Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 370 views

    REMEDIAL - People V Cunanan

    Uploaded by

    J.G R
    Rafael Cunanan y David appeals his conviction for selling illegal drugs. He argues that (1) he was not committing a crime when arrested, (2) openly selling drugs in public was inconceivable, and (3) there was a failure to follow the chain of custody requirements. The court upholds the conviction, finding the prosecution proved the drug transaction occurred and Cunanan was caught in the act of selling shabu. Strict compliance with chain of custody is not required if the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    REMEDIAL - People V Cunanan

    Uploaded by

    J.G R
    370 views1 page
    Rafael Cunanan y David appeals his conviction for selling illegal drugs. He argues that (1) he was not committing a crime when arrested, (2) openly selling drugs in public was inconceivable, and (3) there was a failure to follow the chain of custody requirements. The court upholds the conviction, finding the prosecution proved the drug transaction occurred and Cunanan was caught in the act of selling shabu. Strict compliance with chain of custody is not required if the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved.

    Original Title

    REMEDIAL - People v Cunanan

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Rafael Cunanan y David appeals his conviction for selling illegal drugs. He argues that (1) he was not committing a crime when arrested, (2) openly selling drugs in public was inconceivable, and (3) there was a failure to follow the chain of custody requirements. The court upholds the conviction, finding the prosecution proved the drug transaction occurred and Cunanan was caught in the act of selling shabu. Strict compliance with chain of custody is not required if the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    370 views1 page

    REMEDIAL - People V Cunanan

    Uploaded by

    J.G R
    Rafael Cunanan y David appeals his conviction for selling illegal drugs. He argues that (1) he was not committing a crime when arrested, (2) openly selling drugs in public was inconceivable, and (3) there was a failure to follow the chain of custody requirements. The court upholds the conviction, finding the prosecution proved the drug transaction occurred and Cunanan was caught in the act of selling shabu. Strict compliance with chain of custody is not required if the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized drugs were preserved.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    People v. Cunanan y David, G.R. No.

    198024, March 16, 2015, Second Division, del Castillo

    Parties:
    Plaintiff-Appellee – People of the Philippines
    Accussed-Appellant – Rafael Cunanan y David alias “Paeng Putol”

    Strict compliance with the letter of Section21 is not required if there is a clear showing that
    the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized item have been preserved

    Accused is assailing his conviction for the crime of sale of illegal drugs and argues that: 1)he was not
    committing a crime when he was arrested; 2)it was inconceivable to openly sell drugs in public; 3)there was
    failure to comply with the chain of custody. Should his conviction be overturned?

    No. The prosecution sufficiently proved that a sale transaction took place. That the said transaction involved
    the illegal sale of dangerous drug was sufficiently shown by the prosecution through its establishment of the
    following elements of the offense: (1) the identity of the buyer and the seller, object and consideration; and
    (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. Appellant was lawfully arrested after he was
    caught in flagrante delicto selling shabu in a buy-bust operation.

    In any event, jurisprudence is settled that any irregularity attending the arrest of an accused should be
    timely raised in a motion to quash the Information at any time before arraignment, failing in which, he is
    deemed to have waived his right to question the regularity of his arrest.

    It has been consistently ruled that non-compliance with the chain of custody requirements RA9165 will not
    necessarily render the item seized or confiscated in a buy-bust operation inadmissible. Strict compliance
    with the letter of Section21 is not required if there is a clear showing that the integrity and evidentiary value
    of the seized item have been preserved, i.e., the item being offered in court as exhibit is, without a specter
    of doubt, the very same one recovered in the buy-bust operation. The primordial concern is the preservation
    of the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same would be utilized in the determination
    of the guilt or innocence of the accused.

    You might also like