Logo
Image 1
Avatar

Chain of custody; Presumption of innocence

Author: 79467545 42 views • 2023-01-15 21:00:46


Chain of custody; Presumption of innocence Article III, Section 14 (2) of the 1987 Constitution provides that every accused is presumed innocent unless his guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt. It is "a basic constitutional principle, fleshed out by procedural rules which place on the prosecution the burden of proving that an accused is guilty of the offense charged by proof beyond reasonable doubt. Corollary thereto, conviction must rest on the strength of the prosecution's evidence and not on the weakness of the defense." This presumption in favor of the accused remains until the judgment of conviction becomes final and executory. Borrowing the words of the Court in Mangubat, et al. v. Sandiganbayan, et al., "[u]ntil a promulgation of final conviction is made, this constitutional mandate prevails." Hence, even if a judgment of conviction exists, as long as the same remains pending appeal, the accused is still presumed to be innocent until his guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, in People v. Mingming, the Court outlined what the prosecution must do to hurdle the presumption and secure a conviction: First, the accused enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence until final conviction; conviction requires no less than evidence sufficient to arrive at a moral certainty of guilt, not only with respect to the existence of a crime, but, more importantly, of the identity of the accused as the author of the crime. Second, the prosecution's case must rise and fall on its own merits and cannot draw its strength from the weakness of the defense. (Emphasis supplied) In particular, in cases involving dangerous drugs, in order to hurdle the constitutional presumption of innocence, the prosecution has the burden to prove compliance with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21, Article II of RA 9165, to wit: (1) the seized items must be inventoried and photographed immediately after seizure or confiscation; (2) the physical inventory and photographing must be done in the presence of (a) the accused or his/her representative or counsel, (b) an elected public official, (c) a representative from the media, and (d) a representative from the Department of Justice (DOJ), all of whom shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy of the same; and (3) the seized drugs or drug paraphernalia must be turned over to a forensic laboratory within twenty-four (24) hours from confiscation for examination. Strict compliance with the foregoing requirements is necessary in protecting the integrity and identity of the corpus delicti, without which the crime of the illegal sale, or illegal possession of dangerous drugs or drug paraphernalia cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt. In other words, non-compliance with Section 21 is tantamount to a failure to establish an essential element of the crime, and will therefore engender the acquittal of the accused. [ G.R. No. 232293, December 09, 2020 ] EVELYN ABADINES CUICO, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT. CAGUIOA, J

To share this notes please copy this URL and send it to your friends

Important :

This text must comply to our Terms and Conditions otherwise it will be removed from our Server.

Get Paid To Share

Earn money by posting links or text through our Revenue Share Program!


Note Links & Text Together

Write and publish text, links, or both in one place.

Links are auto-converted into clickable hyperlinks—just separate them with a space or a new line.

Click Publish to generate a page with your content. Copy and share the link so others can view it!