24. PEOPLE V.

SUSAN TAMANO AND JAFFY GALMATICO

FACTS:

Susan Tamano and Jaffy Gulmatico were charged for violation of Section 5, 11,12 of RA. 9165.
Both pleaded not guilty.During the trial, the prosecution presented that Tamano and Galmatico were
arrested during a buy-bust operation. The appellants presented a different version on the day of the
arrest.Tamano narrated she was helping her aunt in her carenderia while waiting for Galmatico
because they agreed to visit their friend Joel Amihan. At that time, Tamanos friend Gigi requested her
to bring to Gigis boyfriend pieces of clothing in a plastic bag. When Galmatico arrived, they proceeded
to the house of Joel Amihan but Tamano got suspicious of the bag and let Galmatico carry it. They
reached the house of Joel Amihan and after some conversations, they decided to leave the place.
While leaving, they were accosted and searched by the police officers. Shabu and shabu
paraphernalia were recovered from the plastic bag of Gigi which was being carried by Galmatico. RTC
rendered a decision finding both the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of all the charges. CA
affrimed in toto.

ISSUES:

Whether the buy-bust operation is valid.

Whether the chain of custody rule was complied.

HELD:

Yes. The appellants who were caught in flagrante delicto were positively identified by the
prosecution witnesses as the same persons who sold the crystalline substance. The sachet of shabu
was presented in court which was identified to be the same object sold by the appellants. The
testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were established how the transaction happened from the
moment PO3 Gepaneca, the poseur-buyer, handed to appellant Tamano 500 bill and in turn,
Galmatico handed the suspected shabu, thus consummating the transaction between them. The
collective evidence presented adequately established that a valid buy-bust operation was conducted.

Chain of custody means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or
controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from
the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory for safekeeping to the presentation
in court for destruction. In this case, PO1 Aguenido immediately searched the appellants and
recovered plastic sachets of shabu. The seized items were brought to the police officers office and
were marked and turned over to PDEA Exhibit Custodian. The following day, the items were
inventoried and submitted to PNP Crime Laboratory for examination and identified to content of shabu.
The police officers testified for the prosecution. The subject specimens were presented in court. From
the foregoing, the prosecution demonstrated the integrity and evidentiary value of the confiscated
drugs had not been compromised because it established crucial link in the chain of custody from the
time it was first discovered until it was brought to court for examination.