Dangerous Drugs Act Of 2002

Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002
RA 9165

Articles 190-194 of the Revised Penal Code are repealed by Republic Act No. 6425 “The Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972” which took effect on March 30, 1972 (Sec. 42), as amended by PD No. 1683 and further amended by RA No. 7659

THE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 (R. A. NO. 9165, repealing R. A. No.6425 and RPC provisions on crimes related to opium and other prohibited drugs)

1. Campaign against Drugs and Protection of State
2. Balance - Medicinal Purpose
3. Rehabilitation

1. Importation of dangerous drugs (even for floral, decorative and culinary purposes) and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals
         Qualifying circumstance:
         a. If the importation was through the use of a diplomatic passport, diplomatic
            facilities or any other means involving the offender’s official status.
         b. Organizes, manages or acts as a financier

            -  The protector or coddler is also liable.

2. Sale, administration, delivery, distribution, and transportation of   dangerous drugs

      Qualifying circumstances:
      a. Within 100 meters from a school;
      b. If minors/mentally incapacitated individuals are used as runners, couriers and      
         messengers of drug pushers;
      c. If the victim of the offense is a minor, or should a prohibited/regulated drug
         involved in any offense under this section be the proximate cause of the death
         of a victim thereof
      d. Organizes, manages or acts as financier

3. Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where any controlled precursor and essential chemical is sold or used

      Qualifying circumstances:
      1. where a prohibited/regulated drug is administered, delivered, or sold to a minor
         who is allowed to use the same in such place; or
      2. should a prohibited drug be the proximate cause of the death of the person using
         the same in such den, dive or resort.
      3. Organizes, manages or acts as financier

         - The protector or coddler is also liable.
         - If place owned by third person, the same shall be confiscated and escheated
           in favor of government IF
            1. Complaint specifically allege that such place used intentionally for
               furtherance of crime
            2. Prosecution proves intent on part of owner
            3. Owner included as accused in criminal complaint

      Opium Dive or Resort - place where dangerous drug and/or controlled
      precursor and essential chemical is administered, delivered, stored for illegal
      purposes, distributed, sold or used in any form (To be habitual – prior
      conviction, reputation of place)

4. Being employees or visitors of drug den who are aware of the nature of such place
       - For the employee who is aware of nature of place and any person who
         knowingly visits such place
       - A person who visited another who was smoking opium shall not be liable
         if the place is not an opium dive or resort

5. Manufacture of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals
      Aggravating circumstance: Clandestine lab is undertaken under the following
      1. Any phase conducted in presence or with help of minors
      2. Established/undertaken within 100m of residential, business, church or school
      3. Lab secured/protected by booby traps
      4. Concealed with legitimate business operations
      5. Employment of practitioner, chemical engineer, public official or foreigner

      Qualifying circumstance: Organizes, manages or acts as financier

      Prima facie proof of manufacture: presence of controlled precursor and essential
      chemical or lab equipment in the clandestine lab

      CLANDESTINE LABORATORY:Any facility used for illegal manufacture of any dangerous
      drug and or controlled precursor and essential chemicals

6. Illegal chemical diversion of precursor and essential chemicals

      CHEMICAL DIVERSION: sale, distribution, transport of legitimately imported,
      in-transit, manufactured or procured controlled precursors or essential chemicals
      to any person or entity engaged in manufacture of dangerous drug and concealment
      of such transaction through fraud, destruction of documents, fraudulent use of
      permits, misdeclaration, use of front companies or mail fraud

7. Manufacture or delivery of equipment, instrument, apparatus, and other paraphernalia for dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursor and essential chemicals

      Acts Punishable:
      1. deliver
      2. possess with intent to deliver
      3. manufacture with intent to deliver the paraphernalia, knowing, or under
         circumstances where one reasonably should know

      Qualifying circumstance - use of a minor or a mentally incapacitated individual
      to deliver such equipment, instrument, apparatus or other paraphernalia

8. Possession of dangerous drugs, regardless of the degree of purity
      - Penalties are graduated to the amount of drugs (the only violation where
         quantity matters)
      - The kinds of drugs have different respective amounts for the graduation of

      Qualifying circumstance: Party, social gathering, or in the proximate company
      of at least 2 persons, regardless of quantity

      Possession: unauthorized, either actual or constructive, irrespective of quantity,
      with intent to possess(full knowledge that what was possessed was any of
      prohibited or regulated drug)

      Elements of possession of opium: (RA 6425)
      1. occupancy or taking
      2. intent to possess

      What is punished is present possession, not past possession

      It is not necessary to allege in information that accused is not authorized to
      possess opium

9. Possession apparatus and other paraphernalia fit for introducing dangerous drugs into the body

      Possession of such equipment = Prima facie evidence that possessor has used a
      dangerous drug and shall be presumed to have violated Sec. 15, use of dangerous

      The possession of PARAPHERNALIA is absorbed by USE of dangerous drug.

      Qualifying circumstance: Party, social gathering, or in the proximate company of
      at least 2 persons.

10. Use of dangerous drugs
      Must be found positive after a confirmatory test

      1st conviction – minimum of 6 mos. of rehabilitation

      2nd conviction – imprisonment and fine

      Where the accused is also found to be in possession of dangerous drugs, this
      Section shall not apply. Sec. 11, possession of dangerous drugs, shall apply.
      Hence, USE is subsumed by POSSESSION.
        Ex. If the offender is caught with possession of paraphernalia, possession of
            dangerous drugs and use of dangerous drugs, the offense is POSSESSION OF
            DANGEROUS DRUGS.

11.Cultivation or culture of plants which are dangerous drugs or are sources thereof

      The land/portions thereof and/or greenhouses in which any of the said plants is
      cultivated or cultured shall be confiscated and escheated to the State, unless
      the owner thereof prove that he did not know of such cultivation or culture
      despite the exercise of due diligence on his part.

      Qualifying circumstance:
      1) The land is part of the public domain
      2) Organizes, manages or acts as financier

12. Failure to keep of original records of transactions of dangerous drugs

      Persons liable: practitioner, manufacturer, wholesaler, importer, distributor,
      dealer, or retailer

      The additional penalty of revocation of his license to practice his profession
      in case of a practitioner, or of his or its business license in case of
      manufacturer, seller, importer, distributor or dealer, shall be imposed.

13. Unnecessary prescription of dangerous drugs

      Person Liable: Practitioner who shall prescribe any dangerous drug for any person
      whose physical/physiological condition does not require the use of thereof or
      in the dosage therein.

14. Unlawful prescription of dangerous drugs

Also Punishable -

a. Importation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical,
b. Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution and
   transportation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical,
c. Maintenance of a den, dive or resort for dangerous drugs,
d. Manufacture of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical,and
e. Cultivation or culture of plants which are sources of dangerous drugs.

      The penalty for such attempt and conspiracy is the same penalty prescribed
      for the commission. Thus, where the offense of sale was not consummated, the
      accused should not be prosecuted under mere possession, but under Sec. 26.
      (Justice Peralta)

1. Public officer or employee who misappropriates, misapplies or fails to account
   for confiscated, seized, or surrendered dangerous drugs, plant sources of
   dangerous drugs, etc.
2. Any elective local or national official who have benefited from the proceeds of
   trafficking of dangerous drugs or have received any financial/material contributions
   or donations from natural or juridical persons guilty of drug trafficking.
3. If the violation of the Act is committed by a partnership, corporation, association
   or any judicial person, the partner, president, director, or manager who consents to
   or knowingly tolerates such violation shall be held criminally liable as co-principal.
4. Partner, president, director, manager, officer or stockholder, who knowingly
   authorizes, tolerates, or consents to the use of a vehicle, vessel, or aircraft as
   an instrument in the importation, sale, delivery, distribution or transportation of
   dangerous drugs, or to the use of their equipment, machines or other instruments in
   the manufacture of any dangerous drugs, if such vehicle, vessel, aircraft, equipment,
   or other instrument, is owned or under the control and supervision of the partnership,    
   corporation, association or judicial entity to which they are affiliated.
5. Any person who is found guilty of “planting” any dangerous drugs and/or controlled
   precursor and essential chemicals, regardless of quantity or purity (penalty of death).
6. Any person violating a regulation issued by the Dangerous Drugs Board
7. Any person authorized to conduct drug test who issues false or fraudulent drug test
   results knowingly, willfully or through gross negligence.
8. Any government officer tasked with the prosecution of drug-related cases under this
   Act who delays or bungles the prosecution.

      For the purpose of enforcing the provisions of this Act, all school heads,
      supervisors and teachers shall be deemed to be persons in authority
      and, as such, are vested with the power to apprehend, arrest, or cause the
      apprehension or arrest of any person who shall violate any of the said provision.
      They shall be considered as persons in authority if they are in the school or
      within its immediate vicinity, or beyond such immediate vicinity if they are
      in attendance in any school or class function in their official capacity as
      school heads, supervisors or teachers.

      Any teacher or school employee who discovers or finds that any person in the
      school or within its immediate vicinity is violating this Act shall have
      the duty to report the violation to the school head or supervisor who shall,
      in turn, report the matter to the proper authorities. Failure to report in
      either case shall, after hearing, constitute sufficient cause for disciplinary
      action by the school authorities. (Sec. 44)


A. Drug dependent who is finally discharged from confinement shall be exempt
   subject to the ff. conditions:
   1) Complied with the rules of the Center
   2) Never been charged or convicted of any offense under this Act, the Dangerous
      Drugs Act of 1972, the RPC, or any special penal laws.
   3) No record of escape from the Center; provided if he escaped, he surrendered
      by himself or through his parent, spouse, guardian, or relative w/in 1 week.
   4) Poses no serious danger to himself, family or community.

B. Voluntary submission of a drug dependent to confinement, treatment and
   rehabilitation by the drug-dependent himself or through his parent,
   guardian or relative within the 4th in a center and compliance with such conditions
   therefor as the Dangerous Drugs Board may prescribe shall exempt him from
   criminal liability for possession or use of the dangerous drug.

C. Should the drug-dependent escape from the center, he may submit himself for
   confinement within 1 week from the date of his escape, of his parent guardian
   or relative may, within the same period surrender him for confinement.

D. Upon application of the Board, the Court shall issue an order for recommitment
   if the drug dependent does not resubmit himself for confinement or if he is
   not surrendered for recommitment.

E. If, subsequent to such recommitment, he should escape again, he shall no longer be
   exempt from criminal liability for the use or possession of any dangerous drug.

F. If a person charged with an offense with an imposable penalty of less than
   6 years and 1 day, and the Court or prosecutor, at any stage of the proceedings,
   finds that the person charged with an offense is a drug dependent, the fiscal
   or court as the case may be, shall suspend all further proceedings and transmit
   records of the case to the Board. If the Board determines that public interest
   requires that such person be committed, it shall file a petition for commitment.
   After commitment and discharge, the prosecution shall continue. In case of
   conviction, the judgment shall, if certified by the center for good behavior,
   indicate that he shall be given full credit for the period of confinement;
   provided when the offense is use of dangerous drugs, and the accused is not a
   recidivist, the penalty shall have deemed to have been served in the center
   upon release.

G. The period of prescription of the offense charged shall not run during the time
   that the respondent/accused is under detention or confinement in a center.

H. A drug dependent who is discharged as rehabilitated, but does not qualify for
   exemption, may be charged under this Act, but shall be placed on probation
   and undergo community service in lieu of imprisonment and/or fine in the
   court’s discretion.

I. A drug dependent who is not rehabilitated after the second commitment to the
   Center under the voluntary submission program shall, upon recommendation of
   the Board, be charged for violation of Sec. 15, (use of dangerous drug) and
   be prosecuted like any other offender. If convicted, he shall be credited for
   the period of confinement in the Center.


A. Supervision and rehabilitative surveillance of the Board and under such
   conditions that the court may impose for a period of 6-18 mos.

    Requisites for suspension:
    1. Accused is a minor over 15 years at the time of the commission of the
       offense but not more than 18 years of age when the judgment should have
       been promulgated.
    2. He has not been previously convicted of violating this Act, Dangerous Drugs
       Act of 1972, RPC or any special penal laws.
    3. He has not been previously committed to a Center or to the care of a DOH-accedited
    4. The Dangerous Drugs Board favorably recommends that his/her sentence be suspended.

       Where the minor is under 15 years at the time of the commission, Art. 192 of
       Child and Youth Welfare Code shall apply (suspension of sentence and commitment)

B. The privilege of suspended sentence may be availed of only once.

C. If the minor violates any of the conditions of his suspended sentence, rules
   of the Board, or rules of the center, the court shall pronounce judgment of
   conviction and he shall serve sentence as any other convicted person.
D. Upon promulgation of sentence, the court may, in its discretion, place the
   accused under probation, or impose community service in lieu of imprisonment.

1. If reasonable ground to believe that offender is under the influence of
   dangerous drugs, conduct examination w/in 24 hours.
2. Positive results shall be challenged w/in 15 days after receipt of the result
   through a confirmatory test.
3. Confirmed test shall be prima facie evidence that offender has used dangerous drugs.
4. Positive test must be confirmed for it to be valid in a court of law.

1. In buy-bust operations, there is no law or rule requiring policemen to adopt a
   uniform way of identifying buy money.
2. Absence of ultraviolet powder on the buy money is not fatal for the prosecution.
3. If offender is an alien, an additional penalty of deportation without further
   proceedings shall be imposed immediately after service of sentence.
4. A person charged under the Dangerous Drugs Act shall not be allowed to avail of
5. A positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating
   circumstance in the commission of a crime by the offender.
6. If public official/employee is the offender, the maximum penalty shall be imposed.
7. Any person convicted of drug trafficking or pushing cannot avail of the
   Probation Law.
8. Immunity from prosecution and punishment shall be granted to an informant,
   provided the ff. conditions concur:
      1) necessary for conviction
      2) not yet in the possession of the State
      3) can be corroborated on material points
      4) has not been previously convicted of a crime of moral turpitude, except
         when there is no other direct evidence
      5) comply with conditions imposed by the State
      6) does not appear to be the most guilty
      7) no other direct evidence available

   Mandatory drug testing includes:
   1) All persons charged with a criminal offense having an imposable penalty
      of not less than 6 years and 1 day.
   2) All candidates for public office, whether appointed or elected.

   Limited applicability of the RPC - The RPC shall not apply to this Act, except
   in the case of minor offenders. Where the offender is a minor, the penalty
   for acts punishable by life imprisonment to death shall be reclusion
   perpetua to death.

      Hence, since RPC nomenclature of penalties is used, the minor is then
      entitled to mitigating circumstances under the RPC (Martin Simon case).
      Thus, the minor does not receive the death penalty. (Justice Peralta)

People v. Adam GR 143842, 10/13/03
   Appellant is guilty of the crime of attempted sale of shabu. As gleaned from
   the testimony of the poseur-buyer, the appellant merely showed the bag
   containing the shabu and held on to it before it was confiscated. There is
   no evidence that the poseur- buyer talked about and agreed with the appellant on
   the purchase price of the shabu. There is no evidence that the appellant handed
   over the shabu to the poseur buyer

People v. Yang, GR 148077, 2/16/04
   The consummation of the crime charged herein may be sufficiently established
   even in the absence of an exchange of money. The offer to sell and then
   the sale itself arose when the poseur-buyer showed the money to appellant,
   which prompted the latter to show the contents of the carton, and hand it over
   to the poseur-buyer. Mere showing of the said regulated drug does not negate
   the existence of an offer to sell or an actual sale. The absence of actual or
   completed payment is irrelevant, for the law itself penalizes the very act of
   delivery of a dangerous drug, regardless of any consideration. Payment of
   consideration is likewise immaterial in the distribution
   of illicit drugs.

People v. Chua, GR 149878, 7/1/03
   In a prosecution for illegal possession of a dangerous drug, mere possession
   of a regulated drug without legal authority is punishable under the
   Dangerous Drugs Act. Lack of criminal intent or good faith does not exempt
   appellants from criminal liability.

People v. Cadley, GR 150735, 3/15/04
   A prior surveillance is not a prerequisite for the validity of an entrapment
   or buy- bust operation, the conduct of which has no rigid or textbook method

People v. Del Norte, GR 149462, 3/31/04
   In a prosecution for illegal possession of dangerous drugs, the following
   facts must be proven with moral certainty:
   (1) that the accused is in possession of the object identified as a
       prohibited or regulated drug;
   (2) that such possession is not authorized by law; and
   (3) that the accused freely and consciously possessed the said drug. In this
       case, proof of the accused’s ownership of the house where the prohibited
       drugs were discovered is necessary.

What is the PDEA?
   The PDEA is the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency. It serves as the
   implementing arm of the Dangerous Drugs Board It shall be responsible for the
   efficient and effective law enforcement of all the provisions on any dangerous
   drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical as provided in this Act.
   Section 82, Article IX, RA 9165

What are the functions of the Dangerous Drugs Board?
   The Board shall Be the policy-making and strategy-formulating body in the
   planning and formulation of policies and programs on drug prevention and control.

   Develop and adopt a comprehensive, integrated, unified and balanced national
   drug abuse prevention and control strategy.

   Under the Office of the President.

How long will the drug dependent be confined for treatment and rehabilitation?
   - Confinement in a Center for treatment and rehabilitation shall not exceed
     one (1) year, after which time the Court, as well as the Board, shall be
     apprised by the head of the treatment and rehabilitation center of the status
     of said drug dependent and determine whether further confinement will be for
     the welfare of the drug dependent and his/her family or the community.

Bar Exam Question (2005)

Dangerous Drug Act: Plea-Bargaining (2005)

Obie Juan is suspected to have in his possession an unspecified amount of methamphetamine hydrochloride or(shabu). An entrapment operation was conducted by police officers, resulting in his arrest following the discovery of 100 grams of the said dangerous drug in his possession. He was subjected to a drug test and was found positive for the use of marijuana, another dangerous drug. He was subsequently charged with two crimes: Violation of Section 11, Article II of RA 9165 for the possession of (shabu) and violation of Section 15, Article II of RA 9165 for the use of marijuana. 

a) Are the charges proper? Explain.

Suggested Answer:

No. The use of dangerous drugs is not committed when Obie Juan was also found to have in his possession such quantity of any dangerous drug. (See s. 11 and 16, RA. No. 9165)

b) So as not to be sentenced to death, Obie Juan offers to plead guilty to a lesser offense. Can he do so? Why?

Suggested Answer:

No. Obie Juan cannot plead guilty to a lower offense as it is prohibited under the law. (Section 23, RA. No. 9165) Any person charged under any provision of this Act regardless of the imposable penalty shall not be allowed to avail of the provision on plea-bargaining.

Bar Exam Question (1998)

Dangerous Drugs Act (1998)

Superintendent Al Santiago, Chief of the Narcotics Division, Western Police District, received information that a certain Lee Lay of-No. 8 Tindalo Street, Tondo, Manila is a member of the 14K Gang selling shabu and marijuana. SPOl Lorenzo and SPO3 Peralta were instructed to conduct surveillance and buy-bust operations against Lay. Their informant contacted Lay and a meeting was arranged at T. Pinpin Restaurant at 2:00 in the afternoon on February 14, 1993. SPO1 Lorenzo and SPO3 Peralta, acting as poseur-buyers, purchased from Lay 10 sticks of marijuana and paid Php 500. Later, Lay agreed to sell to them one kilo of dried marijuana fruiting tops which he gave them at his residence. The policemen arrested Lay and a search was conducted. Found were 356 grams of marijuana seeds, 932 grams of marijuana fruiting tops and 50 sticks of marijuana
cigarettes. What offense or offenses did Lay commit? 

Suggested Answer:

Lay committed the offenses of illegal selling of dangerous drugs and illegal possession of dangerous drugs which should be made subject of separate informations. The crime of illegal selling of dangerous drugs is committed as regards the 10 sticks of marijuana and as regards the one (1) kilo of dried marijuana fruiting tops, which should be subject of two (2) separate informations because the acts were committed at different times and in different places. The crime of Illegal possession of dangerous drugs is committed as regards the marijuana seeds, marijuana fruiting tops and marijuana cigarettes which are not the subject of the sale. Another information shall be filed for this.

Bar Exam Question (2006)

Dangerous Drugs Act (2006)

After receiving reliable information that Dante Ong, a notorious drug smuggler, was arriving on PAL Flight NO. PR 181, PNP Chief Inspector Samuel Gamboa formed a group of anti-drug agents. When Ong arrived at the airport, the group arrested him and seized his attache case. Upon inspection inside the Immigration holding area, the attache case yielded 5 plastic bags of heroin weighing 500 grams. Chief Inspector Gamboa took the attache case and boarded him in an unmarked car driven by PO3 Pepito Lorbes. On the way to Camp Crame and upon nearing White Plains corner EDSA, Chief Inspector Gamboa ordered PO3 Lorbes to stop the car. They brought out the drugs from the case in the trunk and got 3 plastic sacks of heroin. They then told Ong to alight from the car. Ong left with the 2 remaining plastic sacks of heroin. Chief Inspector Gamboa advised him to keep silent and go home which the latter did. Unknown to them, an NBI team of agents had been following them and witnessed the transaction. They arrested Chief Inspector Gamboa and PO3 Lorbes. Meanwhile, another NBI team followed Ong and likewise
arrested him. All of them were later charged. What are their respective criminal liabilities? 

Suggested Answer:

Chief Inspector Gamboa and PO3 Pepito Lorbes who conspired in taking the attache case are liable for the following crimes defined under RA. 9165: 
a) Sec. 27 for misappropriation or failure to account for the confiscated or seized dangerous drugs. 
b) Sec. 4 in relation to Sec. 3(ee) for their acts as protector/coddler of Dante Ong who imported drugs In addition, by allowing Ong to escape prosecution for illegal importation or illegal transportation of dangerous drugs, where the penalty is life imprisonment to death, they are also liable for qualified bribery under Art. 211-A of the Revised Penal Code. With respect to Dante Ong, he is guilty of illegal importation of dangerous drugs under Sec. 4, R.A. 9165, if PR 181 is an international flight. If PR 181 is a domestic flight, he is liable for violation of Sec. 5, RA. 9165 for illegal transportation of dangerous drugs.

Bar Exam Question (2000)

Dangerous Drugs Act (6425); Marked Money (2000)

At about 9 o'clock in the morning, a Narcom Group laid a plan to entrap and apprehend A, a long suspected drug dealer, through a "buy-bust" operation. At the appointed time, the poseur-buyer approached A who was then with B. A marked P100 bill was handed over to A who in turn, gave the poseur-buyer one (1) tea bag of marijuana leaves. The members of the team, who were then positioned behind thick leaves, closed in but evidently were not swift enough since A and B were able to run away. Two days later, A was arrested in connection with another incident. It appears that during the operations, the police officers were not able to seize the marked money but were able to get possession of the marijuana tea bag. A was subsequently prosecuted for violation of Section 4, Article II of Republic Act No. 6425, otherwise known as the Dangerous Drugs Act, During the trial, the marked money was not presented. Can A be held liable? Explain. 

Suggested Answer:

Yes. A can be held liable. The absence of the marked money will not create a hiatus in the prosecution's evidence as long as the sale of the dangerous drugs is adequately proven and the drug subject of the transaction is presented before the court. There was a perfected contract of sale of the drug (People vs. Ong Co, 245 SCRA 733; People vs. Zervoulakos, 241 SCRA 625).

Bar Exam Question (1998)

Dangerous Drugs Act (6425); Plea Bargaining (1998)

Edgardo was charged with importation of prohibited drugs in an information filed with the Regional Trial Court of Kalookan City on June 4, 1994. The offense is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. Can Edgardo avail of plea-bargaining? 

Suggested Answer:

No, Edgardo cannot avail of plea-bargaining because the imposable penalty for his violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act (R.A. No. 6425. as amended) is reclusion perpetua to death. Section 20-A expressly provides that plea-bargaining shall not be allowed where the imposable penalty for the violation of said law is reclusion perpetua to death. (Sec. 20-A, R.A. No. 6425, as amended).

Bar Exam Question (1996)

Dangerous Drugs Act; Consummation of Sale (1996)

Pat. Buensuceso, posing as a buyer, approached Ronnie, a suspected drug pusher, and offered to buy P300 worth of shabu. Ronnie then left, came back five minutes later and handed Pat, Buensuceso an aluminum foil containing the shabu. However, before Pat, Buensuceso was able to deliver the marked money to Ronnie, the latter spotted a policeman at a distance, whom Ronnie knew to be connected with the Narcotics Command of the Police. Upon seeing the latter, Ronnie ran away but was arrested
thirty minutes later by other policemen who pursued him. Under the circumstances, would you consider the crime of sale of a prohibited drug already consummated? Explain.

Suggested Answer:

Yes, the sale of prohibited drug is already consummated although the marked money was not yet delivered. When Ronnie handed the aluminum foil containing the shabu to Pat. Buensuceso pursuant to their agreed sale, the crime was consummated. Payment of the consideration is not an element of requisite of the crime. If ever, the marked money is only evidentiary to strengthen the case of the prosecution.

Bar Exam Question (2002)

Dangerous Drugs Act; Criminal Intent to Posses (2002)

A and his fiancee B were walking in the plaza when they met a group of policemen who had earlier been tipped off that A was in possession of prohibited drugs. Upon seeing the policemen and sensing that they were after him, A handed a sachet containing shabu to his fiancee B, telling her to hide it in her handbag. The policemen saw B placing the sachet inside her handbag. If B was unaware that A was a drug user or pusher or that what was inside the sachet given to her was shabu, is she nonetheless liable under the Dangerous Drugs Act? 

Suggested Answer:

No, B will not be criminally liable because she is unaware that A was a drug user or pusher or of the content of the sachet handed to her by A, and therefore the criminal intent to possess the drug in violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act is absent. There would be no basis to impute criminal liability to her in the absence of animus possidendi.