The Court of Appeals has affirmed the joint decisions of the Regional Trial Court of Virac in two separate drug cases that sentenced a woman to two life imprisonments and to pay a million pesos in total fine of P500,000.00 more than three years ago.
In a ruling promulgated last March 26, 2026, the CA’s Seventh Division, chaired by Associate Justice Angelene Mary W. Quimpo-Sale and with Associate Justices Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela and Selma Palacio Alaras as members, denied the appeal filed by Coleen Mae “Korenai” dela Cruz Sarmiento in Criminal Cases Nos. 8190 and 8191.
On Oct. 10, 2022, the RTC had found the accused-appellant, then 35 and a turon vendor, guilty for violations of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of Republic Act 9165, or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, for the sale and possession of dangerous drugs, respectively.
The case against her co-accused, live-in partner Ardee Sarmiento Arcilla, 35, was dismissed for lack of evidence that he conspired with Sarmiento despite his presence at the scene and his relationship with Coleen.
It may be recalled that on Nov. 22, 2021, Sarmiento, then a 35-year-old turon vendor, was caught with P408,000 worth of shabu in a buy-bust operation conducted by the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) Catanduanes, together with the Virac police station, the Catanduanes Police Intelligence Unit (PIU) and the Regional Police Drug Enforcement Unit (RPDEU).
A confidential informant of the police set up a transaction with the then suspected drug pusher, with the sale going down at the vicinity of the RSL bus terminal in front of the DOLE provincial office.
At 12:50 PM that day, Sarmiento and Arcilla arrived on board a motorcycle, with Colleen signaling the poseur buyer and the confidential informant to wait as she entered the RSL compound.
She came out five minutes later with a parcel wrapped with brown tape and then called the agent and informant. With Sarmiento at her side, she handed to the police officer a plastic sachet containing white crystalline granules and was given the buy-bust money in return.
As soon as the transaction was consummated, the agent announced herself and signaled the rest of the team, with Coleen tossing to the ground the buy-bust money and the parcel.
Aside from the small sachet, the police found a large sachet containing suspected shabu inside the bottom pocket of a jacket that was the content of the parcel.
Laboratory examination of the contents of the two sachets later confirmed the presence of methamphetamine hydrochloride with a total weight of 51.3469 grams.
The package’s waybill stated that it originated from the cargo bus company’s terminal at EDSA Cubao last Nov. 20. 2021, with Sarmiento was the sender and a certain Mike Dimabayao as the receiver.
In her appeal, Coleen Mae alleged that the RTC erred in convicting her, specifically questioning the validity of the buy-bust operation by alleging that the prosecution witnesses, especially the mandatory witnesses, testified that they did not see the actual transaction.
The Court of Appeals, however, was not convinced and held at the outset that the appeal must be denied.
It said that the prosecution clearly established the validity of the buy-bust operation by proving the details of the transaction from initial contact to the consummation of sale by the delivery of the dangerous drug.
“Moreover, the mandatory witnesses are not required to witness the arrest and seizure or confiscation of the drugs,” the ruling stated. “They need only be readily available to witness the immediately ensuing inventory.”
In stressing that her conviction must be sustained, the Court said that with the chain of custody sufficiently established, the elements regarding the identity of the object in the sale of dangerous drugs as well as the identity of the object in the possession of dangerous drugs were duly proven.
“Accused-appellant’s defense of denial cannot be upheld as she herself admitted that she was outside the RSL bus terminal where the buy-bust operation took place. It does not have more evidentiary weight than the credible and positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses from the PDEA and the PNP whose testimonies were duly supported by evidence,” the CA emphasized.