representatives from the media, the DOJ, and any
People v.
UmipangG.R. No. 190321, April 25,
2012
FACTS: On April 1, 2006 at around 6PM, a buy-
bust team from the Station Anti-Illegal Drugs-
Special Operation Task Force (SAID-SOTF) of the
Taguig City Police descended along Cagayan de
OroStreet, Maharlika Village, Taguig City after a
confidential informant reported a certain “Sam” was
selling drugs upon aforesaid place. PO2 Ruchyl
Gasid acted as poseur-buyer and was given PHP
500 marked money. PO2 Gasid and confidential
informant, upon finding “Sam”, asked the latter
if they could buy PHP 500 worth of drugs. “Sam”
then took out 3 plastic sachets containing a white
crystalline substance with various price tags –500,
300, 100. After making the choice PO2 Gasid paid
“Sam” PHP 500. Upon receipt of money, PO2
Gasid took of his cap as pre-arranged signal that
the sale has been consummated. Sensing danger
“Sam” attempted to flee the scene but was promptly
accosted by the other members of the buy-bust
team. Five more marked sachets containing the
same white crystalline substance were recovered
from “Sam” and promptly marked “SAU” (Sammy A.
Umipang) by PO2 Gasid. For the sale of the sachet
of 0.05 gram of shabu, which violates Sec. 5, Art. II
of RA 9165, the RTC of Pasig City sentenced
accused-appellant to life imprisonment and fined
PHP 500,000. For possession of 5 sachets of
shabu with total weight of 0.23 gram, which is a
violation of Sec. 11, Art. II of RA 9165, the same
court sentenced accused-appellant to an
indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of 12 years
and 1dayminimum to 14 years, 21 days as
maximum and fined PHP 300,000. On appeal, CA
affirmed the lower court’s decision in toto.
ISSUE: Did the RTC and the CA err in finding the
testimonial evidence of the prosecution witnesses
as sufficient to convict accused-appellant of the
alleged sale and possession of
methylamphetamine HCL, which are violations of
Secs. 5 and 11, Art. II of RA 9165 respectively?
RULING: No, the Court reiterates once again that
buy-bust operations, although proven to be an
efficient way to flush out illegal transactions, are
also susceptible to police abuse. Hence, strict
adherence to procedures laid down by RA 9165,
specifically Sec. 21, Art. II must be followed. It is
evident that said section was blatantly disregarded
by the buy-bust team when no proper inventory
was done, no photographs taken and no
publicly elected official were present. Section 86 of
RA 9165 was also not followed as the PDEA was
not contacted with regards to the operation.
Although failure to follow Sec. 21, Art. II of RA 9165
ipso facto is not fatal to the prosecution’s case, it
must be shown why such was not carried out by
(1) justifiable cause and (2) preservation of the inte
grity and evidentiary value of the seized
items were guaranteed. Court maintains that
presumption of regularity in the performance of
official functions cannot overrule the step- by-step
procedure outlined in RA 9165 as it is a matter
of substantive law. The court further asserts that
the conduct itself of the buy-bust team was
defective for the following reasons: (1) material
inconsistencies in the marking of the evidence. This
is shown by the admission of PO2 Gasid, who
marked the seized items with the accused-
appellant initials “SAU” (Sammy Abdul Umipang)
allegedly at the scene of the operation. However,
PO2 Gasid admits that prior to the operation he did
not know of the identity or full name of the accused,
the latter being only known as “Sam.” It was PO2
Saez, in the police station, who got “Sam’s” full
name. (2) SAID-SOTF did not show genuine and
sufficient third party representatives enumerated in
Sec. 21, Art. II of RA 9165 as evidenced by PO2
Gasid’s admission during cross-examination that no
effort was made to contact the barangay captain or
any barangay official of Brgy. Maharlika. (3) SAID-
SOTF did not properly accomplish the Certificate of
Inventory. PO2Gasid, who prepared such
document, did not sign it.Court sets aside the
decision of the CA affirming the July 24, 2007 RTC
decision and acquitsSammy A. Umipang of the
crimes charged herein and ordered released
immediately.