People v. Ancheta G.R. No. 197371, June 13, 2012 FACTS:
On August 10, 2004 at 545 PM, a team of law enforcers from the Makati Police Station Anti-Drug Abuse Council descended on Llorando Llora ndo Com pound, Br gy. East Rembo, Makati City to conduct a buy-bust operation. Through an informant, PO1 Marmonejo, poseur-buyer purchased PHP 500 worth of shabu from a certain “Joker”, later identified as Joel Ancheta and arrested the same.
Also arrested were John Llorando, the man in the alley who took the marked mark ed money a nd handed it to Ancheta and Juan Carlos Gernada, the laundry man who was paid by Ancheta a sachet of a white crystalline substance for his laundry services. Recovered from accused-appellant Ancheta were 5 sachets of a white crystalline substance later identified as methylamphetamine HCL, from accused-appellant Gernada 1 sachet of the same. Ancheta was charged for violation of Sec. 5 and 11, Art. II, RA 9165, Gernada with violation of Sec.11, Art. II, RA 9165 and Llorando with violation of Sec. 15, Art. II, RA 9165 In a decision dated September 17, 2008, the Makati City RTC convicted all accused-appellants with the crimes charged against them plus violation of Sec. 5, Art. II, RA 9165 for Llorando. CA affirmed the decision of the RTC on November 30, 2010.
ISSUE:
Will the failure of arresting officers to follow Sec. 21, Art. II, RA 9165 cause the discharge of the accused-appellants from the crimes in which they were convicted?
RULING :
Yes, the Court ruled that the failure of the arresting officers to follow Sec. 21, Art. II, RA 9165 without stating a (1) justifiable cause and (2) its failure to protect the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items invalidates the arrest process and the evidences seized. Court sets aside the decision of the CA which affirmed the conviction of Joel Ancheta, John Llorando and Juan Carlos Gernada by the RTC of Makati City and acquits them of the crimes charged against them and are ordered to be immediately released.
