PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSELITO BARTOLOME y GARCIA, Accused-Appellant. G.R. No. 191726 , February 6, 2012.

DOCTRINE: In prosecutions for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the identity of the prohibited drug must be established with moral certainty. The chain of custody rule ensures the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items. A broken chain of custody, particularly the failure to immediately mark the seized drugs at the place of seizure, casts reasonable doubt on the identity of the *corpus delicti* and warrants acquittal.

FACTS

1. Based on a tip from a confidential informant, a buy-bust operation was planned against accused-appellant Joselito Bartolome for selling shabu.
2. On June 15, 2004, PO2 Rodelio Santos acted as the poseur-buyer. He was given marked money and pre-operation coordination was made with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA).
3. During the operation, Bartolome sold one plastic sachet of suspected shabu to PO2 Santos in exchange for the marked money. Upon consummation, PO2 Santos gave the pre-arranged signal and Bartolome was arrested.
4. Crucially, the arresting officers did not immediately mark the seized plastic sachet at the place of arrest or at the nearest police station. PO2 Santos kept the sachet in his pocket until they returned to their office at the Western Police District. It was only there, in the office, that the marking was done.
5. The seized item was later examined and found positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride. Bartolome was convicted for violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) by the Regional Trial Court, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution successfully established the identity and integrity of the dangerous drug, the *corpus delicti* of the offense, through an unbroken chain of custody.

RULING

NO. The accused-appellant is ACQUITTED on reasonable doubt.

The Supreme Court reversed the convictions. The prosecution failed to prove an unbroken chain of custody, which is essential in drug cases. The Court emphasized that the first link in the chainthe seizure and marking of the drugsis crucial. Marking should be done immediately at the place of seizure to prevent switching, planting, or contamination.

Here, the police officers’ unjustified failure to mark the seized sachet at the place of arrest or at the nearest police station constituted a break in the chain of custody. The interval between seizure and marking, during which the evidence was in the pocket of PO2 Santos without safeguards, created uncertainty about whether the item presented in court was the same one seized from Bartolome. This breach was not excused by the prosecution, which offered no explanation for the deviation from standard procedure.

Consequently, the integrity and evidentiary value of the *corpus delicti* were compromised. Without the identity of the prohibited drug being established beyond reasonable doubt, Bartolome’s guilt cannot be sustained. He was ordered immediately released from custody unless held for another lawful cause.