Category Archives: Presumption of Regularity

Is the existence of all dangerous drugs a sine qua non for conviction?

Next, appellant argues that the prosecution failed to prove the corpus delicti of the crime. In particular, she alleged that the apprehending police officers failed to follow the procedure in the custody of seized prohibited and regulated drugs, instruments, apparatuses, … Continue reading

Posted in Dangerous Drug Act, Evidence, Presumption of Regularity | Tagged , | Leave a comment