Court of Appeals affirms drug conviction ruling

CEBU, Philippines - The Court of Appeals 18th Division has affirmed the conviction of a man for illegal selling of drugs.

Associate Justice Gabriel Ingles said that there is no sufficient evidence to reverse the ruling of the trial court against Ernesto "Nene" Rafols who was convicted for violation of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act 9165 otherwise known as Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act.

"An exhaustive scrutiny of the entire records of this case uncover that there are no fatal errors detrimental to the successful prosecution of the case. The Regional Trial Court did not err in its findings and conclusion. Wherefore, the appeal is hereby denied," the decision reads.

The penned decision of Ingles was concurred by Associate Justices Pampio Abarintos and Marilyn Lagura-Yap.

Rafols was sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of P500,000.

Prior his arrest based on the account of the prosecution, it stated that the City Intelligence and Investigation Branch (CIIB) received information from a confidential agent that a certain "Nene" was engaged in selling shabu in Barangay Zapatera and neighboring barangays in Cebu City.

The police then acted on the information and conducted a buy-bust operation leading to the arrest of Rafols.

But the accused denied the accusation and testified that on March 27, 2007 at around 8:00 p.m. he was at the New Imus Road fixing his motorcycle when a police asset named Emmanuel Porillo passed by.

He said he knew the asset because they were friends and live in the same barangay.

Five minutes after, he said two police officers approached him and was told to go with them to Echavez extension where he was asked if he had P50,000.

After which, he said he was brought to Camp Sotero Cabahug where he was frisked, but then nothing was recovered. Rafol's testimony was supported by Porillo.

But the trial court convicted Rafols who appealed the case citing that the trial court erred in convicting him as the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

In his 10-page decision, Ingles said based on the evidence of the prosecution it clearly identified the seller and the buyer. (FREEMAN)