Hernald Bermillo y de Vera v. People of the Philippines (G.R. No.
246434, January 24, 2024)
Facts:
Hernald Bermillo was charged with violating Section 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165
(Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) for possession of 0.019 grams of
methamphetamine hydrochloride ("shabu"). The prosecution presented evidence from a buy-
bust operation involving Bermillo and another individual, Vilma Matias. Police officers testified
that they observed Bermillo attempting to discard a sachet of shabu during Matias's arrest. The
seized shabu underwent laboratory testing, and the results were presented in court. Bermillo
and Matias presented a different account, claiming the police planted the evidence. The lower
courts found Bermillo guilty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.
Issues:
1. Was Bermillo's arrest lawful (in flagrante delicto)?
2. Did the prosecution adequately establish the chain of custody of the seized shabu?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' decisions and acquitted Bermillo.
Lawful Arrest: The Court found that Bermillo's arrest was valid under the in flagrante
delicto doctrine. The police had probable cause to believe Bermillo was involved in the
drug trade based on his presence at the buy-bust scene and his attempt to dispose of
the shabu.
Chain of Custody: This was the crucial issue leading to the acquittal. While the first three
links in the chain of custody were established (seizure and marking, turnover to
investigating officer, and turnover to forensic chemist), the fourth link (turnover from the
forensic chemist to the court) was deemed insufficient. The parties stipulated to the
forensic chemist's findings without including crucial details about the handling and
storage of the evidence after the laboratory examination. The absence of information on
how the evidence was handled, sealed, and marked from the lab to the court created
reasonable doubt about the integrity of the evidence. The Court emphasized that this is
especially critical given the minuscule amount of shabu involved (0.019 grams). The lack
of complete chain of custody information, coupled with the small amount of drugs,
rendered the evidence inadmissible.
Doctrines Discussed:
In Flagrante Delicto Arrest: The Court addressed the requirements for a valid
warrantless arrest when a person is caught in the act of committing a crime. Probable
cause is necessary.
Chain of Custody: The Court thoroughly discussed the four links in the chain of custody
required under Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, as amended by Republic Act No.
10640. The Court stressed the importance of meticulous documentation of each link to
ensure the integrity of the evidence and prevent tampering. The Court highlighted the
particular importance of this in cases involving small quantities of drugs. Failure to
establish a complete and unbroken chain of custody can lead to acquittal, even if other
aspects of the case seem strong.
Evidentiary Value of Forensic Chemist Testimony: The court emphasized the importance
of the forensic chemist's testimony regarding the handling and analysis of the seized
drugs, particularly when the quantity is small. A stipulation in lieu of this testimony must
include all the necessary details to ensure the integrity of the evidence.
