Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4K views

    GR 93028 People Vs Simon

    Uploaded by

    Mia Parma
    Martin Simon was charged with selling 4 tea bags of marijuana to an undercover narcotics officer for PHP40. At trial, the narcotics officer and another officer testified that Simon sold them the marijuana. Simon claimed he was beaten and forced to sign papers admitting to being a drug pusher. The court found Simon guilty of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a fine of PHP20,000, and costs. The court affirmed the conviction, finding Simon was caught in the act of illegally selling drugs. The court also applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law, making Simon eligible for parole after serving the minimum sentence.

    Copyright:

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

    GR 93028 People Vs Simon

    Uploaded by

    Mia Parma
    4K views2 pages
    Martin Simon was charged with selling 4 tea bags of marijuana to an undercover narcotics officer for PHP40. At trial, the narcotics officer and another officer testified that Simon sold them the marijuana. Simon claimed he was beaten and forced to sign papers admitting to being a drug pusher. The court found Simon guilty of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a fine of PHP20,000, and costs. The court affirmed the conviction, finding Simon was caught in the act of illegally selling drugs. The court also applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law, making Simon eligible for parole after serving the minimum sentence.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    GR 93028 People vs Simon

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Martin Simon was charged with selling 4 tea bags of marijuana to an undercover narcotics officer for PHP40. At trial, the narcotics officer and another officer testified that Simon sold them the marijuana. Simon claimed he was beaten and forced to sign papers admitting to being a drug pusher. The court found Simon guilty of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a fine of PHP20,000, and costs. The court affirmed the conviction, finding Simon was caught in the act of illegally selling drugs. The court also applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law, making Simon eligible for parole after serving the minimum sentence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    4K views2 pages

    GR 93028 People Vs Simon

    Uploaded by

    Mia Parma
    Martin Simon was charged with selling 4 tea bags of marijuana to an undercover narcotics officer for PHP40. At trial, the narcotics officer and another officer testified that Simon sold them the marijuana. Simon claimed he was beaten and forced to sign papers admitting to being a drug pusher. The court found Simon guilty of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a fine of PHP20,000, and costs. The court affirmed the conviction, finding Simon was caught in the act of illegally selling drugs. The court also applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law, making Simon eligible for parole after serving the minimum sentence.

    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 2

    People of the Philippines vs.

    Martin Simon
    G.R. No. 93028
    July 29, 1994
    Ricardo, J.:
    FACTS
    On November 10, 1988 Martin Simon y Sunga was charged with a
    violation of Section 4, Article 2 of R.A. No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs
    Act of 1972)
    o Alleging that on October 22, 1988 he sold 4 tea bags of
    marijuana to a Narcotic Command (NARCOM) in a sum of
    PHP40
    On March 2, 1989 he was arraigned with counsel following his
    escape from Camp Olivas, San Fernando, Pampanga
    o Appellant pleaded NOT GUILTY
    Voluntarily waived his right to a pre-trial conference
    A NARCOM operative informed the police of illegal drug activities of
    ALYAS PUSA. Capt. Francisco Bustamante (Commanding Officer of
    the 3rd Narcotics Regional Unit) formed a team to bust appellant
    o Lopez was handed 2 marijuana bags which cost a total of
    PHP40
    o Lopez signaled the team with a scratch on the head and they
    busted the appellant
    o Pfc. Villacruz corroborated Lopez testimony
    o Sgt. Domingo Pejoro conducted the custodial investigation
    He apprised the rights of Simon: You have the right to
    remain silent, etc.
    Simon orally waived his right to counsel

    Prepared Exhibit G, The Receipt of Property


    Seized/Confiscated
    o Dr. Pedro Clara examined the appellant
    Normal except for high blood pressure
    No physical injuries
    Appellant had gastrointestinal pains due to history of
    peptic ulcer
    Appellants side of the story
    o He was told that he was a pusher on a jeep ride with the
    officers and forced to sign papers. He was punched in the
    stomach when he refused to do so.
    o Admitted that he escaped from the NARCOM office BUT it
    was because of the maltreatment
    Went to his uncles house (Bienvenido Sunga)
    Confined in the hospital for 3 days
    Appellants brother (Norberto Simon) testified that his brother was in
    the hospital that was likely due to his peptic ulcer
    o Confirmed by Dr. Evelyn Gomez-Aguas
    On December 4, 1989, the trial court convicted the appellant for a
    violation of the Dangerous Drug Act
    o Penalty = Life imprisonment, fine of PHP20,000, and pay the
    costs
    o 4 tea bags of marijuana were confiscated by the Government
    Appellant was caught in flagrante delicto engaging in the illegal sale
    of prohibited drugs. Thus, it is unlikely that he was set-up and more
    likely that he committed the crime.

    ISSUE
    1. Whether or not the appellant is guilty of selling prohibited drugs and
    having possession. YES.

    2. Whether or not the Indeterminate Sentence Law is applicable to the


    case. YES.
    RATIO
    1. YES.
    a. Dangerous Drugs Act - punishes any person who unless
    authorized by law, shall sell, administer, deliver, give away to
    another, distribute, dispatch in transit or transport any
    prohibited drug, or shall act as a broker in any of such
    transactions
    i. To sustain a conviction for selling prohibited drugs, the
    sale must be clearly and unmistakably established.
    ii. One cannot sell the drugs without first having
    possession over it.

    b. No law or jurisprudence requires that an arrest or seizure, to


    be valid, be witnessed by a relative, a barangay official or any
    other civilian, or be accompanied by the taking or pictures.
    2. YES.
    a. It is indeterminate in the sense that after serving the
    MINIMUM, the convict may be released on parole, or if he is
    not fitted for release, he shall continue serving
    his sentence until the end of the MAXIMUM.
    b. Drug offenses are not included in nor has appellant
    committed any act, which would put him within the exceptions
    to said law, and the penalty to be imposed does not involve
    reclusion perpetua to death. The Indeterminate Sentence
    Law is a legal and social measure of compassion, and should
    be liberally interpreted in favor of the accused.

    You might also like