TITLE: Mock Trial – People of the Philippines vs.

(Name of Accused)
Violation of Section 11, Article II, RA 9165 (Possession of Dangerous Drugs)

Characters:
Judge
Clerk of Court
Prosecutor
Defense Counsel
Accused
Police Witness (PO1 )
Forensic Chemist (Chemist )
Court Stenographer

SCENE 1 [ARRAIGNMENT]

[Courtroom. Judge enters. All rise.]

Clerk of Court:
All rise. The Regional Trial Court Branch 52 of Lingayen, Pangasinan is now in session,
presided over by the Honorable Judge __________________.

Judge:
You may be seated, the court is now in session, call the cases

Clerk of Court:
Calling Criminal Case No. 2025-010: People of the Philippines vs. [name of accused] for
Violation of Section 11, Article II of Republic Act 9165.

Judge:
Appearance for the prosecution and the defense

Prosecutor:
Good morning, Your Honor. Prosecutor (name) for the People of the Philippines.

Defense Counsel:
Good morning, Your Honor. Atty. (name) defense counsel for the accused, Juan Dela Cruz.

Judge: Is the accused around?

Defense counsel: Yes your honor.

Judge: Arraign the accused

Clerk of Court: What language or dialect do you understand?

Accused: English
Clerk of Court:
“Mr. ______________, you are hereby informed that an Information has been filed against you
by the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor, charging you with Violation of Section 11, Article II of
Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Specifically, it is alleged that on or about March 10, 2025, at Barangay Maniboc, Municipality of
Lingayen, Province of Pangasinan, you did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and knowingly
have in your possession two (2) heat-sealed transparent plastic sachets containing
methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly known as shabu, a dangerous drug, with a total
net weight of 1.02 grams, without the corresponding authority or prescription.
The offense is punishable under Section 11 of RA 9165.

“Do you understand the charge against you?”

Accused: Yes your honor

Clerk: And how do you plead – guilty or not guilty?”

Accused: Not Guilty your honor

Clerk: The accused pleaded not guilty your honor

Judge:
“Let the plea of not guilty be entered into the record.
This Court hereby sets the case for pre-trial conference on [insert date], in accordance with the
Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial.
The parties are directed to appear on the scheduled date fully prepared to discuss possible
stipulations of fact, the marking of evidence, the identification of issues, and other matters
aimed at expediting the trial.
The trial is to proceed immediately after pre-trial if the issues are joined.
So ordered.”

Scene 2: Pre-Trial (Courtroom)

[Judge enters. Everyone stands.]

Clerk of Court:
All rise. Court is now in session, presided by Honorable Judge (name). Please be seated.

Judge:
Good morning. We are here for the Pre-Trial of Criminal Case No. 2025-010, entitled People of
the Philippines vs. (name of accsued), for a violation of Section 11, Article II, Republic Act No.
9165 (Possession of Dangerous Drugs). Counsel, kindly state your appearances.

Prosecutor (name):
Good morning, Your Honor. The People of the Philippines is represented by Prosecutor ______.

Defense Counsel (Atty. _______):

Good morning, Your Honor. The defendant, __________, is represented by Atty. ________.
Judge:
Thank you, counsel. Before we begin, let me ask the parties if there are any issues or
stipulations that can be settled before the trial commences.

Prosecutor:
Yes, Your Honor. The prosecution has no objections to the defendant’s identification, and we
are ready to proceed with the trial. We would like to stipulate that the seized substance was
indeed in the custody of the arresting officer from the time of seizure to the turn-over to the
Forensic Chemistry Laboratory.

Defense Counsel:
We have no objections, Your Honor, to the stipulations regarding the identification of the seized
substance. However, we would like to emphasize that the chain of custody of the evidence
was not properly observed during the inventory process.

Judge:
Noted. The parties are reminded that chain of custody is crucial for establishing the integrity of
the evidence. If there are no further issues, we shall proceed with the trial. I will now set the trial
date and advise the parties to ensure that all witnesses are present.

[Judge reads the trial schedule.]

Judge:
The case is set for trial on March 15, 2025 at 9:00 AM. The Clerk will issue the necessary
subpoenas for witnesses. The defense is likewise advised to file its pre-trial brief within the
required period. Court is adjourned.

[Judge exits, everyone stands.]

Scene 3: Trial (Courtroom)

[Court is in session. The prosecution and defense are present. The judge enters.]

Clerk of Court:
All rise. Court is now in session.

Judge:
Please be seated. The case is called for trial. Prosecutor, you may proceed with the
presentation of your first witness.

Prosecution's Direct Examination of PO1 ________

Prosecutor (Atty. ________):

Thank you, Your Honor. The prosecution calls Police Officer 1 _________ to the witness
stand.

[PO1 _______ is sworn in.]

Prosecutor (Atty. _______):

Good morning, Officer Marquez. Could you please state your full name and your position?

PO1 _______:
Good morning, Your Honor. I am Police Officer 1 _______, assigned to the Anti-Illegal Drugs
Unit of the local police station.

Prosecutor (Atty. _______):

Thank you, Officer. Can you tell the court what happened on March 10, 2025, when you were
on duty?

PO1 __________:
Yes, Your Honor. On March 10, 2025, at around 2:30 PM, I, along with my team, conducted a
buy-bust operation targeting a suspected drug dealer in Barangay Maniboc. The operation
was conducted in coordination with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA).

Prosecutor (Atty. ________):

And were you able to apprehend the accused?

PO1 _______:
Yes, Your Honor. The accused, _________, was caught in the act of selling what appeared to
be methamphetamine hydrochloride to an undercover agent.

Prosecutor (Atty. ________):

What happened next?

PO1 _________:
Upon the arrest, I immediately conducted a search and found two (2) heat-sealed plastic
sachet containing a white crystalline substance in his possession. We marked the item “JDC-
01” and “JDC-02” for identification.

Prosecutor (Atty. _______):

And what did you do after the arrest?

PO1 ________:
After the arrest, I prepared an inventory of the seized items in the presence of my team. I then
transported the evidence to the Forensic Chemistry Laboratory for testing.

Prosecutor (Atty. ________):

Thank you, Officer ______. I have no further questions, Your Honor.

Judge:
Defense, you may cross-examine the witness.

Defense's Cross-Examination of PO1 _______

Defense Counsel (Atty. _______):

Good morning, Officer ________. You mentioned that you conducted an inventory of the seized
items after the arrest. Was there a barangay official present during that inventory?

PO1 ______:
No, Your Honor. The barangay official was not present at the time.

Defense Counsel (Atty. _______):

And was there a media representative present as well?

PO1 ________:
No, Your Honor. There was no media representative.

Defense Counsel (Atty. _______):

And was there a DOJ representative present?

PO1 _________:
No, Your Honor. We did not have a DOJ representative.

Defense Counsel (Atty. ______):

So, it is correct to say that the inventory was not conducted in the presence of all the required
witnesses as stipulated by Section 21, Article II of R.A. 9165?

PO1 ______:
Yes, Your Honor, that is correct.

Defense Counsel (Atty. ______):

No further questions, Your Honor.
Judge:
Thank you, Officer _______. You may step down.

[PO1 _______exits.]

Closing Arguments

Prosecutor (Atty. _______):

Your Honor, the prosecution submits that the arrest was lawful and the evidence, although
handled by the arresting officer, proves the possession of dangerous drugs by the accused. The
absence of the required witnesses during the inventory does not automatically discredit the
evidence, as the chain of custody was maintained throughout the process.

Defense Counsel (Atty. ________):

Your Honor, the failure to comply with the procedural requirements of Section 21 of R.A. 9165
raises serious doubts regarding the integrity of the evidence. The law mandates the presence of
a barangay official, a media representative, and a DOJ representative to ensure transparency in
the inventory of seized items. The prosecution has failed to justify the absence of these
witnesses, and as such, the evidence must be excluded.

Judge:
Noted. We will proceed to the formal offer.

FORMAL OFFER

Judge:
This court is now ready to hear the formal offer of evidence from the parties. Prosecution, you
may proceed.

Prosecution's Formal Offer

Prosecutor (Atty. ______):

Thank you, Your Honor. The People of the Philippines respectfully offer the following evidence:

1. Exhibit A – Two (2) heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet allegedly containing white
crystalline substance, marked “JDC-01” and “JDC-02” upon seizure.
→ Purpose: To prove the corpus delicti, the subject of the offense under Section 11,
Article II of R.A. 9165.
2. Exhibit B – Chemistry Report No. CRL-2025-001 prepared by Forensic Chemist
__________.
→ Purpose: To prove the substance is methamphetamine hydrochloride or “shabu”
weighing 0.8 grams.
3. Exhibit C – Inventory and photograph of the seized item, taken by PO1 _________.
→ Purpose: To support chain of custody and compliance with procedural requirements.
4. Exhibit D – Spot report and Arrest Report dated March 10, 2025.
→ Purpose: To prove the circumstances of arrest and seizure.
5. Testimonial evidence – The testimony of PO1 _______, the arresting officer.
→ Purpose: To narrate the events leading to the arrest, seizure, and turnover of the
item.

The prosecution respectfully submits that these pieces of evidence are relevant, competent, and
material to prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Judge:
Defense, any objections?

Defense's Objection

Defense Counsel (Atty._______):

Yes, Your Honor. The defense objects specifically to Exhibits A, B, and C. We argue that:

 The chain of custody was broken.

 The required witnesses under Section 21 – namely a barangay official, DOJ
representative, and a media representative – were absent during inventory and
photograph of the evidence.
  The prosecution failed to offer a justifiable reason for this noncompliance.
 As established in recent jurisprudence, such lapses raise serious doubts as to the
integrity and identity of the evidence.

Accordingly, the defense prays that these exhibits be excluded for being inadmissible and
unreliable.

Judge:
Noted. The court shall rule on the admissibility of the evidence in the final decision. Defense, do
you intend to present evidence?

Defense's Formal Offer

Defense Counsel:
Your Honor, the defense waives the presentation of additional evidence and rests its case. We
submit that the prosecution failed to discharge its burden of proof. Hence, we waive the formal
offer and rely on our earlier cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses.

Judge:
Very well. With both parties having rested their respective cases, this case is now submitted for
decision.

Scene 4: Promulgation of Judgment

[Courtroom is in session. The accused is present. Everyone stands as the judge enters.]

Clerk of Court:
All rise. This is the promulgation of judgment in Criminal Case No. 2025-010, entitled People of
the Philippines vs. (NAME OF ACCUSSED) The Honorable Judge (NAME) presiding.

Judge:
Please be seated. This court has reached a decision.

After a thorough examination of the evidence presented, this court finds the following:

 The accused (name) was arrested in flagrante delicto by PO1 (name).

 A plastic sachet allegedly containing methamphetamine hydrochloride was seized from
him.
 However, this court notes with grave concern the lapses in the chain of custody.
 As mandated by Section 21, Article II of R.A. 9165, the presence of three required
witnesses during inventory — a barangay official, media, and DOJ rep — was not
secured.
 No sufficient explanation was given for their absence, nor were alternative measures
taken to ensure the integrity of the evidence.
 These procedural safeguards exist to prevent planting, tampering, or substitution of
evidence — and are not mere technicalities.

As held by the Supreme Court in multiple rulings, failure to comply with Section 21, without
justifiable reason, is fatal to the prosecution’s case.

Disposition: In view of the foregoing, this Court finds that the prosecution failed to establish the
guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

WHEREFORE, the Court hereby ACQUITS accused (name) of the charge of Violation of
Section 11, Article II, R.A. 9165, for possession of dangerous drugs.

The accused is ordered immediately released from detention unless he is held for some other
lawful cause.

SO ORDERED.