36
Rollo.page 15
Rollo, pages11-12
Page 16 of 36
Page 21 of 36
xxx
Strict compliance with the prescribed
procedures is required because of the unique
characteristic of illegal drugs, rendering them
indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily
open to tampering, alteration or substitution
either by accident or otherwise. Hence, we
have the rules on the measures to be observed
during and after the seizure, during the
custody and transfer of the drugs for
examination, and at all times up to their
presentation in court.
While Section 21(a) of the Implementing
Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No.
9165 excuses non-compliance with the aforequoted procedure, the same holds true only for
as long as the integrity and evidentiary value
of the seized items are properly preserved by
the apprehending officers. Here, the failure of
the buy-bust team to comply with the
procedural requirements cannot be excused
since there was a break in the chain of custody
of the substance taken from appellant. It
should be pointed out that the identity of the
seized substance is established by showing its
chain of custody.
The following are the links that must be
established in the chain of custody in a buybust situation: first, the seizure and marking,
if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from
the accused by the apprehending officer;
second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized
by the apprehending officer to the investigating
officer; third, the turnover by the investigating
officer 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.
Page 22 of 36
Page 26 of 36
Page 27 of 36
Page 28 of 36
Page 30 of 36
Page 31 of 36
Q:
Could you describe what you
were wearing that time, Miss witness?
A:
shirts.
Page 7
Q:
I am showing you a picture
marked as Exhibits K, K-1 and K-2, could
you look at this pictures and tell this court if
this is the clothes you were wearing on the
night of December 3, 2014?
PROS. ORIBE:
May I object, your Honor, to the
presentation of the photograph because there
was no basis, your Honor.
COURT:
Whose picture is that? Because you
mentioned Exhibits K and K-1.
ATTY. ROMAN:
Yes, your honor.
COURT:
Page 32 of 36
withdrawing
my
objection,
your
WITNESS:
A. Yes, maam.
Page 8
ATTY. ROMAN:
Q:
Based on the accusation of the
arresting officers against you Miss witness, he
instructed you to take out from your pocket the
money allegedly given to you on December 3,
2014. What can you say about this allegation?
A:
That allegation is not true
because my shorts I was wearing that night
has no pockets.
Q:
Do you have that shorts with
your right now, Miss witness?
A:
Yes, maam.
COURT INTERPRETER:
Page 33 of 36
PRAYER
27
Rollo, page 22
Page 34 of 36
Copy Furnished:
OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
Counsel for the People of the Philippines
Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village,
Makati City
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF PASIG CITY
BRANCH 65
Hall of Justice, Pasig City
Page 35 of 36
EXPLANATION
That the foregoing Appellants Brief is being served
through registered mail with return card due to distance and
lack of manpower to effect personal service.
Page 36 of 36