Mallillin v. People

Summary

This Supreme Court case involved the criminal prosecution of Junie Mallillin for illegal possession of shabu under RA 9165. While the RTC and Court of Appeals convicted him based on physical evidence found during a warranted search, the Supreme Court reversed and acquitted him on reasonable doubt. The Court found fatal deficiencies in the chain of custody, particularly the failure to present key witnesses who handled the evidence (Gallinera and Garcia). Additionally, the Court identified multiple procedural irregularities during the search, including sending the accused away on an errand during crucial moments, deviation from mandatory inventory procedures under Section 21 of RA 9165 implementing rules, and failure to immediately deliver seized items to the issuing court. The decision emphasized that the constitutional presumption of innocence cannot be overcome by mere presumption of regularity in police duties when the evidence raises reasonable doubt about the integrity and identity of the seized items.