THE Court of Appeals (CA) has upheld the warrant of arrest issued against a former barangay captain tagged as Manila City’s “drug queen” for allegedly organizing a drug ring with the help of “ninja cops.”
In a 16-page decision promulgated on November 15, the appellate court’s Third Division through Associate Justice Jaime Fortunato Karingal dismissed the petition of Guia Gomez Castro, who won as chairperson of Barangay 484 in Sampaloc, Manila in 2018, seeking to set aside the arrest warrant issued against her by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court in connection with the killing of PO1 Roderick Valencia, a suspected reseller of seized illegal drugs supposedly under her payroll.
Police records showed Valencia was fatally shot at Barangay Salvacion in Quezon City by two motorcycle-riding men on July 13, 2011.
The case remained unresolved for eight years until the driver of the motorcycle, identified as Ernesto Encarnado, executed an extrajudicial confession implicating the former barangay chair in the killing.
Encarnado claimed that Castro wanted Valencia dead after the latter failed to remit money from the sales of recycled illegal drugs.
This led the police to file murder charges against Castro who denied the allegation linking her to the killing of Valencia.
On June 2, 2021, Branch 88 of the QC RTC Branch 88 denied Castro’s motion to quash and recall the warrant of arrest issued against her on February 11, 2021.
But the presiding judge subsequently recused from the case, which was re-raffled to Branch 224, which affirmed the warrant.
Castro then elevated the case to the CA, arguing that the RTC abused its discretion when it upheld the warrant of arrest despite lack of basis.
She said that Encarnado’s story was fabricated and that he was being manipulated by unscrupulous individuals to falsely implicate her in drug-related charges. She also emphasized that the accusations were unfounded, especially considering her acquittal in a prior drug case.
She also argued that the long delay in the case should warrant its dismissal.
But the CA in its decision dismissed Castro’s arguments, saying that it should be raised in the trial proper of the case.
“We agree with the Office of the Solicitor General. There is no grave abuse of discretion when the trial courts issued the assailed Orders,” the CA said, adding that the “trial courts’ finding of probable cause to issue a warrant of arrest against Castro is justified by the evidence presented before it.”
“Ernesto’s detailed statement provides strong grounds for the trial courts to believe his account for purposes of issuing a warrant of arrest against Guia. He established a longstanding relationship with Guia, citing their shared neighborhood and collaborative involvement in illegal drug activities. Crucially, he delivered a coherent and plausible narrative detailing Guia’s conspiracy to murder Valencia. This included her directive to find a gunman and her provision of PO1 Valencia’s whereabouts. Furthermore, Ernesto disclosed the reward they received from Guia for their role in the crime,” the CA added.
With this, the CA held that “in our assessment, there is nothing capricious or whimsical in the trial courts’ finding of probable cause to issue a warrant of arrest against Guia” and ruled that her petition for certiorari has no basis.
Concurring with the decision are Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas Jr. and Ruben Reynaldo Roxas.
