PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. JOSEPH ESPALLARDO Y REYES, AND ALFONSO BANGATE Y AREVALO, ACCUSED. JOSEPH ESPALLARDO Y REYES, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

This is an appeal of Joseph Espallardo y Reyes from the decision
of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 109, Pasay City, in Criminal Case No.
85-8972-P, finding him guilty of selling prohibited drugs in violation of
Section 4, Republic Act No. 6425, as amended, otherwise known as the Dangerous
Drugs Act, and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua,
to pay a fine of Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00), with the accessory
penalties provided by law and to pay the costs.

The case was tried jointly with Criminal Case No. 85-8973-P,
entitled “People of the Philippines vs. Alfonso Bangate y Arevalo,”
for possession of prohibited drugs (violation of Section 8 of R.A. 6425, as
amended) but the accused Bangate, after being arraigned, jumped bail.  He was tried in absentia and
sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for six (6) years and one (1)
day and to pay a fine of Six Thousand Pesos (P6,000.00).

On November 16, 1985, at around 12:30 P.M., several Pasay City
policemen of the Anti-Narcotics Unit, namely: 
Cpl. Angelito Lacap,
Patrolmen Marcos Butay, Serenio Aure, Carlos Ogalinola and Wilfredo Jerios were
on routine patrol in the vicinity of the Pasay Public Market when   they noticed the appellant, Joseph
Espallardo, and four (4) other persons sniffing something from a cellophane bag
at Primero de Mayo Street near the public market.  When the policemen approached the group, the
latter scampered in different directions, except the appellant Espallardo who
was not fleet-footed enough to avoid being caught after a brief chase.

A routine check of his person by Cpl. Lacap yielded fifteen (15)
sticks of handrolled marijuana cigarettes in his right pants pocket.

On the way to the police station, the appellant pointed to
Alfonso Bangate who was vending vegetables on the sidewalk at the corner of
Taft Avenue and Primero de Mayo Streets, as
one of his customers for
marijuana sticks.  The policemen accosted
Bangate and asked him if they may search him. 
He submitted to the search made by Cpl. Lacap, who found two sticks of
marijuana cigarettes inside his wallet.

At the police station, Espallardo was asked to write his name on
the fifteen (15) marijuana sticks confiscated from him.  Cpl. Lacap countersigned them.

The two sticks of marijuana which were confiscated from Bangate
were similarly signed by him and Cpl. Lacap.

All the seventeen (17) sticks
of marijuana cigarettes were immediately submitted to the National
Bureau of Investigation for examination and testing and they were found
positive for marijuana by Forensic Chemist Aida Viloria Magsipoc.

On November 18, 1985, the following information was filed by
Assistant Fiscal Manuel Garcia charging Espallardo with selling marijuana
cigarettes:

“That on or about
the 16th day of November, 1985, in Pasay
City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, JOSEPH ESPALLARDO Y REYES, without authority of law, did
then and there wilfully and feloniously sell, give away to another, deliver,
distribute or act as a broker in the sale transaction of marijuana cigarette, a
prohibited drug.” (p. 1, Rollo.)

Another information was filed on the same day against Alfonso
Bangate y Arevalo for possession of marijuana cigarettes as follows:

“That on or about
the 16th day of November 1985, in Pasay City, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, ALFONSO BANGATE
Y AREVALO, without having been authorized by law, did then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession, custody and control two (2)
sticks of marijuana cigarette, a prohibited drug.” (p. 7, Rollo.)

Upon arraignment, both accused, with the assistance of their
respective counsel pleaded not guilty.

The evidence for the prosecution consisted of the testimonies of the
following witnesses:

1.  Aida Viloria Magsipoc,
Senior Forensic Chemist of the National Bureau of Investigation, affirmed that after a microscopic and chemical
examination of all the sticks of suspected marijuana cigarettes brought to her
by Pat. Serino Aure of the Pasay City Police Station, with a letter-request
dated November 16, 1985, she found them
all to be positive for the presence of marijuana;

2.  Pat. Marcos Butay
testified that on November 16, 1985, he was on patrol with Cpl. Angelito Lacap,
Pfc. Carlos Ogalinola, Pat. Serino Aure and Pfc. Wilfredo Jerios, in the
vicinity of the Pasay City Public Market, when they chanced upon Joseph
Espallardo sniffing rugby; that Espallardo tried to flee upon seeing the
policemen, but the policemen gave chase until
they caught him at Primero de Mayo Street:  and that
Espallardo pointed to Alfonso Bangate as one of his customers who had
just purchased from him two sticks of marijuana cigarettes at P5.00 per stick; and

3. Cpl. Lacap, Pfc.
Carlos Ogalinola, Pat. Serino Aure and Pfc. Wilfredo Jerios corroborated Pat.
Butay.

In his defense, Espallardo alleged that he was playing billiards on November 16, 1985 at Interior
P. Villanueva Street,
Pasay City
at 12:00 o’clock noon when five (5) police officers approached him and told
him to go with them to the police station. 
He did not know what wrong he had done. 
Alfonso Bangate had been introduced to him by a cousin in 1984, but he
has not seen him since then.  At the
police headquarters, his statement was taken, and he was forced to admit
ownership of the marijuana cigarettes which he saw there for the first
time.  He denied selling any marijuana
cigarettes.  He denied that the fifteen
(15) marijuana cigarettes had been confiscated from him.  He denied that Bangate bought marijuana
cigarettes from him.

Espallardo was identified in open court by the police witnesses
as the person whom they caught sniffing rugby and in whose possession they found fifteen (15) sticks of marijuana
cigarettes.  Bangate, who jumped bail
after arraignment, was identified by the police officers thru his photographs
in his personal bail bond.

After the trial, judgment was rendered by the trial court as
follows:

“In view of all the foregoing, the Court finds accused Joseph
Espallardo y Reyes guilty beyond reasonable doubt as charged in Criminal Case
No. 85-8972-P for Violation of Section 4, Republic Act 6425 as amended and
hereby sentences him to Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Twenty Thousand
(P20,000.00) Pesos with all the accessory penalty (sic) provided for by law and
to pay the cost.

“Likewise, the Court finds accused Alfonso Bangate y Arevalo
guilty beyond reasonable doubt as charged in Criminal Case No. 85-8973-P for
Violation of Section 8, Republic Act 6425 as amended and hereby sentences him
to suffer an imprisonment of Six (6) Years, One (1) Day and to pay a fine of
Six Thousand (P6,000.00) Pesos.

“The seventeen (17) sticks of marijuana cigarette (sic) are
hereby ordered forfeited in favor of the government and the Officer-In-Charge
of this Court is hereby ordered to transmit the same to the Dangerous Drugs
Board thru the National Bureau of Investigation for proper disposition.”
(pp. 38-39, Rollo.)

Only Espallardo appealed to this Court.  He alleges
that the trial court erred:

1.  in giving credence to the lackadaisical
testimonies of the witnesses for the prosecution, without due regard to his own
straightforward declarations; and

2.  in concluding that he was not entitled to the
basic rights provided for by the procedural and substantive laws.

The appeal has no merit. 
The trial court’s findings on the credibility of the prosecution
witnesses deserve full respect (Vda. de Portugal vs. IAC, 159 SCRA 178).  Thus, said the court:

“After a careful perusal of all the evidences on record, this
Court gives credence to the evidence of the prosecution as against the
uncorroborated evidence for the defense. 
The Court gives great weight to the testimonies of the police witnesses
there being nothing on record to show that the said police witnesses has (sic)
any ill motive in testifying against both accused.  On the contrary, the police officers has
(sic) in their favor the presumption of regularity of the performance of their
public functions.  As against the
unsubstantiated denial of accused Joseph Espallardo, the Court considered the
testimonies of the peace officers more convincing and credible.

“Pursuant to the rulings laid down by the Supreme Court in
People versus Roberto Toledo (SCRA 140 page 259) ‘possession of considerable
quantity of marijuana leaves and seeds coupled with the fact that accused is
not a user of prohibited drugs indicates an intention of the accused to sell,
distribute and deliver marijuana.’ In this particular case, accused Joseph
Espallardo was caught in flagrante delicto in possession of fifteen (15) sticks
of handrolled marijuana and verbally admitted to the police officers having
just sold two (2) sticks of marijuana to accused Alfonso Bangate on whose
person was also found two (2) sticks of handrolled marijuana when arrested at
the corner of Taft Avenue when pointed to by accused Espallardo.” (pp.
37-38, Rollo.)

Appellant adverts to the alleged inconsistency between the
testimony of Pat. Butay who implied that he alone accosted appellant, and that
of Pat. Serenio Aure who stated that he and Pat. Butay together arrested the
appellant.  Appellant also invites the
court’s attention to Pat. Aure’s testimony that four to seven persons were
sniffing rugby, while Pat. Jerios, on the other hand, testified that appellant
was alone when they chased him.

The alleged contradictions among the police witnesses are
imaginary.  The supposed inconsistencies
can be reconciled and do not alter the fact that the five policemen found
fifteen (15) sticks of marijuana in the possession of Espallardo when they
apprehended him.  His possession of a
substantial quantity of marijuana cigarettes plus Bangate’s disclosure that he
purchased his two sticks of marijuana cigarettes from Espallardo, confirmed the
charge that the latter was engaged in the nefarious trade of selling marijuana
cigarettes.

While the appellant capitalizes Pat. Jerios’ error in testifying
that Alfonso Bangate was the source of Espallardo’s marijuana, that error was
rectified by the witness in his
re-direct examination when he clarified that the marijuana sticks were
“bought from Joseph Espallardo” (p. 5, tsn, February 23, 1987).

Appellant’s assertion that the testimony of the forensic chemist
was insufficient to convict him was answered by the Solicitor General in his
brief for the People as follows:

“This claim is without basis. 
The forensic chemist’s testimony shows that she is a graduate B.S.
Chemistry in PWU in 1971 and thereafter took up Master of Science in U.P. where
she graduated in 1973.  She also passed
the board examination for chemists in 1972. 
She taught at the PWU and thereafter joined NBI in May 1973 up to the
time she testified in January 17, 1986.  Her duties as chemist at the NBI were:  ‘do laboratory examination on the specimen
submitted to us by the police authorities and some private persons which submit
specimen for examination’ and she conducted more than one thousand cases of
examination (p. 2, tsn, Jan. 17, 1986). 
These undisputed evidence qualifies her as an expert witness as regards
the fifteen (15) sticks confiscated being positive for marijuana upon her
examination in the laboratory.” (p. 93, Rollo.)

The testimonies of the five law enforcement officers who arrested
appellant, the NBI forensic chemist who made the laboratory tests on the
marijuana specimens, and the other accused Bangate, were sufficient for the
conviction of the
appellant.  Being law enforcers, the
police officers are “presumed to have regularly performed their duty in
the absence of proof to the contrary” (People vs. Khan. 161 SCRA 406).

There is no merit in the appellant’s contention that the search
of his person conducted by the policemen was illegal because he had not yet
been charged with a violation of P.D. No. 1619 (illegal possession of volatile
substance) hence, the marijuana confiscated from him was inadmissible as
evidence.

The marijuana sticks were seized from him after his arrest for
possession of rugby (a volatile substance whose use or possession for the
purpose of inhalation to induce intoxication is punishable under Section 2 of
P.D. No. 1619), hence, they may be used as evidence against him.  In People vs. Salondro, Jr., 170 SCRA 763, we
ruled that evidence taken from the accused as an incident to his arrest, may be
presented against him in court.

WHEREFORE, the conviction of the accused, Joseph
Espallardo y Reyes, is affirmed and he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of
life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P20,000 with the accessory penalties
provided by law and to pay the costs (Sec. 4, R.A. 6425, as amended).

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, (Chairman), Cruz, Gancayco, and Medialdea, JJ., concur.