PEOPLE vs CLIMACO

Duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs from time of seizure or confiscation,  to forensic lab, to safekeeping, on to presentation in court SHOULD NOT BE TAMPERED. 

A buy-bust operation was conducted thereafter arresting one Gomer Climaco.

Trial ensued where a consolidated criminal case was filed against the accused for violation of Sec. 5 and 11 of RA 9165 which is the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 for Illegal Possession and Illegal Sale of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride otherwise known as "shabu".

RTC of Laguna found Climaco guilty beyond reasonable doubt sentencing him to 12 to 14 years and to pay fine.

Accused appealed but CA affirmed his conviction declaring that all the elements of the crimes of Illegal Sale and Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs were proven.

ISSUE:

The sole issue in this case is whether the guilt of Climaco for the crimes of Illegal Sale and Illegal Possession of shabu was proven BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. 

RULING:

Court resolved to acquit Climaco for the prosecution's failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Chain of Custody:  

1. Seizure/Confiscation > 2. Forensic Lab > 3. Safe Keeping > 4. Court Presentation 

Duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs from time of seizure or confiscation  to forensic lab, to safekeeping on to presentation in court SHOULD NOT BE TAMPERED. 

There was a discrepancy of object evidence based on the testimony of accosting officer. The substances retrieved from Climaco and submitted to the court had the specimen marking  of   TR-R & TR-B.  But according to the chemistry report however, the plastic sachets submitted for examination carried the markings GSC-1 & GSC-2.  

Therefore the CHAIN OF CUSTODY  was broken. 

Decision of RTC and CA was SET ASIDE. Appellant Climaco therefore acquitted. 

STATE vs TATUM

Court encourages admission of DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE such as photographs etc. provided they be sufficiently verified and validated.

A certain Ralph Tatum was convicted of a crime of 1^st degree FORGERY and sentenced to life imprisonment as a habitual criminal.

Facts of the case states that one William Tousin receives monthly welfare checks from the state of Washington. But one February of 1960, Tousin did not receive his check.  The mailed check was normally left on a window ledge in the hallway room house where the appellant Tatum resides.

It was found out that the check was endorsed and cashed at a local store by someone other than the payee.

A lady employee of the local store testified that the initial on the face of the check was hers and thereafter submitted the negative and print in the regiscope and was admitted as evidence over appellant’s objection.    

ISSUE:
One, may demonstrative evidence such as regiscope films be admitted as evidence? Two, were the regiscope films authenticated sufficiently in order to warrant their admission?

RULING:

Yes. Court in many years encouraged the admission and use of DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE, including photographs.

Provided:

They be sufficiently verified and validated. And that some witness (not necessarily the photographer) be able to give some indication as to when, where and under what circumstances the photo was taken.

Lady witness testified that she recognized the background shown in the picture as that of their store and also testified their regiscoping of the checks is one of their standard procedures. 

Therefore Yes, the regiscope films  submitted as evidence were authenticated sufficiently.

Ruling of the lower court was affirmed.  Tatum's appeal denied.