Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 24 views

    People Vs Del Monte

    Uploaded by

    Hoven Macasinag
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Norberto Del Monte y Gapay for selling illegal drugs. The Court found that while the police failed to photograph Del Monte with the seized evidence or conduct a physical inventory as required by law, Del Monte did not raise this issue during his trial. By raising the issue of alleged procedural lapses for the first time on appeal, Del Monte's objection was deemed waived. Furthermore, non-compliance with inventory and photographing requirements does not alone render seized drugs inadmissible. The prosecution established the elements of the crime of illegal drug sale, showing the sale occurred and identifying the drugs in court.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People Vs Del Monte

    Uploaded by

    Hoven Macasinag
    24 views1 page
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Norberto Del Monte y Gapay for selling illegal drugs. The Court found that while the police failed to photograph Del Monte with the seized evidence or conduct a physical inventory as required by law, Del Monte did not raise this issue during his trial. By raising the issue of alleged procedural lapses for the first time on appeal, Del Monte's objection was deemed waived. Furthermore, non-compliance with inventory and photographing requirements does not alone render seized drugs inadmissible. The prosecution established the elements of the crime of illegal drug sale, showing the sale occurred and identifying the drugs in court.

    Original Description:

    evid

    Original Title

    People vs Del Monte

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Norberto Del Monte y Gapay for selling illegal drugs. The Court found that while the police failed to photograph Del Monte with the seized evidence or conduct a physical inventory as required by law, Del Monte did not raise this issue during his trial. By raising the issue of alleged procedural lapses for the first time on appeal, Del Monte's objection was deemed waived. Furthermore, non-compliance with inventory and photographing requirements does not alone render seized drugs inadmissible. The prosecution established the elements of the crime of illegal drug sale, showing the sale occurred and identifying the drugs in court.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    24 views1 page

    People Vs Del Monte

    Uploaded by

    Hoven Macasinag
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Norberto Del Monte y Gapay for selling illegal drugs. The Court found that while the police failed to photograph Del Monte with the seized evidence or conduct a physical inventory as required by law, Del Monte did not raise this issue during his trial. By raising the issue of alleged procedural lapses for the first time on appeal, Del Monte's objection was deemed waived. Furthermore, non-compliance with inventory and photographing requirements does not alone render seized drugs inadmissible. The prosecution established the elements of the crime of illegal drug sale, showing the sale occurred and identifying the drugs in court.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    G.R. No.

    179940, April 23, 2008


    People vs. NORBERTO DEL MONTE Y GAPAY alias “OBET”

    Facts:
    Accused-appellant questioned his conviction, contending that the evidence against him
    should have been rendered inadmissible for failure to comply with Section 21 of RA 9165.

    Ruling:
    Accused-appellants claim that police failed to take pictures of him with the evidence and that
    the police, who had initial custody, failed to conduct physical inventory was raised only during
    appeal.

    The court held that it is already late for accused-appellant to do this.

    The law excuses non-compliance under justifiable grounds. However, whatever justifiable
    grounds may excuse the police officers involved in the buy-bust operation in this case from
    complying with Section 21 will remain unknown, because appellant did not question during
    trial the safekeeping of the items seized from him. Indeed, the police officers' alleged
    violations of Sections 21 and 86 of Republic Act No. 9165 were not raised before the trial
    court but were instead raised for the first time on appeal. In no instance did appellant least
    intimate at the trial court that there were lapses in the safekeeping of seized items that
    affected their integrity and evidentiary value. Objection to evidence cannot be raised for the
    first time on appeal; when a party desires the court to reject the evidence offered, he must so
    state in the form of objection. Without such objection he cannot raise the question for the first
    time on appeal.

    The Court also added that, non-compliance with Section 21 of said law, particularly the
    making of the inventory and the photographing of the drugs confiscated and/or seized, will
    not render the drugs inadmissible in evidence.

    Afterall, all the elements necessary to prosecute sale of illegal drugs had been
    established. The prosecution clearly showed that the sale of the drugs actually happened and
    that the shabu subject of the sale was brought and identified in court.

    The court sustained accused-appellant’s conviction.

    You might also like