Flashcards Studio

During a home invasion case, investigators recover a sealed vial containing a bloodstain from a suspect's jacket. The vial is placed in a tamper-evident plastic bag and sealed by Officer R, who initials the bag. The seal number and sealing time are not recorded in the custody log. The bag is entrusted to a civilian courier who delivers it to the municipal crime laboratory. At the laboratory, forensic analysts extract DNA from the blood, generate a DNA profile report, and place the remaining sample into a new sealed vial, which is resealed and logged by Analyst S. The original vial remains in the police property room. At trial, the People seek to admit the DNA profile as real evidence. The defense objects, arguing that the chain of custody is broken because (i) the seal number and sealing time were not recorded; (ii) a civilian courier was used without a formal custody-audit trail; and (iii) there is no hash verification of the digital report. Analyze whether the DNA profile and sample are admissible as real evidence and discuss what constitutes proper chain of custody under Philippine law, including how gaps can be cured. (a) Identify the controlling doctrine. (b) Distinguish the elements required to establish chain of custody and assess whether the facts demonstrate a complete chain. (c) Apply to the facts: is the DNA profile/admissible? what steps could cure any gaps?