25/08/2025
SLIGHT DELAY IN INVENTORY FATAL TO INTEGRITY OF DRUG EVIDENCE—SUPREME COURT
| The Supreme Court (SC) has acquitted two men accused of drug-related charges due to the failure of the arresting officers to immediately conduct an inventory of the evidence upon confiscation, emphasizing that it is fatal to the integrity of the chain of custody.
In a 20-page ruling penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, the SC's Third Division granted the appeal of Joseph Atanacio and Jon Magno, who challenged their conviction by the Court of Appeals for violation of Sections 5 (selling of illegal drugs) and 11 (possession) of Republic Act No. (RA) 9165 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Atanacio and Magno were charged in 2020 for the sale and possession of methamphetamine hydrochloride, or shabu, following a buy-bust operation conducted by the Iloilo City Police Office (ICPO).
During the trial, the arresting officers admitted that the insulating witnesses: Rommel Bebita of the GMA Super Radyo (media) and Barangay Kagawad Michias Vergara (barangay official), arrived at the place of arrest around 10 minutes after the two accused were arrested.
Meanwhile, Atanacio and Magno denied the accusations by claiming that the shabu recovered from their possessions was planted.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found the accused guilty, which was subsequently affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The appellate court emphasized that the prosecution was able to provide all the facts necessary to establish adherence to the chain of custody rule, prompting Atanacio and Magno to elevate the case before the Supreme Court.
In granting Atanacio and Magno's appeal, the high court stressed the importance of complying with the chain of custody rule in drug cases. It found that the arresting officers breached the first chain by not conducting the inventory and marking of the seized dangerous drugs immediately upon confiscation.
During cross examination, the arresting officer claimed that he marked the seized items in the presence of the insulating witnesses, who arrived at the place of confiscation around 10 minutes after the arrest of Atanacio and Magno.
“In the present case, there is a glaring irregularity that seriously taints the integrity of the dangerous drugs confiscated from Atanacio and highlights the importance of marking the seized buy-bust items immediately upon confiscation,” the Supreme Court said.
“The Court agrees with Atanacio and Magno that the slightest delay in the marking of the seized dangerous drugs already created a nagging doubt as to the precautionary and safeguarding measures adopted by Pat. Mendez on the confiscated items, thus putting into question the integrity and evidentiary value of the items seized,” the Supreme Court added.
It also held that the arresting officer failed to establish the fourth link in the chain of custody due to the failure of the forensic chemist to narrate how she handled the drug specimens before, during, and after she conducted the laboratory examination, which is vital to the integrity of the evidence.
“Neither the prosecution nor the apprehending officers offered any justification for the non-compliance with the procedure required under Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, as amended by Republic Act No. 10640. This unjustified departure from the chain of custody rule casts doubt on the prosecution's evidence,” it said.
The SC cleared Atanacio and Magno and ordered their immediate release from detention.
