People vs.

Capuno
Facts:
In its April 3, 2006 decision, the RTC of San Mateo Rizal found appellant Erlinda Capuno guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of illegal sale of shabu, under Section 5, Art. II of RA No. 9165 of the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. The trial courts decision was affirmed by the CA but
modified the penalty imposed.
The antecedent facts are as follows:
The prosecution presented PO1 Jose Gordon Antonio who narrated that around 11:00 a.m. of
July 21, 2002, he was at the Rodriguez Police Station when a civilian informant arrived and reported that
a woman was openly selling dangerous drugs on Manggahan Street, Barangay Burgos, Montalban Rizal.
Upon receiving the information, he, PO1 Joseph Fernandez, and PO1 Fortunato Jiro planned an
entrapment operation where he posed as a buyer and his companions would act as back-up. They went
to Manggahan street and when they were near, the informant pointed them to the appellant. PO1
Antonio approached the appellant and told her, paiskor ng halagang piso ; he then handed a pre-
marked one hundred peso bill to appellant who pulled out a plastic sachet and handed it to PO1
Antonio. PO1 Antonio immediately held appellants arm, introduced himself to her and stated her
constitutional rights.
PO1 Jiro testified that around 11:00 a.m. of July 21, 2002, he was at the Police Station when a
confidential asset called and informed the police that he saw one alias Erlinda selling illegal drugs. The
police then planned a buy-bust operation. Afterwards, PO1 Jiro, PO1 Antonio and PO1 Fernandez, along
with the confidential assed proceeded to Manahan Street where the buy-bust operation was executed.
The defense on their part, presented a different version of events. Appellant Capuno testified
that around 11:00 am of July 21, 2002, she was sleeping at home with her daughter when two persons
who introduced themselves as police officers, entered her house. The two men, who were wearing
maong pants and sando, asked her if she was Erlinda Capuno and when she said yes, they searched her
house. When they found nothing in her house, she, along with her daughter, were invited at the
municipal hall of montalban.
The RTC and CA convicted Capuno of the crime charged.
Upon appeal, Capuno claimed that the lower courts erred in convicting her of the crime charged despite
the prosecutions failure to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt, anchoring her claim that PO1
Antonio and PO1 Jiros conflicting claims.
Issue: Whether appellants guilt was proved beyond reasonable doubt
Held: No. The SC, after due consideration resolved to acquit appellant for the prosecutions failure to
prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In considering a criminal case, it is critical to start with the laws own starting perspective on the
status of the accused- in all criminal prosecutions, he is presumed innocent of the charge laid unless the
contrary is proven beyond reasonable doubt. The burden lies on the prosecution to overcome such
presumption of innocence by presenting the quantum of evidence required. In so doing, the prosecution
must rest on its own merits and not rely on the weakness of the defense. And if the prosecution fails to
meet the required amount of evidence, the defense may logically not event present evidence on its
behalf. In which case, the presumption prevails and the accused should necessarily be acquitted.