People v. Navaja
G.R. No 104044 March 30, 1993
Ponente: Davide, Jr., J
Disputable presumption: Suppression of Evidence
Facts:
1. The Accused Alexander Navaja was convicted of the crime of selling a prohibited drug, 'shabu' under RA 6425. The authorities set up a buy bust operation but he managed to elude arrest after the transaction. Accused was subsequently arrested during a hearing of the Habeas Corpus case filed by his mother, about a year after.
2. In his appeal the accused contended that the court erred in convicting him as only one of the witnesses among 5 (of the policemen who accosted him) were presented by the prosecution.
Issue: Whether or not the non-presentation of the other witnesses gave rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence
HELD:
The non-presentation of the corroborative witnesses did not constitute suppression of evidence and such would not be fatal the prosecution's case. The rule is settled that the adverse presumption is not applicable when ---
1) suppression is not willful
2) the evidence suppressed or withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative
3) the evidence is at the disposal of both parties
4) the suppresion is an exercise of privilege
Moreover, the Court has consistently held in drugs cases that absent any proof to the contrary, law enforcers are presumed to have regularly performed their duty. The accused has also failed to present proof of an ulterior motive on the part of the police officers.
Note: This case digest/summary may serve as a ticker or memory aid. Reading of the full text of the case is still highly recommended.
No comments:
Post a Comment