PEOPLE v.

ROMY LIM Y MIRANDA

GR No. 231989
Sep 04, 2018

FACTS:

A report by a confidential informant prompted IO1 Orellan and his teammates, directed by their
regional director Lt. Col. Edwin Layese, to conduct a buy-bust operation against a certain “Romy”. IO2
Orcales, IO1 Orellan, and IO1 Carin were assigned as the team leader, the arresting officer/back-
up/evidence custodian, and the poseur-buyer,  respectively. They conducted the buy-bust operation at
around 10:00p.m., where in the CI and IO1 Carin both went to the house of “Romy”. After the exchange
of money and the plastic sachet believed to contain shabu, IO1 Carin executed the pre-arranged signal,
a missed call to IO1 Orellan. IO1 Orellan took into custody the P500.00 bill, the plastic box with the
plastic sachet of white substance, and a disposable lighter. IOl Carin turned over to him the plastic
sachet that she bought from Lim. Markings and inventory were done by IO1 Orellan in the house
without the presence of the representative from the media and barangay officials . Even the Inventory
Receipt of the confiscated items was not signed by any elected public official, the representatives of the
Department of Justice, and the representative from the media.

Both RTC and Court of Appeals, found Romy Lim guilty of illegal possession and sale of
dangerous drugs, while his stepson Eldie Gorres was acquitted from all charges against him.

Lim contended that the case records are bereft of evidence showing that the buy-bust team
followed the procedure mandated in Section 21(1), Article II of R.A. No. 9165, thus the appeal to the
Supreme Court.

ISSUE:

Whether the procedure mandated in Section 21(1), Article II of R.A. No. 9165 were violated.

RULING:

Yes. Section 21(1), Article II of R.A. No. 9165 states: (1) The apprehending team having initial
custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory
and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were
confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and
the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected public official who shall be required to sign the copies
of the inventory and be given a copy thereof. In this case, the prosecution failed to establish and prove
that there has been earnest effort to secure the attendance of the necessary witnesses. They also failed
to explain why the buy-bust team felt "unsafe" in waiting for the representatives in Lim's house,
considering that the team is composed of at least ten (10) members, and the two accused were the only
persons in the house. Thus, the SC reversed and set aside the decision rendered by both RTC and CA.