This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-10-09 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| In drugs cases, the prosecution must show that the integrity of the corpus delicti has been preserved. This is crucial in drugs cases because the evidence involved the seized chemical is not readily identifiable by sight or touch and can easily be tampered with or substituted.[68] "Proof of the corpus delicti in a buy-bust situation requires not only the actual existence of the transacted drugs but also the certainty that the drugs examined and presented in court were the very ones seized. This is a condition sine qua non for conviction since drugs are the main subject of the illegal sale constituting the crime and their existence and identification must be proven for the crime to exist."[69] The flagrant lapses committed in handling the alleged confiscated drug in violation of the chain of custody requirement even effectively negate the presumption of regularity in the performance of the police officers' duties, as any taint of irregularity affects the whole performance and should make the presumption unavailable.[70] | |||||
|
2012-10-24 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In the prosecution of illegal sale of drugs, the elements that should be proven are the following: (1) the identities of the buyer and the seller, the object, and consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. The prosecution must (1) prove that the transaction or sale actually took place, and (2) present in court evidence of the corpus delicti.[27] As regards the prosecution for illegal possession of dangerous drugs, the elements to be proven are the following: (1) the accused is in possession of an item or an object identified to be a prohibited or a regulated drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and (3) the accused freely and consciously possessed the said drug.[28] | |||||