Poli Searches and Seizure

Narratives
Constitutional Law II
Michael Vernon Guerrero Mendiola
2005
Shared under Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial-ShareAlie !"0 #hili$$ines license"
Some %i&hts %eserved"
'able o( Contents
Alvero vs" )i*on +G% L-!,2- , Ma. /0,12 3 /
#eo$le vs" Andre Marti +G% 4/51/- /4 5anuar. /00/2 3 /
6ache 7 Co" 8#hil"9 Inc" vs" %ui* +G% L-!2,00- 2: ;ebruar. /0:/2 3 2
Stonehill vs" )iono +G% L-/0550- /0 5une /01:2 3 ,
<urcher vs" Stan(ord )ail. +,!1 =S 5,:- !/ Ma. /0:42 """ 5
>ilson vs" La.ne +521 =S 10!- 2, Ma. /0002 3 1
6ur&os v" Chie( o( Sta((- A;# +G% 1,21/- 21 )ecember /04,2 3 4
Chandler vs" Miler +520 =S !05- /5 A$ril /00:2 3 4
#eo$le vs" Chua ?o San +G% /24222- /: 5une /0002 3 /0
#eo$le vs" Molina +G% /!!0/:- /0 ;ebruar. 200/2 3 //
Solid 'rian&le Sales Cor$" vs" Sitchon +G% /,,!00- 2! November 200/2 3 /2
#eo$le vs" Salan&uit +G% /!!25,-55- /0 A$ril 200/2 3 /,
Amar&a vs" Abbas +G% L-4111- 24 March /0512 3 /5
Sta" %osa Minin& Com$an. vs" Assistant #rovincial ;iscal <abala +G% L-,,:2!- !/ Au&ust /04:2 3 /1
#eo$le vs" Intin& +G% 440/0- 25 5ul. /0002 3 /:
#aderan&a vs" )rilon +G% 01040- /0 A$ril /00/2 3 /4
#ita vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% 40401- 5 @ctober /0402 3 /0
Abdula vs" Guiani +G% //442/- /4 ;ebruar. 20002 3 20
#asion Vda" de Garcia vs" Locsin +G% ,5050- 20 5une /0!42 3 22
Aee Sue Bo. vs" Almeda +G% ,:02/- /5 5une /0,02 "" 2!
Alvare* vs" Court o( ;irst Instance o( 'a.abas +G% ,5!54- 20 5anuar. /0!:2 3 2,
Mata vs" 6a.ona +G% 50:20- 21 March /04,2 3 21
@lae* vs" #eo$le o( the #hili$$ines +G% :4!,:-,0- 0 November /04:2 3 21
#rudente vs" )a.rit +G% 424:0- /, )ecember /0402 3 2:
Chia vs" Actin& Collector o( Customs +G% L-,!4/0- 21 Se$tember /0402 3 24
20th Centur. ;oC ;ilm Cor$oration vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% L-:11,0-5/- /0 Au&ust /0442 3 20
Nolasco vs" Cru* #ano +G% L-1040!- 4 @ctober /0452 3 !0
#a$er Industries Cor$oration o( the #hili$$ines vs" Asuncion +G% /22002- /0 Ma. /0002 3 !2
Aouse( Al-Ghoul vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /21450- , Se$tember 200/2 3 !!
#eo$le v" @mawen& +G% 00050- 2 Se$tember /0022 3 !,
#eo$le vs" Correa +G% //02,1- !0 5anuar. /0042 3 !5
#eo$le v" %amos +G% 45,0/-02- , 5une /0002 3 !1
#eo$le v" 6arros +G% 001,0- 20 March /00,2 3 !:
Vero. v" La.a&ue +G% 051!0- /4 5une /0022 3 !4
#eo$le vs" )amaso +G% 0!5/1- /2 Au&ust /0022 3 !0
Lo$e* vs" Commissioner o( Customs +G% L-2:014- ! )ecember /0:52 3 ,/
Caballes vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /!1202- /5 5anuar. 20022 3 ,/
#eo$le vs" Asis +G% /,25!/- /5 @ctober 20022 3 ,!
#eo$le vs" 'udtud +G% /,,0!:- 21 Se$tember 200!2 3 ,,
Chimel vs" Cali(ornia +!05 =S :52- 2! 5une /0102 3 ,1
#eo$le vs" dela Cru* +G% 4!210- /4 A$ril /0002 3 ,:
#eo$le v" Balubiran +G% 4,0:0- 1 Ma. /00/2 3 ,:
#eo$le v" Malmstedt +G% 0//0:- /0 5une /00/2 3 ,4
Ds$ano vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /20,!/- / A$ril /0042 3 ,0
#eo$le vs" 'an&liben +G% L-1!1!0- 1 A$ril /0002 3 50
#eo$le v" Che Chun 'in& +G% /!0514-10- 2/ March 20002 3 5/
#eo$le vs" Dstrella +G% /!45!0-,0- 2/ 5anuar. 200!2 3 52
#eo$le vs" Libnao +G% /!1410- 20 5anuar. 200!2 3 5,
#eo$le v" Musa +G% 01/::- 2: 5anuar. /00!2 3 55
#adilla vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /2/0/:- /2 March /00:2 3 51
#eo$le vs" Valde* +G% /20201- 25 Se$tember 20002 3 54
Ari*ona v" ?ics +,40 =S !2/- ! March /04:2 3 10
#eo$le vs" Com$acion +G% /2,,,2- 20 5ul. 200/2 3 1/
%oldan vs" Arca +G% L-25,!,- 25 5ul. /0:52 3 12
?i*on vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% //01/0- /! )ecember /0012 3 1,
#eo$le vs" Gatward +G%s //0::2-:!- : ;ebruar. /00:2 3 11
#eo$le vs" 5ohnson +G% /!444/- /4 )ecember 20002 3 1:
#eo$le vs" Su*ui +G% /201:0- 2! @ctober 200!2 3 14
6ureau o( Customs vs" @&ario +G% /!404/- !0 March 20002 3 :0
'err. vs" @hio +!02 =S /- /0 5une /0142 3 :/
#eo$le v" Sola.ao +G% //0220- 20 Se$tember /0012 3 :2
Manalili v" CA +G% //!,,:- 0 @ctober /00:2 3 :!
Malacat vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /2!505- /2 )ecember /00:2 3 :,
;lorida vs" 5"L" +000 =S 04-/00!- 24 March 20002 3 :1
#eo$le vs" 6alin&an +G% /054!,- /! ;ebruar. /0052 3 :1
Asuncion vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /25050- / ;ebruar. /0002 3 :4
#a$a vs" Ma&o +G% L-2:!10- 24 ;ebruar. /0142 3 :0
#eo$le vs" C;I %i*al- 6ranch IE- Fue*on Cit. +G% L-,/141- /: November /0402 3 40
>hren v" =nited States + 5/: =S 401 8No" 05-54,/9- /0 5une /0012 3 42
Aransas vs" Sullivan +000 =S 00-212- 20 Ma. 200/2 3 4!
#eo$le vs" de Gracia +G% /02000-/0- 1 5ul. /00,2 3 4,
Valmonte vs" de Villa +G% 4!044- 2, Ma. /0002 3 45
Ania& vs" Commission on Dlections +G% /0,01/- : @ctober /00,2 3 4:
#eo$le vs" Dscano- =sana and Lo$e* +G% /20:51-54- 24 5anuar. 20002 3 44
Camara vs" Munici$al Court o( the Cit. and Countr. o( San ;rancisco +!4: =S 52!- 5 5une /01:2 3 40
In %DG =mil- =mil vs" %amos +G% 4/51:- 0 5ul. /0002 3 00
#eo$le vs" Sucro +G% 0!2!0- /4 March /00/2 3 0/
#eo$le vs" )oria +G% /25200- 22 5anuar. /0002 3 02
#eo$le vs" Go +G% //100/- /, March 200/2H also Go vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /2!0,!2 3 0,
#eo$le vs" de Gu*man +G% //:052-5!- /, ;ebruar. 200/2 3 01
#eo$le vs" Gerente +G% 054,:-,4- /0 March /00!2 3 0:
#eo$le vs" Sinoc +G% //!5//-/2- / 5ul. /00:2 3 04
#eo$le vs" 6aula +G% /!21:/- /5 November 20002 3 00
#eo$le vs" Cubcubin +G% /!121:- /0 5ul. 200/2 3 /0/
#eo$le vs" %odri&ue*a +G% 05002- , ;ebruar. /0022 3 /02
Go vs" Court o( A$$eals +G% /0/4!:- // ;ebruar. /0022 3 /0,
#eo$le vs" Calimlim +G% /2!040- !0 Au&ust 200/2 3 /01
#eo$le vs" Dnrile +G% :,/40- 21 Ma. /00!2 3 /0:
#eo$le vs" #asuda& +G% /24422- , Ma. 200/2 3 /04
#eo$le vs" Aminnudin +G% L-:,410- 1 5ul. /0442 "" /04
#eo$le vs" #lana +G% /24245- 2: November 200/2 3 /00
#eo$le vs" Conde +G% //!210- /0 A$ril 200/2 3 //0
This collection contains ninety-two (92) cases
summarized in this format by
Michael Vernon M. Guerrero (as a senior law student)
during the irst !emester" school year 2##$-2##%
in the &olitical 'aw (e)iew class
under *ean Mariano Magsalin +r.
at the ,rellano -ni)ersity !chool of 'aw (,-!').
.om/iled as &*" !e/tember 2#02.
1erne Guerrero entered ,-!' in +une 2##2
and e)entually graduated from ,-!' in 2##%.
2e /assed the &hili//ine bar e3aminations immediately after (,/ril 2##4).
berne&uerrero"word$ress"com
Narratives (Berne Guerrero)
121 Alvero vs. Dizon [GR L-342, 4 May 1946]
En Banc, de Joya (J): 4 concur, 4 acting justices concur
Facs! On 12 February 1945, while the battle for Manila was raging, soldiers of the United States Army,
aom!anied by men of Fili!ino "uerrilla Fores, !laed Aurelio S# Al$ero under arrest, ha$ing been
sus!eted of ollaboration with the enemy, and sei%ed and too& ertain !a!ers from his house in 'asay, (i%al#
On or about 4 Otober 1945, Al$ero was aused of treason, in riminal ase ) of the 'eo!le*s +ourt, after
whih, on 1 -eember 1945, he filed a !etition, demanding the return of the !a!ers allegedly sei%ed and ta&en
from his house# Al$ero also filed a !etition for bail, at the hearing of whih the !roseution !resented ertain
!a!ers and douments, whih were admitted as !art of its e$idene, and said !etition was denied# At the trial
of the ase on the merits, the !roseution again !resented said !a!ers and douments, whih were admitted as
!art of its e$idene, and were mar&ed as e.hibits# On 2/ February 194/, the 0udges issued an order denying
the !etition for the return of the douments, and admitted as om!etent e$idene the douments !resented by
the !roseution# On the same date that said order was issued, denying the !etition for the return of said
douments, Al$ero as&ed for the reonsideration of said order, whih was also denied# Al$ero filed a !etition
for ertiorari with in0untion with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the douments sei%ed by United States Army !ersonnel at Al$ero2s home an be used as
e$idene against the latter#
$el%! 3he right of offiers and men of the United States Army to arrest Al$ero, as a ollaborationist sus!et,
and to sei%e his !ersonal !a!ers, without any searh warrant, in the %one of military o!erations, is
un4uestionable, under the !ro$isions of artile 4, +ha!ter 55, Setion 5, of the (egulations relati$e to the 6aws
and +ustoms of 1ar on 6and of the 7ague +on$entions of 1989, authori%ing the sei%ure of military !a!ers in
the !ossession of !risoners of war, and also under the !rolamation, dated 29 -eember 1944, issued by "en#
-ouglas MaArthur, as +ommander in +hief of the United States Army, delaring his !ur!ose to remo$e
ertain iti%ens of the 'hili!!ines, who had $oluntarily gi$en aid and omfort to the enemy, in $iolation of the
allegiane due the "o$ernments of the United States and the +ommonwealth of the 'hili!!ines, when
a!!rehended, from any !osition of !olitial and eonomi influene in the 'hili!!ines and to hold them in
restraint for the duration of the war# 3he !ur!ose of the onstitutional !ro$isions against unlawful searhes
and sei%ures is to !re$ent $iolations of !ri$ate seurity in !erson and !ro!erty, and unlawful in$asions of the
santity of the home, by offiers of the law ating under legislati$e or 0udiial santion, and to gi$e remedy
against suh usur!ations when attem!ted# :ut it does not !rohibit the "o$ernment from ta&ing ad$antage of
unlawful searhes made by a !ri$ate !erson or under authority of state law# 7erein, as the soldiers of the
United States Army, that too& and sei%ed ertain !a!ers and douments from the residene of Al$ero, were not
ating as agents or on behalf of the "o$ernment of the +ommonwealth of the 'hili!!ines, and that those
!a!ers and douments ame into the !ossession of the authorities of the +ommonwealth "o$ernment, through
the Offie of the +5+ of the United States Army in Manila, the use and !resentation of said !a!ers and
douments, as e$idene for the !roseution against Al$ero, at the trial of his ase for treason, before the
'eo!le*s +ourt, annot now be legally atta&ed, on the ground of unlawful or unreasonable searhes and
sei%ures, or on any other onstitutional ground, as delared by the Su!reme +ourt of the United States in
similar ases# ;See :urdeau $s# M-owell, 25/ U# S#, 4/5, "ambino $s# United States, 295 U# S#, )18#<
122 &eo'le vs. An%re Mari [GR (1)61, 1( *an#ary 1991]
Third Division, Bidin (J): 3 concur
Facs! On 14 August 19=9, Andre Marti and his ommon>law wife, Shirley (eyes, went to the booth of the
Manila 'a&ing and ?.!ort Forwarders in the 'istang 'ili!ino +om!le., ?rmita, Manila, arrying with them
4 gift>wra!!ed !a&ages# Anita (eyes ;the !ro!rietress and no relation to Shirley (eyes< attended to them#
Marti informed Anita (eyes that he was sending the !a&ages to a friend in @urih, Swit%erland# Marti filled
u! the ontrat neessary for the transation, writing therein his name, !ass!ort number, the date of shi!ment
Constitutional Law II, 2005 ( 1 )
and the name and address of the onsignee, namely, A1A63?( F5?(@, Matta&etr 55, =852 @urih,
Swit%erland#A Anita (eyes did not ins!et the !a&ages as Marti refused, who assured the former that the
!a&ages sim!ly ontained boo&s, igars, and glo$es and were gifts to his friend in @urih# 5n $iew of Marti*s
re!resentation, the 4 !a&ages were then !laed inside a brown orrugated bo., with styro>foam !laed at the
bottom and on to! of the !a&ages, and sealed with mas&ing ta!e# :efore deli$ery of Marti*s bo. to the
:ureau of +ustoms andBor :ureau of 'osts, Mr# Cob (eyes ;!ro!rietor< and husband of Anita ;(eyes<,
following standard o!erating !roedure, o!ened the bo.es for final ins!etion, where a !euliar odor emitted
therefrom# Cob !ulled out a ello!hane wra!!er !rotruding from the o!ening of one of the glo$es, and too&
se$eral grams of the ontents thereof# Cob (eyes forthwith !re!ared a letter re!orting the shi!ment to the D:5
and re4uesting a laboratory e.amination of the sam!les he e.trated from the ello!hane wra!!er# At the
Darotis Setion of the Dational :ureau of 5n$estigation ;D:5<, the bo. ontaining Marti*s !a&ages was
o!ened, yielding dried mari0uana lea$es, or a&e>li&e ;bri&s< dried mari0uana lea$es# 3he D:5 agents made
an in$entory and too& harge of the bo. and of the ontents thereof, after signing a A(eei!tA a&nowledging
ustody of the said effets# 3hereu!on, the D:5 agents tried to loate Marti but to no a$ail, inasmuh as the
latter*s stated address was the Manila +entral 'ost Offie# 3hereafter, an 5nformation was filed against Marti
for $iolation of (A /425, otherwise &nown as the -angerous -rugs At# After trial, the S!eial +riminal
+ourt of Manila ;(egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh E65E< rendered the deision, on$iting Marti of $iolation of
Setion 21 ;b<, Artile 5F in relation to Setion 4, Artile 11 and Setion 2 ;e<;i<, Artile 1 of (e!ubli At
/425, as amended, otherwise &nown as the -angerous -rugs At# Marti a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether an at of a !ri$ate indi$idual, allegedly in $iolation of the aused*s onstitutional rights, be
in$o&ed against the State#
$el%! 5n the absene of go$ernmental interferene, the liberties guaranteed by the +onstitution annot be
in$o&ed against the State# 3he ontraband herein, ha$ing ome into !ossession of the "o$ernment without the
latter transgressing the aused*s rights against unreasonable searh and sei%ure, the +ourt sees no ogent
reason why the same should not be admitted against him in the !roseution of the offense harged# 3he mere
!resene of the D:5 agents did not on$ert the reasonable searh effeted by (eyes into a warrantless searh
and sei%ure !rosribed by the +onstitution# Merely to obser$e and loo& at that whih is in !lain sight is not a
searh# 7a$ing obser$ed that whih is o!en, where no tres!ass has been ommitted in aid thereof, is not
searh# 1here the ontraband artiles are identified without a tres!ass on the !art of the arresting offier, there
is not the searh that is !rohibited by the onstitution# 3he onstitutional !rosri!tion against unlawful
searhes and sei%ures therefore a!!lies as a restraint direted only against the go$ernment and its agenies
tas&ed with the enforement of the law# 3hus, it ould only be in$o&ed against the State to whom the restraint
against arbitrary and unreasonable e.erise of !ower is im!osed# 5f the searh is made u!on the re4uest of
law enforers, a warrant must generally be first seured if it is to !ass the test of onstitutionality# 7owe$er, if
the searh is made at the behest or initiati$e of the !ro!rietor of a !ri$ate establishment for its own and !ri$ate
!ur!oses, as in the ase at bar, and without the inter$ention of !olie authorities, the right against
unreasonable searh and sei%ure annot be in$o&ed for only the at of !ri$ate indi$idual, not the law
enforers, is in$ol$ed# 5n sum, the !rotetion against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures annot be e.tended
to ats ommitted by !ri$ate indi$iduals so as to bring it within the ambit of alleged unlawful intrusion by the
go$ernment#
123 +ac,e - .o. /&,il.0 "nc. vs. R#iz [GR L-32419, 22 Fe3r#ary 1921]
En Banc, Villamor (J): concur, ! "iled a se#arate concurring o#inion to $hich ! concurs, ! concurs in
result
Facs! On 24 February 1998, Misael '# Fera, +ommissioner of 5nternal (e$enue, wrote a letter addressed to
Cudge Fi$enio M# (ui% re4uesting the issuane of a searh warrant against :ahe G +o# ;'hil#<, 5n# and
Frederi& ?# Seggerman for $iolation of Setion 4/;a< of the Dational 5nternal (e$enue +ode ;D5(+<, in
relation to all other !ertinent !ro$isions thereof, !artiularly Setions 5), 92, 9), 28= and 289, and authori%ing
(e$enue ?.aminer (odolfo de 6eon to ma&e and file the a!!liation for searh warrant whih was attahed
to the letter# 5n the afternoon of the following day, -e 6eon and his witness, Arturo 6ogronio, went to the
+ourt of First 5nstane ;+F5< of (i%al# 3hey brought with them the following !a!ersH Fera*s letter>re4uest, an
a!!liation for searh warrant already filled u! but still unsigned by -e 6eon, an affida$it of 6ogronio
subsribed before -e 6eon, a de!osition in !rinted form of 6ogronio already aom!lished and signed by him
but not yet subsribed, and a searh warrant already aom!lished but still unsigned by Cudge# At that time
the Cudge was hearing a ertain ase, so, by means of a note, he instruted his -e!uty +ler& of +ourt to ta&e
the de!ositions of -e 6eon and 6ogronio# After the session had ad0ourned, the Cudge was informed that the
de!ositions had already been ta&en# 3he stenogra!her, u!on re4uest of the Cudge, read to him her stenogra!hi
notes, and thereafter, the Cudge as&ed 6ogronio to ta&e the oath and warned him that if his de!osition was
found to be false and without legal basis, he ould be harged for !er0ury# 3he Cudge signed de 6eon*s
a!!liation for searh warrant and 6ogronio*s de!osition# Searh 1arrant 2>M>98 was then signed by Cudge
and aordingly issued# ) days later ;a Saturday<, the :5( agents ser$ed the searh warrant to the or!oration
and Seggerman at the offies of the or!oration on Ayala A$enue, Ma&ati, (i%al# 3he or!oration*s lawyers
!rotested the searh on the ground that no formal om!laint or transri!t of testimony was attahed to the
warrant# 3he agents ne$ertheless !roeeded with their searh whih yielded / bo.es of douments# On )
Marh 1998, the or!oration and Seggerman filed a !etition with the +ourt of First 5nstane ;+F5< of (i%al
!raying that the searh warrant be 4uashed, dissol$ed or realled, that !reliminary !rohibitory and mandatory
writs of in0untion be issued, that the searh warrant be delared null and $oid, and that Fera, 6ogronio, de
6eon, et# al#, be ordered to !ay the or!oration and Seggerman, 0ointly and se$erally, damages and attorney*s
fees# After hearing and on 29 Culy 1998, the ourt issued an order dismissing the !etition for dissolution of the
searh warrant# 5n the meantime, or on 1/ A!ril 1998, the :ureau of 5nternal (e$enue made ta. assessments
on the or!oration in the total sum of '2,594,929#99, !artly, if not entirely, based on the douments thus
sei%ed# 3he or!oration and Seggerman filed an ation for ertiorari, !rohibition, and mandamus#
"ss#e! 1hether the or!oration has the right to ontest the legality of the sei%ure of douments from its offie#
$el%! 3he legality of a sei%ure an be ontested only by the !arty whose rights ha$e been im!aired thereby,
and that the ob0etion to an unlawful searh and sei%ure is !urely !ersonal and annot be a$ailed of by third
!arties# 5n Stonehill, et al# $s# -io&no, et al# ;"( 6>19558, 19 Cune 19/9, 28 S+(A )=)< the Su!reme +ourt
im!liedly reogni%ed the right of a or!oration to ob0et against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, holding
that the or!orations ha$e their res!eti$e !ersonalities, se!arate and distint from the !ersonality of the
or!orate offiers, regardless of the amount of shares of sto& or the interest of eah of them in said
or!orations, whate$er, the offies they hold therein may be, and that the or!orate offiers therefore may not
$alidly ob0et to the use in e$idene against them of the douments, !a!ers and things sei%ed from the offies
and !remises of the or!orations, sine the right to ob0et to the admission of said !a!ers in e$idene belongs
e.lusi$ely to the or!orations, to whom the sei%ed effets belong, and may not be in$o&ed by the or!orate
offiers in !roeedings against them in their indi$idual a!aity# 3he distintion between the Stonehill ase
and the !resent ase is thatH in the former ase, only the offiers of the $arious or!orations in whose offies
douments, !a!ers and effets were searhed and sei%ed were the !etitioners, while in the latter, the
or!oration to whom the sei%ed douments belong, and whose rights ha$e thereby been im!aired, is itself a
!etitioner# On that sore, the or!oration herein stands on a different footing from the or!orations in
Stonehill# Moreo$er, herein, the searh warrant was $oid inasmuh as First, there was no !ersonal
e.amination onduted by the Cudge of the om!lainant ;-e 6eon< and his witness ;6ogronio<# 3he Cudge did
not as& either of the two any 4uestion the answer to whih ould !ossibly be the basis for determining
whether or not there was !robable ause against :ahe G +o# and Seggerman# 3he !artii!ation of the Cudge
in the !roeedings whih led to the issuane of Searh 1arrant 2>M>98 was thus limited to listening to the
stenogra!her*s readings of her notes, to a few words of warning against the ommission of !er0ury, and to
administering the oath to the om!lainant and his witness# 3his annot be onsider a !ersonal e.amination#
Seond, the searh warrant was issued for more than one s!eifi offense# 3he searh warrant was issued for
at least 4 distint offenses under the 3a. +ode# 3he first is the $iolation of Setion 4/;a<, Setion 92 and
Setion 9) ;the filing of inome ta. returns<, whih are interrelated# 3he seond is the $iolation of Setion 5)
;withholding of inome ta.es at soure<# 3he third is the $iolation of Setion 28= ;unlawful !ursuit of
business or ou!ation<, and the fourth is the $iolation of Setion 289 ;failure to ma&e a return of reei!ts,
sales, business or gross $alue of out!ut atually remo$ed or to !ay the ta. due thereon<# ?$en in their
lassifiation the / !ro$isions are embraed in 2 different titlesH Setions 4/;a<, 5), 92 and 9) are under 3itle
55 ;5nome 3a.<, while Setions 28= and 289 are under 3itle F ;'ri$ilege 3a. on :usiness and Ou!ation<#
6astly, the searh warrant does not !artiularly desribe the things to be sei%ed# Searh 1arrant Do# 2>M>98
tends to defeat the ma0or ob0eti$e of the :ill of (ights, i#e#, the elimination of general warrants, for the
language used therein is so all>embraing as to inlude all onei$able reords of the or!oration, whih, if
sei%ed, ould !ossibly render its business ino!erati$e# 3hus, Searh 1arrant 2>M>98 is null and $oid#
124 4one,ill vs. Dio5no [GR L-19))1, 19 *#ne 1962]
En Banc, %once#cion (%J): & concur
Facs! U!on a!!liation of the offiers of the go$ernment, S!eial 'roseutors 'edro -# +en%on, ?fren 5#
'lana and Manuel Fillareal Cr# and Assistant Fisal Manases "# (eyes, Cudge Amado (oan ;Munii!al +ourt
of Manila<, Cudge (oman +ansino ;Munii!al +ourt of Manila<, Cudge 7ermogenes +aluag ;+ourt of First
5nstane of (i%al>Iue%on +ity :ranh<, and Cudge -amian Cimene% ;Munii!al +ourt of Iue%on +ity< issued,
on different dates, a total of 42 searh warrants against 7arry S# Stonehill, (obert '# :roo&s, 7Cohn C# :roo&s,
and Jarl :e&, andBor the or!orations of whih they were offiers, direted to any !eae offier, to searh the
said !ersons andBor the !remises of their offies, warehouses andBor residenes, and to sei%e and ta&e
!ossession of the following !ersonal !ro!erty to witH A:oo&s of aounts, finanial reords, $ouhers,
orres!ondene, reei!ts, ledgers, 0ournals, !ortfolios, redit 0ournals, ty!ewriters, and other douments
andBor !a!ers showing all business transations inluding disbursements reei!ts, balane sheets and !rofit
and loss statements and :obbins ;igarette wra!!ers<A as Athe sub0et of the offense, stolen or embe%%led and
!roeeds or fruits of the offense,A or Aused or intended to be used as the means of ommitting the offense,A
whih is desribed in the a!!liations ad$erted to abo$e as A$iolation of +entral :an& 6aws, 3ariff and
+ustoms 6aws, 5nternal (e$enue ;+ode< and the (e$ised 'enal +ode#A Alleging that the searh warrants are
null and $oid, as ontra$ening the +onstitution and the (ules of +ourt, Stonehill, et# al# filed with the
Su!reme +ourt the original ation for ertiorari, !rohibition, mandamus and in0untion# On 22 Marh 19/2,
the Su!reme +ourt issued the writ of !reliminary in0untion !rayed for in the !etition# 7owe$er, by resolution
dated 29 Cune 19/2, the writ was !artially lifted or dissol$ed, insofar as the !a!ers, douments and things
sei%ed from the offies of the or!orations are onerned, but, the in0untion was maintained as regards the
!a!ers, douments and things found and sei%ed in the residenes of Stonehill, et# al#
"ss#e! 1hether Stonehill, et# al# an assail the legality of the ontested warrants that allowed sei%ure of
douments, !a!ers and other effets in the or!orate offies, and other !laes besides their residenes#
$el%! Stonehill, et# al# maintained that the searh warrants are in the nature of general warrants and that,
aordingly, the sei%ures effeted u!on the authority thereof are null and $oid# Do warrant shall issue but u!on
!robable ause, to be determined by the 0udge in the manner set forth in said !ro$ision, and the warrant shall
!artiularly desribe the things to be sei%ed# Done of these re4uirements has been om!lied with in the
ontested warrants# 3he gra$e $iolation of the +onstitution made in the a!!liation for the ontested searh
warrants was om!ounded by the desri!tion therein made of the effets to be searhed for and sei%ed# 3he
warrants authori%ed the searh for and sei%ure of reords !ertaining to all business transations of Stonehill,
et# al#, regardless of whether the transations were legal or illegal# 3he warrants santioned the sei%ure of all
reords of the or!orate offiers and the or!orations, whate$er their nature, thus o!enly ontra$ening the
e.!liit ommand of our :ill of (ights K that the things to be sei%ed be !artiularly desribed K as well as
tending to defeat its ma0or ob0eti$eH the elimination of general warrants# 7owe$er, the douments, !a!ers,
and things sei%ed under the alleged authority of the warrants in 4uestion may be s!lit into ;2< ma0or grou!s,
namelyH ;a< those found and sei%ed in the offies of the or!orations and ;b< those found sei%ed in the
residenes of Stonehill, et# al# As regards the first grou!, Stonehill, et# al# ha$e no ause of ation to assail the
legality of the ontested warrants and of the sei%ures made in !ursuane thereof, for the sim!le reason that
said or!orations ha$e their res!eti$e !ersonalities, se!arate and distint from the !ersonality of Stonehill, et#
al#, regardless of the amount of shares of sto& or of the interest of eah of them in said or!orations, and
whate$er the offies they hold therein may be# 5ndeed, it is well settled that the legality of a sei%ure an be
ontested only by the !arty whose rights ha$e been im!aired thereby, and that the ob0etion to an unlawful
searh and sei%ure is !urely !ersonal and annot be a$ailed of by third !arties# +onse4uently, Stonehill, et# al#
may not $alidly ob0et to the use in e$idene against them of the douments, !a!ers and things sei%ed from
the offies and !remises of the or!orations ad$erted to abo$e, sine the right to ob0et to the admission of
said !a!ers in e$idene belongs e.lusi$ely to the or!orations, to whom the sei%ed effets belong, and may
not be in$o&ed by the or!orate offiers in !roeedings against them in their indi$idual a!aity# 1ith res!et
to the douments, !a!ers and things sei%ed in the residenes of Stonehill, et# al#, the 29 Cune 19/2 (esolution
of the Su!reme +ourt, denying the lifting of the writ of !reliminary in0untion !re$iously issued by the +ourt
on the douments, !a!ers and things sei%ed in the residenes, in effet, restrained the !roseutors from using
them in e$idene against Stonehill, et# al# 3hus, the +ourt held that the warrants for the searh of ) residenes
are null and $oid, that the searhes and sei%ures therein made are illegal, that the writ of !reliminary
in0untion heretofore issued, in onnetion with the douments, !a!ers and other effets thus sei%ed in said
residenes is made !ermanent, that the writs !rayed for are granted, insofar as the douments, !a!ers and
other effets so sei%ed in the residenes are onerned, and that the !etition herein is dismissed and the writs
!rayed for denied, as regards the douments, !a!ers and other effets sei%ed in the 29 !laes, offies and other
!remises#
12) 6#rc,er vs. 4an7or% Daily [436 84 )42, 31 May 192(]
'hite (J): 3 concur, ! "iled a se#arate concurring o#inion, ( "iled se#arate dissenting o#inions, to $hich !
joined, ! too) no #art*
Facs! On 9 A!ril 1991, offiers of the 'alo Alto 'olie -e!artment and of the Santa +lara +ounty Sheriff*s
-e!artment res!onded to a all from the diretor of the Stanford Uni$ersity 7os!ital re4uesting the remo$al
of a large grou! of demonstrators who had sei%ed the hos!ital*s administrati$e offies and ou!ied them
sine the !re$ious afternoon# After se$eral futile efforts to !ersuade the demonstrators to lea$e !eaefully,
more drasti measures were em!loyed# 3he !olie hose to fore their way in at the west end of the orridor#
As they did so, a grou! of demonstrators emerged through the doors at the east end and, armed with sti&s and
lubs, atta&ed the grou! of nine !olie offiers stationed there# All nine were in0ured# 3he offiers themsel$es
were able to identify only two of their assailants, but one of them did see at least one !erson !hotogra!hing
the assault at the east doors# On A!ril 11 ;Sunday<, a s!eial edition of the Stanford -aily ;-aily<, a student
news!a!er !ublished at Stanford Uni$ersity, arried artiles and !hotogra!hs de$oted to the hos!ital !rotest
and the $iolent lash between demonstrators and !olie# 3he !hotogra!hs arried the byline of a -aily staff
member and indiated that he had been at the east end of the hos!ital hallway where he ould ha$e
!hotogra!hed the assault on the 9 offiers# 3he ne.t day, the Santa +lara +ounty -istrit Attorney*s Offie
seured a warrant from the Munii!al +ourt for an immediate searh of the -aily*s offies for negati$es, film,
and !itures showing the e$ents and ourrenes at the hos!ital on the e$ening of A!ril 9# 3he warrant issued
on a finding of A0ust, !robable and reasonable ause for belie$ing thatH Degati$es and !hotogra!hs and films,
e$idene material and rele$ant to the identity of the !er!etrators of felonies, to wit, :attery on a 'eae
Offier, and Assault with -eadly 1ea!on, will be loated Lon the !remises of the -ailyM#A 3he warrant
affida$it ontained no allegation or indiation that members of the -aily staff were in any way in$ol$ed in
unlawful ats at the hos!ital# 3he searh !ursuant to the warrant was onduted later that day by 4 !olie
offiers and too& !lae in the !resene of some members of the -aily staff# 3he -aily*s !hotogra!hi
laboratories, filing abinets, des&s, and waste!a!er bas&ets were searhed# 6o&ed drawers and rooms were
not o!ened# 3he searh re$ealed only the !hotogra!hs that had already been !ublished on A!ril 11, and no
materials were remo$ed from the -aily*s offie# A month later the -aily and $arious members of its staff
brought a i$il ation in the United States -istrit +ourt for the Dorthern -istrit of +alifornia see&ing
delaratory and in0unti$e relief under 42 U#S#+# 19=) against the !olie offiers who onduted the searh,
the hief of !olie, the distrit attorney and one of his de!uties, and the 0udge who had issued the warrant# 3he
om!laint alleged that the searh of the -aily*s offie had de!ri$ed res!ondents under olor of state law of
rights seured to them by the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States +onstitution#
3he -istrit +ourt denied the re4uest for an in0untion but, on the news!a!er staff*s motion for summary
0udgment, granted delaratory relief# 3he ourt did not 4uestion the e.istene of !robable ause to belie$e that
a rime had been ommitted and to belie$e that rele$ant e$idene would be found on the -aily*s !remises# 5t
held, howe$er, that the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments forbade the issuane of a warrant to searh for
materials in !ossession of one not sus!eted of rime unless there is !robable ause to belie$e, based on fats
!resented in a sworn affida$it, that a sub!oena dues teum would be im!ratiable# 3he -istrit +ourt
further held that where the innoent ob0et of the searh is a news!a!er, First Amendment interests are also
in$ol$ed and that suh a searh is onstitutionally !ermissible Aonly in the rare irumstane where there is a
lear showing that ;1< im!ortant materials will be destroyed or remo$ed from the 0urisdition, and ;2< a
restraining order would be futile#A Sine these !reonditions to a $alid warrant had not been satisfied, the
searh of the -aily*s offies was delared to ha$e been illegal# 3he +ourt of A!!eals affirmed !er uriam,
ado!ting the o!inion of the -istrit +ourt# @urher, et# al# filed a !etition for ertiorari#
"ss#e! 1hether the Fourth Amendment is to be onstrued and a!!lied to the Athird !artyA searh, the reurring
situation where state authorities ha$e !robable ause to belie$e that fruits, instrumentalities, or other e$idene
of rime is loated on identified !ro!erty but do not then ha$e !robable ause to belie$e that the owner or
!ossessor of the !ro!erty is himself im!liated in the rime that has ourred or is ourring#
$el%! First, a State is not !re$ented by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments from issuing a warrant to
searh for e$idene sim!ly beause the owner or !ossessor of the !lae to be searhed is not reasonably
sus!eted of riminal in$ol$ement# 3he ritial element in a reasonable searh is not that the !ro!erty owner
is sus!eted of rime but that there is reasonable ause to belie$e that the AthingsA to be searhed for and
sei%ed are loated on the !ro!erty to whih entry is sought# Seond, the -istrit +ourt*s new rule denying
searh warrants against third !arties and insisting on sub!oenas would undermine law enforement efforts
sine searh warrants are often used early in an in$estigation before all the !er!etrators of a rime ha$e been
identified, and the seemingly blameless third !arty may be im!liated# 3he delay in em!loying a sub!oena
dues teum ould easily result in disa!!earane of the e$idene# Dor would the ause of !ri$ay be ser$ed
sine searh warrants are more diffiult to obtain than sub!oenas# 6astly, !ro!erly administered, the
!reonditions for a searh warrant ;!robable ause, s!eifiity with res!et to the !lae to be searhed and the
things to be sei%ed, and o$erall reasonableness<, whih must be a!!lied with !artiular e.atitude when First
Amendment interests would be endangered by the searh, are ade4uate safeguards against the interferene
with the !ress* ability to gather, analy%e, and disseminate news that res!ondents laim would ensue from use
of warrants for third>!arty searhes of news!a!er offies#
126 9ilson vs. Layne [)26 84 613, 24 May 1999]
+ehn,uist (%J):
Facs! 5n early 1992, the Attorney "eneral of the United States a!!ro$ed AO!eration "unsmo&e,A a s!eial
national fugiti$e a!!rehension !rogram in whih United States Marshals wor&ed with state and loal !olie to
a!!rehend dangerous riminals# 3his effeti$e !rogram ultimately resulted in o$er ),888 arrests in 48
metro!olitan areas# One of the dangerous fugiti$es identified as a target of AO!eration "unsmo&eA was
-omini 1ilson, the son of +harles and "eraldine 1ilson# -omini 1ilson had $iolated his !robation on
!re$ious felony harges of robbery, theft, and assault with intent to rob, and the !olie om!uter listed
Aaution indiatorsA that he was li&ely to be armed, to resist arrest, and to Aassault !olie#A 3he om!uter also
listed his address as 989 Dorth StoneStreet A$enue in (o&$ille, Maryland# Un&nown to the !olie, this was
atually the home of -omini 1ilson*s !arents# 3hus, in A!ril 1992, the +iruit +ourt for Montgomery
+ounty issued three arrest warrants for -omini 1ilson, one for eah of his !robation $iolations# 3he
warrants were eah addressed to Aany duly authori%ed !eae offier,A and ommanded suh offiers to arrest
him and bring him AimmediatelyA before the +iruit +ourt to answer an inditment as to his !robation
$iolation# 3he warrants made no mention of media !resene or assistane# 5n the early morning hours of 1/
A!ril 1992, a "unsmo&e team of -e!uty United States Marshals and Montgomery +ounty 'olie offiers
assembled to e.eute the -omini 1ilson warrants# 3he team was aom!anied by a re!orter and a
!hotogra!her from the 1ashington 'ost, who had been in$ited by the Marshals to aom!any them on their
mission as !art of a Marshal*s Ser$ie ride>along !oliy# At /H45 a#m#, the offiers, with media re!resentati$es
in tow, entered the dwelling at 989 Dorth StoneStreet A$enue in the 6inoln 'ar& neighborhood of (o&$ille#
+harles and "eraldine 1ilson were still in bed when they heard the offiers enter the home# +harles 1ilson,
dressed only in a !air of briefs, ran into the li$ing room to in$estigate# -iso$ering at least 5 men in street
lothes with guns in his li$ing room, he angrily demanded that they state their business, and re!eatedly ursed
the offiers# :elie$ing him to be an angry -omini 1ilson, the offiers 4ui&ly subdued him on the floor#
"eraldine 1ilson ne.t entered the li$ing room to in$estigate, wearing only a nightgown# She obser$ed her
husband being restrained by the armed offiers# 1hen their !roteti$e swee! was om!leted, the offiers
learned that -omini 1ilson was not in the house, and they de!arted# -uring the time that the offiers were in
the home, the 1ashington 'ost !hotogra!her too& numerous !itures# 3he !rint re!orter was also a!!arently
in the li$ing room obser$ing the onfrontation between the !olie and +harles 1ilson# At no time, howe$er,
were the re!orters in$ol$ed in the e.eution of the arrest warrant# +harles and "eraldine 1ilson sued the law
enforement offiials in their !ersonal a!aities for money damages, and ontended that the offiers* ations
in bringing members of the media to obser$e and reord the attem!ted e.eution of the arrest warrant $iolated
their Fourth Amendment rights# 3he -istrit +ourt denied the !olie offiers* motion for summary 0udgment
on the basis of 4ualified immunity# On interloutory a!!eal to the +ourt of A!!eals, a di$ided !anel re$ersed
and held that the offiers were entitled to 4ualified immunity# 3he ase was twie reheard en ban, where a
di$ided +ourt of A!!eals again u!held the defense of 4ualified immunity# 3he +ourt of A!!eals delined to
deide whether the ations of the !olie $iolated the Fourth Amendment# 5t onluded instead that beause no
ourt had held ;at the time of the searh< that media !resene during a !olie entry into a residene $iolated
the Fourth Amendment, the right allegedly $iolated by !etitioners was not Alearly establishedA and thus
4ualified immunity was !ro!er# 141 F# )d 111 ;+A4 199=<# Fi$e 0udges dissented, arguing that the offiers*
ations did $iolate the Fourth Amendment, and that the learly established !rotetions of the Fourth
Amendment were $iolated#
"ss#e! 1hether the !olie offiers were 0ustified to bring along the 1ashington 'ost re!orters in the e.eution
of the warrant inside the house of +harles and "eraldine 1ilson#
$el%! Do# Although the offiers undoubtedly were entitled to enter the 1ilson home in order to e.eute the
arrest warrant for -omini 1ilson, they were not entitled to bring a news!a!er re!orter and a !hotogra!her
with them# 1hile it does not mean that e$ery !olie ation while inside a home must be e.!liitly authori%ed
by the te.t of the warrant ;Fourth Amendment allows tem!orary detainer of homeowner while !olie searh
the home !ursuant to warrant<, the Fourth Amendment does re4uire that !olie ations in e.eution of a
warrant be related to the ob0eti$es of the authori%ed intrusion ;3he !ur!oses 0ustifying a !olie searh stritly
limit the !ermissible e.tent of the searh<# +ertainly the !resene of re!orters inside the home was not related
to the ob0eti$es of the authori%ed intrusion# 5nasmuh as that the re!orters did not engage in the e.eution of
the warrant and did not assist the !olie in their tas&, the re!orters were not !resent for any reason related to
the 0ustifiation for !olie entry into the home>>the a!!rehension of -omini 1ilson# 3his is not a ase in
whih the !resene of the third !arties diretly aided in the e.eution of the warrant# 1here the !olie enter a
home under the authority of a warrant to searh for stolen !ro!erty, the !resene of third !arties for the
!ur!ose of identifying the stolen !ro!erty has long been a!!ro$ed by this +ourt and our ommon>law
tradition# 3he laim of the offiers, that the !resene of the 1ashington 'ost re!orters in the 1ilsons* home
nonetheless ser$ed a number of legitimate law enforement !ur!oses ignores, the im!ortane of the right of
residential !ri$ay at the ore of the Fourth Amendment# 5t may well be that media ride>alongs further the law
enforement ob0eti$es of the !olie in a general sense, but that is not the same as furthering the !ur!oses of
the searh# 1ere suh generali%ed Alaw enforement ob0eti$esA themsel$es suffiient to trum! the Fourth
Amendment, the !rotetions guaranteed by that Amendment*s te.t would be signifiantly watered down#
Although it may be laimed the !resene of third !arties ould ser$e in some situations to minimi%e !olie
abuses and !rotet sus!ets, and also to !rotet the safety of the offiers, suh a situation is signifiantly
different from the media !resene in this ase, where the 1ashington 'ost re!orters in the 1ilsons* home
were wor&ing on a story for their own !ur!oses# 3a&en in their entirety, the reasons ad$aned by the offiers
fall short of 0ustifying the !resene of media inside a home# 3hus, it is a $iolation of the Fourth Amendment
for !olie to bring members of the media or other third !arties into a home during the e.eution of a warrant
when the !resene of the third !arties in the home was not in aid of the e.eution of the warrant#
122 +#r:os v. .,ie7 o7 4a77, AF& [GR 64261, 26 Dece;3er 19(4]
En Banc, Escolin (J): !- concur, ! too) no #art
Facs! On 9 -eember 19=2, Cudge ?rnani +ru%>'aNo, ?.euti$e Cudge of the then +F5 (i%al LIue%on +ityM,
issued 2 searh warrants where the !remises at 19, (oad ), 'ro0et /, Iue%on +ity, and 9=4 Units + G -,
(MS :uilding, Iue%on A$enue, Iue%on +ity, business addresses of the AMetro!olitan MailA and A1e ForumA
news!a!ers, res!eti$ely, were searhed, and offie and !rinting mahines, e4ui!ment, !ara!hernalia, motor
$ehiles and other artiles used in the !rinting, !ubliation and distribution of the said news!a!ers, as well as
numerous !a!ers, douments, boo&s and other written literature alleged to be in the !ossession and ontrol of
Cose :urgos, Cr# !ublisher>editor of the A1e ForumA news!a!er, were sei%ed# A !etition for ertiorari,
!rohibition and mandamus with !reliminary mandatory and !rohibitory in0untion was filed after / months
following the raid to 4uestion the $alidity of said searh warrants, and to en0oin the Cudge Ad$oate "eneral
of the AF', the ity fisal of Iue%on +ity, et#al# from using the artiles sei%ed as e$idene in +riminal +ase I>
8229=2 of the (3+ Iue%on +ity ;'eo!le $# :urgos<#
"ss#e! 1hether allegations of !ossession and !rinting of sub$ersi$e materials may be the basis of the issuane
of searh warrants#
$el%! Setion ) !ro$ides that no searh warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue e.e!t u!on !robable ause to
be determined by the 0udge, or suh other res!onsible offier as may be authori%ed by law, after e.amination
under oath or affirmation of the om!lainant and the witnesses he may !rodue, and !artiularly desribing
the !lae to be searhed and the !ersons or things to be sei%ed# 'robable ause for a searh is defined as suh
fats and irumstanes whih would lead a reasonably disreet and !rudent man to belie$e that an offense
has been ommitted and that the ob0ets sought in onnetion with the offense are in the !lae sought to be
searhed# 5n mandating that Ano warrant shall issue e.e!t u!on !robable ause to be determined by the 0udge,
after e.amination under oath or affirmation of the om!lainant and the witnesses he may !rodueO, the
+onstitution re4uires no less than !ersonal &nowledge by the om!lainant or his witnesses of the fats u!on
whih the issuane of a searh warrant may be 0ustified# 7erein, a statement in the effet that :urgos Ais in
!ossession or has in his ontrol !rinting e4ui!ment and other !ara!hernalia, news !ubliations and other
douments whih were used and are all ontinuously being used as a means of ommitting the offense of
sub$ersion !unishable under '- ==5, as amendedA is a mere onlusion of law and does not satisfy the
re4uirements of !robable ause# :ereft of suh !artiulars as would 0ustify a finding of the e.istene of
!robable ause, said allegation annot ser$e as basis for the issuane of a searh warrant# Further, when the
searh warrant a!!lied for is direted against a news!a!er !ublisher or editor in onnetion with the
!ubliation of sub$ersi$e materials, the a!!liation andBor its su!!orting affida$its must ontain a
s!eifiation, stating with !artiularity the alleged sub$ersi$e material he has !ublished or is intending to
!ublish# Mere generali%ation will not suffie#
12( .,an%ler vs. Miler [)21 84 31), 1) A'ril 1992]
.ins/urg (J): & concur, ! "iled se#arate dissenting o#inion*
Facs! 3he 6ibertarian 'arty nominated 1al&er 6# +handler for the offie of 6ieutenant "o$ernor, Sharon 3#
7arris for the offie of +ommissioner of Agriulture, and Cames -# 1al&er for the offie of member of the
"eneral Assembly# 5n May 1994, about one month before the deadline for submission of the ertifiates
re4uired by P21>2>148, +handler, 7arris, and 1al&er filed an ation in the United States -istrit +ourt for the
Dorthern -istrit of "eorgia# 3hey asserted, inter alia, that the drug tests re4uired by P21>2>148 $iolated their
rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States +onstitution, naming
"o$ernor @ell -# Miller and two other state offiials in$ol$ed in the administration of P21>2>148, as
defendants# +handler, et #al# re4uested delaratory and in0unti$e relief barring enforement of the statute# 5n
Cune 1994, the -istrit +ourt denied +handlers* motion for a !reliminary in0untion# 3he !ro$ision in the
statute of the State of "eorgia re4uired andidates for designated state offies to ertify that they ha$e ta&en a
drug test and that the test result was negati$e# +handler, et# al# a!!arently submitted to the drug tests, obtained
the ertifiates re4uired by P21>2>148, and a!!eared on the ballot# After the 1994 eletion, the !arties 0ointly
mo$ed for the entry of final 0udgment on sti!ulated fats# 5n Canuary 1995, the -istrit +ourt entered final
0udgment for Miller, et# al# A di$ided ?le$enth +iruit !anel, relying on the US +ourt*s !reedents sustaining
drug testing !rograms for student athletes, ustoms em!loyees, and railway em!loyees, the United States
affirmed and 0udged the "eorgia*s law to be onstitutional#
"ss#e! 1hether the sus!iionless searhes, re4uired in "eorgia2s drug testing for andidates for !ubli offies,
is reasonable#
$el%! "eorgia*s drug testing re4uirement, im!osed by law and enfored by state offiials, effets a searh
within the meaning of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments# ;+olletion and testing of urine to meet
"eorgia*s ertifiation statute Aonstitutes a searh sub0et to the demands of the Fourth AmendmentA<# As
e.!lained in S&inner, go$ernment ordered Aolletion and testing of urine intrudes u!on e.!etations of
!ri$ay that soiety has long reogni%ed as reasonable#A ;S&inner and Fon (aab, 4=9 U#S#, at /19<# 3o be
reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, a searh ordinarily must be based on indi$iduali%ed sus!iion of
wrongdoing# :ut !artiulari%ed e.e!tions to the main rule are sometimes warranted based on As!eial needs,
beyond the normal need for law enforement#A 1hen suh As!eial needsA>>onerns other than rime
detetion>>are alleged in 0ustifiation of a Fourth Amendment intrusion, ourts must underta&e a onte.t
s!eifi in4uiry, e.amining losely the om!eting !ri$ate and !ubli interests ad$aned by the !arties# 5n
limited irumstanes, where the !ri$ay interests im!liated by the searh are minimal, and where an
im!ortant go$ernmental interest furthered by the intrusion would be !laed in 0eo!ardy by a re4uirement of
indi$iduali%ed sus!iion, a searh may be reasonable des!ite the absene of suh sus!iion# Our !reedents
establish that the !roffered s!eial need for drug testing must be substantial>>im!ortant enough to o$erride the
indi$idual*s a&nowledged !ri$ay interest, suffiiently $ital to su!!ress the Fourth Amendment*s normal
re4uirement of indi$iduali%ed sus!iion# Miller, et# al#*s defense of the statute rests !rimarily on the
inom!atibility of unlawful drug use with holding high state offie, but notably la&ing therein is any
indiation of a onrete danger demanding de!arture from the Fourth Amendment*s main rule, and nothing in
the reord hints that the ha%ards Miller, et# al#, broadly desribe ;i#e# the use of illegal drugs draws into
4uestion an offiial*s 0udgment and integrity, 0eo!ardi%es the disharge of !ubli funtions, inluding antidrug
law enforement efforts, and undermines !ubli onfidene and trust in eleted offiials< are real and not
sim!ly hy!othetial for "eorgia*s !olity# Further, "eorgia*s ertifiation re4uirement is not well designed to
identify andidates who $iolate antidrug laws, nor is the sheme a redible means to deter illiit drug users
from see&ing eletion to state offie# 1hat is left, after lose re$iew of "eorgia*s sheme, is the image the
State see&s to !ro0et# :y re4uiring andidates for !ubli offie to submit to drug testing, "eorgia dis!lays its
ommitment to the struggle against drug abuse# 3he need re$ealed, in short, is symboli, not As!eial,A as that
term draws meaning from our ase law# 3hus, howe$er well meant, the andidate drug test "eorgia has
de$ised diminishes !ersonal !ri$ay for a symbol*s sa&e# 3he Fourth Amendment shields soiety against that
state ation# 5n fine, where the ris& to !ubli safety is substantial and real, blan&et sus!iionless searhes
alibrated to the ris& may ran& as Areasonable#A :ut where, as herein, !ubli safety is not genuinely in
0eo!ardy, the Fourth Amendment !reludes the sus!iionless searh, no matter how on$eniently arranged#
Constitutional Law II, 2005 ( )
129 &eo'le vs. .,#a $o 4an [GR 12(222, 12 *#ne 1999]
En Banc, Davide Jr* (%J): !3 concur, ! on leave
Facs! 5n res!onse to re!orts of ram!ant smuggling of firearms and other ontraband, Cim 6agasa +id, as
+hief of 'olie of the :anotan 'olie Station, of 6a Union began !atrolling the :anotan oastline with his
offiers# 1hile monitoring the oastal area of :arangay :ulala on 29 Marh 1995, he intere!ted a radio all
at around 12H45 !#m# from :arangay +a!tain Cuan Almoite of :arangay 3ammoalao re4uesting !olie
assistane regarding an unfamiliar s!eedboat the latter had s!otted, whih loo&ed different from the boats
ordinarily used by fisherfol& of the area and was !oised to do& at 3ammoalao shores# +id and / of his men
led by his +hief 5n$estigator, S'O1 (eynoso :adua, !roeeded forthwith to 3ammoalao beah, onferred
with Almoite, and obser$ed that the s!eedboat ferried a lone male !assenger# 1hen the s!eedboat landed, the
male !assenger alighted, and using both hands, arried what a!!eared a multiolored strawbag, and wal&ed
towards the road# :y this time, Almoite, +id and :adua, the latter two ons!iuous in their uniform and
issued side>arms, beame sus!iious of the man as he suddenly hanged diretion and bro&e into a run u!on
seeing the a!!roahing offiers# :adua, !re$ented the man from fleeing by holding on to his right arm#
Although +id introdued themsel$es as !olie offiers, the man a!!eared im!assi$e# S!ea&ing in ?nglish,
then in 3agalog, and later in 5loano, +id then re4uested the man to o!en his bag, but he seemed not to
understand# +id then resorted to Asign language,A motioning with his hands for the man to o!en the bag# 3he
man a!!arently understood and aeded to the re4uest# A searh of the bag yielded se$eral trans!arent !lasti
!a&ets ontaining yellowish rystalline substanes# As +id wished to !roeed to the !olie station, he
signaled the man to follow, but the latter did not om!rehend# 7ene, +id !laed his arm around the shoulders
of the man and esorted the latter to the !olie head4uarters# At the !olie station, +id then Areited and
informed the man of his onstitutional rightsA to remain silent, to ha$e the assistane of a ounsel, et#
?liiting no res!onse from the man, +id ordered his men to find a resident of the area who s!o&e +hinese to
at as an inter!reter# 5n the meantime, :adua o!ened the bag and ounted 29 !lasti !a&ets ontaining
yellowish rystalline substanes# 3he inter!reter, Mr# "o 'ing "uan, finally arri$ed, through whom the man
was Aa!!rised of his onstitutional rights#A 1hen the !oliemen as&ed the man se$eral 4uestions, he retreated
to his obstinate retiene and merely showed his 5- with the name +hua 7o San !rinted thereon# +hua*s bag
and its ontents were sent to the 'D' +rime 6aboratory at +am! -iego Silang, +arlatan, San Fernando, 6a
Union for laboratory e.amination# 5n the meantime, +hua was detained at the :anotan 'olie Station# 6ater,
'olie +hief 5ns!etor and Forensi +hemist 3heresa Ann :ugayong +id ;wife of +id<, onduted a
laboratory e.amination of 29 !lasti !a&ets, adn in her +hemistry (e!ort ->825>95, she stated that her
4ualitati$e e.amination established the ontents of the !lasti !a&ets, weighing 2=#9 &ilos, to be !ositi$e of
metham!hetamine hydrohloride or shabu, a regulated drug# +hua was initially harged with illegal
!ossession of metham!hetamine hydrohloride before the (3+ ;+riminal +ase 48)9<# 7owe$er, !ursuant to
the reommendation of the Offie of the 'ro$inial 'roseutor of San Fernando, 6a Union, the information
was subse4uently amended to allege that +hua was in $iolation of Setion 15, Artile 555 of (A /425 as
amended by (A 9/59 ;illegal trans!ort of a regulated drug<# At his arraignment on )1 Culy 1995, where the
amended om!laint was read to him by a Fu&ien>s!ea&ing inter!reter, +hua entered a !lea of not guilty# 3rial
finally ensued, with inter!reters assigned to +hua ;u!on the (3+*s diret re4uest to the 3ai!ei ?onomi and
+ultural Offie in the 'hili!!ines, after its failure to a4uire one from the -e!artment of Foreign Affairs<#
+hua !ro$ided a om!letely different story, laiming that the bags belong to his em!loyer +ho +hu (ong,
who he aom!anied in the s!eedboat, that they deided to do& when they were low on fuel and tele!hone
battery, that the !olie, with nary any s!o&en word but only gestures and hand mo$ements, esorted him to
the !reint where he was handuffed and tied to a hair, that the !olie, led by an offier, arri$ed with the
motor engine of the s!eedboat and a bag, whih they !resented to him, that the !olie ins!eted o!ened the
bag, weighed the ontents, then !rolaimed them as metham!hetamine hydrohloride# 5n a deision
!romulgated on 18 February 1999, the (3+ on$ited +hua for trans!orting 2=#9 &ilos of metham!hetamine
hydrohloride without legal authority to do so# +hua !rays for the re$ersal of the (3+ deision and his
a4uittal before the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether !ersistent re!orts of ram!ant smuggling of firearm and other ontraband artiles, +hua*s
waterraft differing in a!!earane from the usual fishing boats that ommonly ruise o$er the :anotan seas,
+hua2s illegal entry into the 'hili!!ines, +hua2s sus!iious beha$ior, i#e# he attem!ted to flee when he saw the
!olie authorities, and the a!!arent ease by whih +hua an return to and na$igate his s!eedboat with
immediate dis!ath towards the high seas, onstitute A!robable ause#A
$el%! Do# ?nshrined in the +onstitution is the in$iolable right to !ri$ay of home and !erson# 5t e.!liitly
ordains that !eo!le ha$e the right to be seure in their !ersons, houses, !a!ers and effets against
unreasonable searhes and sei%ures of whate$er nature and for any !ur!ose# 5nse!arable, and not merely
orollary or inidental to said right and e4ually hallowed in and by the +onstitution, is the e.lusionary
!rini!le whih derees that any e$idene obtained in $iolation of said right is inadmissible for any !ur!ose in
any !roeeding# 3he +onstitutional !rosri!tion against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures does not, of
ourse, forestall reasonable searhes and sei%ure# 3his interdition against warrantless searhes and sei%ures,
howe$er, is not absolute and suh warrantless searhes and sei%ures ha$e long been deemed !ermissible by
0uris!rudene# 3he (ules of +ourt reogni%e !ermissible warrantless arrests, to witH ;1< arrests in flagrante
delito, ;2< arrests effeted in hot !ursuit, and ;)< arrests of esa!ed !risoners# 3he !roseution and the
defense !ainted e.tremely di$ergent $ersions of the inident, but the +ourt is ertain that +hua was arrested
and his bag searhed without the benefit of a warrant# 3here are no fats on reord reasonably suggesti$e or
demonstrati$e of +hua2s !artii!ation in an ongoing riminal enter!rise that ould ha$e s!urred !olie
offiers from onduting the obtrusi$e searh# 3he (3+ ne$er too& the !ains of !ointing to suh fats, but
!rediated mainly its deision on the finding that Aaused was aught red>handed arrying the bagful of
shabu when a!!rehended#A 5n short, there is no !robable ause# 'ersistent re!orts of ram!ant smuggling of
firearm and other ontraband artiles, +hua*s waterraft differing in a!!earane from the usual fishing boats
that ommonly ruise o$er the :anotan seas, +hua2s illegal entry into the 'hili!!ines, +hua2s sus!iious
beha$ior, i#e# he attem!ted to flee when he saw the !olie authorities, and the a!!arent ease by whih +hua
an return to and na$igate his s!eedboat with immediate dis!ath towards the high seas, do not onstitute
A!robable ause#A Done of the telltale lues, e#g#, bag or !a&age emanating the !ungent odor of mari0uana or
other !rohibited drug, 28 onfidential re!ort andBor !ositi$e identifiation by informers of ourier;s< of
!rohibited drug andBor the time and !lae where they will trans!ortBdeli$er the same, sus!iious demeanor or
beha$ior and sus!iious bulge in the waist K ae!ted by the +ourt as suffiient to 0ustify a warrantless
arrest e.ists in the ase# 3here was no lassified information that a foreigner would disembar& at 3ammoalao
beah bearing !rohibited drug on the date in 4uestion# +hua was not identified as a drug ourier by a !olie
informer or agent# 3he fat that the $essel that ferried him to shore bore no resemblane to the fishing boats of
the area did not automatially mar& him as in the !roess of !er!etrating an offense# 3he searh annot
therefore be denominated as inidental to an arrest# 3o reiterate, the searh was not inidental to an arrest#
3here was no warrant of arrest and the warrantless arrest did not fall under the e.em!tions allowed by the
(ules of +ourt as already shown# From all indiations, the searh was nothing but a fishing e.!edition#
+asting aside the regulated substane as e$idene, the same being the fruit of a !oisonous tree, the remaining
e$idene on reord are insuffiient, feeble and ineffetual to sustain +hua2s on$ition#
131 &eo'le vs. Molina [GR 133912, 19 Fe3r#ary 2111]
En Banc, 0nares12antiago (J): !4 concur
Facs! Sometime in Cune 199/, S'O1 Marino 'aguido!on, then a member of the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie
;'D'< detailed at 'reint Do# ), Matina, -a$ao +ity, reei$ed an information regarding the !resene of an
alleged mari0uana !usher in -a$ao +ity# 3he first time he ame to see the said mari0uana !usher in !erson was
during the first wee& of Culy 199/# S'O1 'aguido!on was then with his informer when a motoryle !assed
by# 7is informer !ointed to the motoryle dri$er, "regorio Mula y Malagura ;QA:oboyA<, as the !usher# As
to Dasario Molina y Manamat ;Q A:obongA<, S'O1 'aguido!on had no oasion to see him !rior to = August
199/# At about 9H)8 a#m# of = August 199/, S'O1 'aguido!on reei$ed an information that the alleged !usher
will be !assing at D7A, Maa, -a$ao +ity any time that morning# +onse4uently, at around =H88 a#m# he alled
for assistane at the 'D', 'reint ), Matina, -a$ao +ity, whih immediately dis!athed the team of S'O4
-ionisio +loribel ;team leader<, S'O2 'aguido!on ;brother of S'O1 Marino 'aguido!on<, and S'O1
'am!lona, to !roeed to the house of S'O1 Marino 'aguido!on where they would wait for the alleged !usher
to !ass by# At around 9H)8 a#m#, while the team were !ositioned in the house of S'O1 'aguido!on, a
Atrisi&adA arrying Mula and Molina !assed by# At that instane, S'O1 'aguido!on !ointed to Mula and
Molina as the !ushers# 3hereu!on, the team boarded their $ehile and o$ertoo& the Atrisi&ad#A S'O1
'aguido!on was left in his house, )8 meters from where Mula and Molina were aosted# 3he !olie offiers
then ordered the Atrisi&adA to sto!# At that !oint, Mula, who was holding a bla& bag, handed the same to
Molina# Subse4uently, S'O1 'am!lona introdued himself as a !olie offier and as&ed Molina to o!en the
bag# Molina re!lied, A:oss, if !ossible we will settle this#A S'O1 'am!lona insisted on o!ening the bag,
whih re$ealed dried mari0uana lea$es inside# 3hereafter, Mula and Molina were handuffed by the !olie
offiers# On / -eember 199/, the aused Mula and Molina, through ounsel, 0ointly filed a -emurrer to
?$idene, ontending that the mari0uana allegedly sei%ed from them is inadmissible as e$idene for ha$ing
been obtained in $iolation of their onstitutional right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures# 3he
demurrer was denied by the trial ourt# A motion for reonsideration was filed by the aused, but this was
li&ewise denied# 3he aused wai$ed !resentation of e$idene and o!ted to file a 0oint memorandum# On 25
A!ril 1999, the trial ourt rendered the deision, finding the aused guilty of the offense harged, and
sentened both to suffer the !enalty of death by lethal in0etion# 'ursuant to Artile 49 of the (e$ised 'enal
+ode and (ule 122, Setion 18 of the (ules of +ourt, the ase was ele$ated to the Su!reme +ourt on
automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether Mula and Molina manifested outward indiation that would 0ustify their arrest, and the sei%ure
of !rohibited drugs that were in their !ossession#
$el%! 3he fundamental law of the land mandates that searhes and sei%ures be arried out in a reasonable
fashion, that is, by $irtue or on the strength of a searh warrant !rediated u!on the e.istene of a !robable
ause# +om!lementary to the foregoing !ro$ision is the e.lusionary rule enshrined under Artile 555, Setion
), !aragra!h 2, whih bolsters and solidifies the !rotetion against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures# 3he
foregoing onstitutional !rosri!tion, howe$er, is not without e.e!tions# Searh and sei%ure may be made
without a warrant and the e$idene obtained therefrom may be admissible in the following instanesH ;1<
searh inident to a lawful arrest, ;2< searh of a mo$ing motor $ehile, ;)< searh in $iolation of ustoms
laws, ;4< sei%ure of e$idene in !lain $iew, ;5< when the aused himself wai$es his right against
unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, and ;/< sto! and fris& situations ;3erry searh<# 3he first e.e!tion
;searh inidental to a lawful arrest< inludes a $alid warrantless searh and sei%ure !ursuant to an e4ually
$alid warrantless arrest whih must !reede the searh# Still, the law re4uires that there be first a lawful arrest
before a searh an be made K the !roess annot be re$ersed# 7erein, Mula and Molina manifested no
outward indiation that would 0ustify their arrest# 5n holding a bag on board a trisi&ad, they ould not be said
to be ommitting, attem!ting to ommit or ha$e ommitted a rime# 5t matters not that Molina res!onded
A:oss, if !ossible we will settle thisA to the re4uest of S'O1 'am!lona to o!en the bag# Suh res!onse whih
allegedly reinfored the Asus!iionA of the arresting offiers that Mula and Molina were ommitting a rime,
is an e4ui$oal statement whih standing alone will not onstitute !robable ause to effet an in flagrante
delito arrest# Dote that were it not for S'O1 Marino 'aguido!on, Mula and Molina ould not be the sub0et
of any sus!iion, reasonable or otherwise# Further, it would a!!ear that the names and addresses of Mula and
Molina ame to the &nowledge of S'O1 'aguido!on only after they were arrested, and suh annot lend a
semblane of $alidity on the arrest effeted by the !eae offiers# 1ithal, the +ourt holds that the arrest of
Mula and Molina does not fall under the e.e!tions allowed by the rules# 7ene, the searh onduted on
their !erson was li&ewise illegal# +onse4uently, the mari0uana sei%ed by the !eae offiers ould not be
admitted as e$idene against them#
131 4oli% <rian:le 4ales .or'. vs. 4ic,on [GR 144319, 23 =ove;3er 2111]
3irst Division, 4a#unan (J): 4 concur
Facs! :oth Sanly and Solid 3riangle sell genuine Mitsubishi !roduts# Solid 3riangle a4uires its goods from
Ca!an on the basis of its e.lusi$e distributorshi! with Mitsubishi +or!oration# 1hile Sanly buys its goods
from 7ong&ong, laiming it is a !arallel im!orter ;one whih im!orts, distributes, and sells genuine !roduts
in the mar&et, inde!endently of an e.lusi$e distributorshi! or ageny agreement with the manufaturer<, not
an unfair om!etitor# On 2= Canuary 1999, Cudge A!olinario -# :ruselas, Cr#, 'residing Cudge of (3+, :ranh
9), Iue%on +ity, u!on a!!liation of the ?onomi 5ntelligene and 5n$estigation :ureau ;?55:<, issued
Searh 1arrant ))24 ;99< against Sanly +or!oration ;Sanly<, for $iolation of Setion 1/= of (A =29) ;unfair
om!etition<# :y $irtue of Searh 1arrant, ?55: agents sei%ed 451 bo.es of Mitsubishi !hotogra!hi olor
!a!er from Sanly# Forthwith, Solid 3riangle, through (obert Sithon, its Mar&eting and +ommuniation
Manager, filed with the Offie of the +ity 'roseutor, Iue%on +ity, an affida$it om!laint for unfair
om!etition against the members of the :oard of Sanly and 613 +o#, 5n# ;613< L5S 1>99>2=98M, alleging
that ?(A (adio and ?letrial Su!!ly ;?(A<, owned and o!erated by 613, is in ons!iray with Sanly in
selling andBor distributing Mitsubishi brand !hoto !a!er to the damage and !re0udie of Solid 3riangle, whih
laims to be the sole and e.lusi$e distributor thereof, !ursuant to an agreement with the Mitsubishi
+or!oration# On 4 February 1999, Solid 3riangle filed with Cudge :ruselas* sala an urgent e. !arte motion for
the transfer of ustody of the sei%ed Mitsubishi !hoto olor !a!er stored in the offie of ?55:# On = February
1999, Sanly, 613 and ?(A mo$ed to 4uash the searh warrant whih was denied by Cudge :ruselas in an
order dated 5 Marh 1999# Sanly, 613 and ?(A filed a motion for reonsideration whih was granted by
Cudge :ruselas on 1= Marh 1999, where the latter he&d that there is doubt whether the at om!lained of
;unfair om!etition< is riminal in nature# Solid 3riangle filed a motion for reonsideration ontending that the
4uashal of the searh warrant is not !ro!er onsidering the !endeny of the !reliminary in$estigation in 5S 1>
99>2=98 for unfair om!etition wherein the sei%ed items will be used as e$idene# On 2/ Marh 1999, Cudge
:ruselas issued an order denying Solid 3riangle*s motion for reonsideration# Meanwhile, on 29 Marh 1999,
Solid 3riangle filed with :ranh 91 of the same +ourt, !resided by Cudge 6ita S# 3olentino>"enilo ;+i$il +ase
I>99>)928/< for damages and in0untion with !rayer for writs of !reliminary in0untion and attahment
against Sanly, 613 and ?(A# On )1 Marh 1999, Cudge "enilo denied Solid 3riangle*s a!!liation for a
!reliminary attahment on the ground that the a!!liation is not su!!orted with an affida$it by the a!!liant,
through its authori%ed offier, who !ersonally &nows the fats# Meanwhile, on 28 A!ril 1999, Cudge :ruselas
issued an order, direting the ;1< ?55:, Sithon and Solid 3riangle to di$ulge and re!ort to the ourt the e.at
loation of the warehouse where the goods sub0et of the !roeeding were &e!t within 92 hours from reei!t
thereof, ;2< Sithon and Solid 3riangle to a!!ear and show ause why they should not be held in ontem!t of
ourt for failure to obey a lawful order of the ourt at a hearing for the !ur!ose on 12 May 1999 at =H)8 a#m#,
;)< the -e!uty Sheriff of the +ourt to ta&e ustody of the sei%ed goods and ause their deli$ery to the !erson
from whom the goods were sei%ed without further loss of time# Solid 3riangle filed a !etition for ertiorari
before the +ourt of A!!eals on 2/ A!ril 1999, and the latter issued a tem!orary restraining order to !re$ent
Cudge :ruselas from im!lementing the Order dated 28 A!ril 1999# On / Culy 1999, the +ourt of A!!eals
rendered 0udgment initially granting ertiorari, and held that the 4uashing of the warrant de!ri$ed the
!roseution of $ital e$idene to determine !robable ause# U!on motion by Sanly, et#, howe$er, the +ourt of
A!!eals re$ersed itself# 5n its AAmendatory -eision,A the a!!ellate ourt held that there was no !robable
ause for the issuane of the searh warrant, and aordingly, held that the e$idene obtained by $irtue of said
warrant was inadmissible in the !reliminary in$estigation# 7ene, the !etition by Solid 3riangle#
"ss#e! 1hether the ourt that issued the warrant may resol$e the motions to su!!ress e$idene while a
!reliminary in$estigation is ongoing#
$el%! 3he !roeedings for the issuaneB4uashal of a searh warrant before a ourt on the one hand, and the
!reliminary in$estigation before an authori%ed offier on the other, are !roeedings entirely inde!endent of
eah other# One is not bound by the other*s finding as regards the e.istene of a rime# 3he !ur!ose of eah
!roeeding differs from the other# 3he first is to determine whether a warrant should issue or be 4uashed, and
the seond, whether an information should be filed in ourt# Setion 14, (ule 12/, e.!ressly !ro$ides that a
motion to 4uash a searh warrant andBor to su!!ress e$idene obtained thereby may be filed in and ated u!on
only by the ourt where the ation has been instituted# Under the same setion, the ourt whih issued the
searh warrant may be !re$ented from resol$ing a motion to 4uash or su!!ress e$idene only when a riminal
ase is subse4uently filed in another ourt, in whih ase, the motion is to be resol$ed by the latter ourt# 5t is
therefore !uerile to argue that the ourt that issued the warrant annot entertain motions to su!!ress e$idene
while a !reliminary in$estigation is ongoing# Suh erroneous inter!retation would !lae a !erson whose
!ro!erty has been sei%ed by $irtue of an in$alid warrant without a remedy while the goods !roured by $irtue
thereof are sub0et of a !reliminary in$estigation# De$ertheless, the e$idene !resented before the trial ourt
does not !ro$e unfair om!etition under Setion 1/= of the 5ntelletual 'ro!erty +ode# Sanly +or!oration did
not !ass off the sub0et goods as that of another# 5ndeed, it admits that the goods are genuine Mitsubishi
!hotogra!hi !a!er, whih it !urhased from a su!!lier in 7ong Jong# Assuming that the ats of Sanly, et#
to ma&e Ait a!!ear that they were duly authori%ed to sell or distribute Mitsubishi 'hoto 'a!er in the
'hili!!inesA onstitutes a rime, there is no !roof to establish suh an allegation# 3he ourt, thus, ordered
Solid 3riangle and ?55: to return to Sanly +or!oration the 451 bo.es of Mitsubishi !hotogra!hi olor !a!er
sei%ed by $irtue of Searh 1arrant ))24 ;99< issued by the Iue%on +ity (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh 9)#
132 &eo'le vs. 4alan:#i [GR 1332)4-)), 19 A'ril 2111]
2econd Division, 5endo6a (J): 4 concur
FatsH On 2/ -eember 1995, Sr# 5ns!# Aguilar a!!lied for a warrant in the (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh 98,
-asmariNias, +a$ite, to searh the residene of (obert Salanguit y Jo on :inhagan St#, Do$alihes, Iue%on
+ity# 7e !resented as his witness S'O1 ?dmund :adua, who testified that as a !oseur>buyer, he was able to
!urhase 2#12 grams of shabu from Salanguit# 3he sale too& !lae in Salunguit*s room, and :adua saw that
the shabu was ta&en by Salunguit from a abinet inside his room# 3he a!!liation was granted, and a searh
warrant was later issued by 'residing Cudge -olores 6# ?s!aNol# At about 18H)8 !#m# of said day, a grou! of
about 18 !oliemen, along with one i$ilian informer, went to the residene of Salunguit to ser$e the warrant#
3he !olie o!erati$es &no&ed on Salanguit2s door, but nobody o!ened it# 3hey heard !eo!le inside the house,
a!!arently !ani&ing# 3he !olie o!erati$es then fored the door o!en and entered the house# After showing
the searh warrant to the ou!ants of the house, 6t# +ortes and his grou! started searhing the house# 3hey
found 12 small heat>sealed trans!arent !lasti bags ontaining a white rystalline substane, a !a!er li! bo.
also ontaining a white rystalline substane, and two bri&s of dried lea$es whih a!!eared to be mari0uana
wra!!ed in news!rint ha$ing a total weight of a!!ro.imately 1,255 grams# A reei!t of the items sei%ed was
!re!ared, but Salanguit refused to sign it# After the searh, the !olie o!erati$es too& Salanguit with them to
Station 18, ?-SA, Jamuning, Iue%on +ity, along with the items they had sei%ed# 'O) -ua%o re4uested a
laboratory e.amination of the onfisated e$idene# 3he white rystalline substane with a total weight of
2#99 grams and those ontained in a small bo. with a total weight of =#)9 grams were found to be !ositi$e for
metham!hetamine hydrohloride# On the other hand, the two bri&s of dried lea$es, one weighing 425 grams
and the other =58 grams, were found to be mari0uana# +harges against (oberto Salanguit y Jo for $iolations
of (e!ubli At ;(A< /425, i#e# for !ossession of shabu and mari0uana, ;+riminal +ases I>95>/4)59 and I>
95>/4)5=, res!eti$ely< were filed on 2= -eember 1995# After hearing, the trial ourt rendered its deision,
on$iting Salanguit in +riminal +ases I>95>/4)59 and I>95>/4)5= for $iolation of Setion 1/ and =,
res!eti$ely, (A /425, and sentening him to suffer an indeterminate sentene with a minimum of / months
of arresto mayor and a ma.imum of 4 years and 2 months of !rision orreional, and relusion !er!etua and
to !ay a fine of '988,888#88, res!eti$ely# Salanguit a!!ealed, ontesting his on$ition on the grounds that
;1< the admissibility of the shabu allegedly reo$ered from his residene as e$idene against him on the
ground that the warrant used in obtaining it was in$alid, ;2< the admissibility in e$idene of the mari0uana
allegedly sei%ed from Salanguit to the A!lain $iewA dotrine, and ;)< the em!loyment of unneessary fore by
the !olie in the e.eution of the warrant#
"ss#e! 1hether the warrant was in$alid for failure of !ro$iding e$idene to su!!ort the sei%ure of Rdrug
!ara!hernaliaO, and whether the mari0uana may be inluded as e$idene in light of the R!lain $iew dotrine#O
$el%! 3he warrant authori%ed the sei%ure of Aundetermined 4uantity of shabu and drug !ara!hernalia#A
?$idene was !resented showing !robable ause of the e.istene of metham!hetamine hydrohloride or
shabu# 3he fat that there was no !robable ause to su!!ort the a!!liation for the sei%ure of drug
!ara!hernalia does not warrant the onlusion that the searh warrant is $oid# 3his fat would be material
only if drug !ara!hernalia was in fat sei%ed by the !olie# 3he fat is that none was ta&en by $irtue of the
searh warrant issued# 5f at all, therefore, the searh warrant is $oid only insofar as it authori%ed the sei%ure of
drug !ara!hernalia, but it is $alid as to the sei%ure of metham!hetamine hydrohloride as to whih e$idene
was !resented showing !robable ause as to its e.istene# 5n sum, with res!et to the sei%ure of shabu from
Salanguit*s residene, Searh 1arrant 1/8 was !ro!erly issued, suh warrant being founded on !robable ause
!ersonally determined by the 0udge under oath or affirmation of the de!osing witness and !artiularly
desribing the !lae to be searhed and the things to be sei%ed# 1ith res!et to, and in light of the A!lain $iew
dotrine,A the !olie failed to allege the time when the mari0uana was found, i#e#, whether !rior to, or
ontem!oraneous with, the shabu sub0et of the warrant, or whether it was reo$ered on Salanguit*s !erson or
in an area within his immediate ontrol# 5ts reo$ery, therefore, !resumably during the searh onduted after
the shabu had been reo$ered from the abinet, as attested to by S'O1 :adua in his de!osition, was in$alid#
3hus, the +ourt affirmed the deision as to +riminal +ase I>95>/4)59 only#
133 A;ar:a vs. A33as [GR L-(666, 2( Marc, 19)6]
2econd Division, 7aras (%J): & concur
Facs! Datalio '# Amarga, the 'ro$inial Fisal of Sulu, filed in the +ourt of First 5nstane of Sulu an
information for murder ;riminal ase 11)1, 'eo!le of the 'hili!!ines $s# Mad!irol, Awadi, (a0ah, Sali, 5nsa
and Mahara0ah :a!ayani<# At the foot of the information, Amarga ertified under oath that Ahe has onduted
the neessary !reliminary in$estigation !ursuant to the !ro$isions of (e!ubli At 9)2#A As the only
su!!orting affida$it was that of 5man 7ad0i (ohmund Cubair, to the effet that the latter Awas told that the
deeased was shot and &illed by three !ersons namedH 7a0irul A!!ang, (a0ah A!!ang and Awadi :agali,A and
Amarga had failed or refused to !resent other e$idene suffiient to ma&e out a !rima faie ase, Cudge
Maa!anton Abbas ;+F5 of Sulu< issued an order, dismissing the ase without !re0udie to reinstatement
should the !ro$inial fisal su!!ort his information with reord of his in$estigation whih in the o!inion of
the ourt may su!!ort a !rima faie ase# Amarga instituted a !etition for ertiorari and mandamus before the
Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the !reliminary in$estigation onduted by Amarga dis!enses with the 0udge2s duty to
determine !robable ause e.ists before issuing the orres!onding warrant of arrest#
$el%! Setion 1, !aragra!h ), of Artile 555 of the +onstitution !ro$ides that Ano warrant shall issue but u!on
!robable ause, to be determined by the 0udge after e.amination under oath or affirmation of the om!lainant
and the witnesses he may !rodue#A 3he 4uestion whether A!robable auseA e.ists or not must de!end u!on
the 0udgment and disretion of the 0udge or magistrate issuing the warrant# 5f he is satisfied that A!robable
auseA e.ists from the fats stated in the om!laint, made u!on the in$estigation by the !roseuting attorney,
then his onlusion is suffiient u!on whih to issue the warrant for arrest# 7e may, howe$er, if he is not
satisfied, all suh witnesses as he may deem neessary before issuing the warrant# 3he issuane of the
warrant of arrest is !rima faie e$idene that, in his 0udgment at least, there e.isted A!robable auseA for
belie$ing that the !erson against whom the warrant is issued is guilty of the rime harged# 3he !reliminary
in$estigation onduted by Amarga under (e!ubli At 9)2 whih formed the basis for the filing in the +ourt
of First 5nstane of Sulu of riminal ase 11)1 does not dis!ense with the 0udge*s duty to e.erise his 0udiial
!ower of determining, before issuing the orres!onding warrant of arrest, whether or not !robable ause
e.ists therefor# 3he +onstitution $ests suh !ower in the 0udge who, howe$er, may rely on the fats stated in
the information filed after !reliminary in$estigation by the !roseuting attorney#
134 4a. Rosa Minin: .o;'any vs. Assisan &rovincial Fiscal 6a3ala [GR L-44223, 31 A#:#s
19(2]
En Banc, Bidin (J): !( concur, ! too) no #art
Facs! On 21 Marh 1994, Sta# (osa Mining +om!any filed a om!laint for attem!ted theft of materials
;sra! iron< forming !art of the installations on its mining !ro!erty at Cose 'anganiban, +amarines Dorte
against (omeo "arrido and "il Ala!an with the Offie of the 'ro$inial Fisal of +amarines Dorte, then
headed by 'ro$inial Fisal Coa4uin 5lustre# 3he ase was assigned to third Assistant Fisal ?steban '# 'anotes
for !reliminary in$estigation who, after onduting said in$estigation, issued a resolution dated 2/ August
1994 reommending that an information for Attem!ted 3heft be filed against "arrido and Ala!an on a finding
of !rima faie ase whih resolution was a!!ro$ed by Fisal 5lustre# "arrido and Ala!an sought
reonsideration of the resolution but the same was denied by Fisal 5lustre in a resolution dated 14 Otober
1994# On 29 Otober 1994, Fisal 5lustre filed with the +ourt of First 5nstane ;+F5< of +amarines Dorte an
5nformation dated 19 Otober 19=9 ;+riminal +ase =21<, harging "arrido aand Ala!an with the rime of
Attem!ted 3heft# 5n a letter dated 22 Otober 1994, "arrido and Ala!an re4uested the Seretary of Custie for
a re$iew of the (esolutions of the Offie of the 'ro$inial Fisal dated 2/ August 1994 and 14 Otober 1994#
On / Do$ember 1994, the +hief State 'roseutor ordered the 'ro$inial Fisal by telegram to Aele$ate entire
reords 'FO +ase 599 against "arrido et al#, re$iew in fi$e days and defer all !roeedings !ending re$iew#A
On / Marh 1995, the Seretary of Custie, after re$iewing the reords, re$ersed the findings of !rima faie
ase of the 'ro$inial Fisal and direted said !roseuting offier to immediately mo$e for the dismissal of
the riminal ase# 3he +om!any sought reonsideration of the direti$e of the Seretary of Custie but the
latter denied the same in a letter dated 11 Cune 1995# A motion to dismiss dated 1/ Se!tember 1995 was then
filed by the 'ro$inial Fisal but the ourt denied the motion on the ground that there was a !rima faie
e$idene against "arrido and Ala!an and set the ase for trial on 25 February 199/# "arrido and Ala!an
sought reonsideration of the ourt*s ruling but in an Order dated 1) February 199/, the motion filed for said
!ur!ose was li&ewise denied# 3rial of the ase was reset to 2) A!ril 199/# 3hereafter, Fisal 5lustre was
a!!ointed a 0udge in the +F5 of Albay and Fisal @abala beame offier>in>harge of the 'ro$inial Fisal*s
Offie of +amarines Dorte# On 19 A!ril 199/, Fisal @abala filed a Seond Motion to -ismiss the ase# 3his
seond motion to dismiss was denied by the trial ourt in an order dated 2) A!ril 199/# 1hereu!on, Fisal
@abala manifested that he would not !roseute the ase and disauthori%ed any !ri$ate !roseutor to a!!ear
therein# 7ene, the +om!any filed a !etition for mandamus before the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the fisal an refuse to !roseute the ase if the Seretary of Custie re$ersed the findings of
!rima faie ase by the fisal#
$el%! 5f the fisal is not at all on$ined that a !rima faie ase e.ists, he sim!ly annot mo$e for the
dismissal of the ase and, when denied, refuse to !roseute the same# 7e is obliged by law to !roeed and
!roseute the riminal ation# 7e annot im!ose his o!inion on the trial ourt# At least what he an do is to
ontinue a!!earing for the !roseution and then turn o$er the !resentation of e$idene to another fisal or a
!ri$ate !roseutor sub0et to his diretion and ontrol# 1here there is no other !roseutor a$ailable, he should
!roeed to disharge his duty and !resent the e$idene to the best of his ability and let the ourt deide the
merits of the ase on the basis of the e$idene addued by both !arties# 3he mere fat that the Seretary of
Custie had, after re$iewing the reords of the ase, direted the !roseuting fisal to mo$e for the dismissal of
the ase and the motion to dismiss filed !ursuant to said direti$e is denied by the trial ourt, is no
0ustifiation for the refusal of the fisal to !roseute the ase# One a om!laint or information is filed in
+ourt any dis!osition of the ase as its dismissal or the on$ition or a4uittal of the aused rests in the
sound disretion of the +ourt# 3he +ourt is the best and sole 0udge on what to do with the ase before it# 3he
determination of the ase is within its e.lusi$e 0urisdition and om!etene# A motion to dismiss the ase
filed by the fisal should he addressed to the +ourt who has the o!tion to grant or deny the same# 5t does not
matter if this is done before or after the arraignment of the aused or that the motion was filed after a
rein$estigation or u!on instrutions of the Seretary of Custie who re$iewed the reords of the in$estigation#
13) &eo'le vs. "nin: [GR ((919, 2) *#ly 1991]
En Banc, .utierre6 Jr* (J): !4 concur
Facs! On / February 19==, Mrs# ?ditha :arba filed a letter>om!laint against O5+>Mayor -ominador S#
(egalado Cr# of 3an0ay, Degros Oriental with the +ommission on ?letions ;+OM?6?+<, for allegedly
transferring her, a !ermanent Dursing Attendant, "rade 5, in the offie of the Munii!al Mayor to a $ery
remote barangay and without obtaining !rior !ermission or learane from +OM?6?+ as re4uired by law#
Ating on the om!laint, +OM?6?+ direted Atty# "erardo 6ituanas, 'ro$inial ?letion Su!er$ision of
-umaguete +ityH ;1< to ondut the !reliminary in$estigation of the ase, ;2< to !re!are and file the neessary
information in ourt, ;)< to handle the !roseution if the e$idene submitted shows a !rima faie ase and ;)<
to issue a resolution of !roseution or dismissal as the ase may be# After a !reliminary in$estigation of
:arba*s om!laint, Atty# 6ituanas found a !rima faie ase# 7ene, on 2/ Se!tember 19==, he filed with the
(egional 3rial +ourt ;:ranh )=# -umaguete +ity< a riminal ase for $iolation of setion 2/1, 'aragra!h ;h<,
Omnibus ?letion +ode against the O5+>Mayor# 5n an Order dated )8 Se!tember 19==, the ourt issued a
warrant of arrest against the O5+ Mayor# 5t also fi.ed the bail at '5,888#88 as reommended by the 'ro$inial
?letion Su!er$isor# 7owe$er, in an order dated ) Otober 19== and before the aused ould be arrested, the
trial ourt set aside its )8 Se!tember 19== order on the ground that Atty# 6ituanas is not authori%ed to
determine !robable ause !ursuant to Setion 2, Artile 555 of the 19=9 +onstitution# 3he ourt stated that it
Awill gi$e due ourse to the information filed in this ase if the same has the written a!!ro$al of the
'ro$inial Fisal after whih the !roseution of the ase shall be under the su!er$ision and ontrol of the
latter#A 5n another order dated 22 Do$ember 19==, the ourt ga$e Atty# 6ituanas 15 days from reei!t to file
another information harging the same offense with the written a!!ro$al of the 'ro$inial Fisal# Atty#
6ituanas failed to om!ly with the order# 7ene, in an order dated = -eember 19==, the trial ourt 4uashed
the information# A motion for reonsideration was denied# 7ene, the !etition#
"ss#e! 1hether the a!!ro$al of the 'ro$inial Fisal is neessary before the information filed by the
'ro$inial ?letion Su!er$isor may be gi$en due ourse by the trial ourt#
$el%! As to the onstitutional mandate that A.. no searh warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue e.e!t u!on
!robable ause to be determined !ersonally by the 0udge ..,A ;Artile 555, Setion 2, +onstitution< the
determination of !robable ause is a funtion of the Cudge# 5t is not for the 'ro$inial Fisal or 'roseutor nor
for the ?letion Su!er$isor to asertain# Only the Cudge and the Cudge alone ma&es this determination# On the
other hand, the !reliminary in4uiry made by a 'roseutor does not bind the Cudge# 5t merely assists him to
ma&e the determination of !robable ause# 3he Cudge does not ha$e to follow what the 'roseutor !resents to
him# :y itself, the 'roseutor*s ertifiation of !robable ause is ineffetual# 5t is the re!ort, the affida$its, the
transri!ts of stenogra!hi notes ;if any<, and all other su!!orting douments behind the 'roseutor*s
ertifiation whih are material in assisting the Cudge to ma&e his determination# 3hus, Cudges and
'roseutors ali&e should distinguish the !reliminary in4uiry whih determines !robable ause for the issuane
of a warrant of arrest from the !reliminary in$estigation !ro!er whih asertains whether the offender should
be held for trial or released# ?$en if the two in4uiries are onduted in the ourse of one and the same
!roeeding, there should be no onfusion about the ob0eti$es# 3he determination of !robable ause for the
warrant of arrest is made by the Cudge# 3he !reliminary in$estigation !ro!er > whether or not there is
reasonable ground to belie$e that the aused is guilty of the offense harged and, therefore, whether or not be
should be sub0eted to the e.!ense, rigors and embarrassment of trial K is the funtion of the 'roseutor#
'reliminary in$estigation should be distinguished as to whether it is an in$estigation for the determination of
a suffiient ground for the filing of the information or it is an in$estigation for the determination of a !robable
ause for the issuane of a warrant of arrest# 3he first &ind of !reliminary in$estigation is e.euti$e in nature#
5t is !art of the !roseution*s 0ob# 3he seond &ind of !reliminary in$estigation whih is more !ro!erly alled
!reliminary e.amination is 0udiial in nature and is lodged with the 0udge#
3he 19=9 +onstitution ;Artile 5E +, Setion 2< mandates the +OM?6?+ not only to in$estigate but also to
!roseute ases of $iolation of eletion laws# 3his means that the +OM?6?+ is em!owered to ondut
!reliminary in$estigations in ases in$ol$ing eletion offenses for the !ur!ose of hel!ing the Cudge determine
!robable ause and for filing an information in ourt# 3his !ower is e.lusi$e with +OM?6?+# 5t is only after
a !reliminary e.amination onduted by the +OM?6?+ through its offiials or its de!uties that setion 2,
Artile 555 of the 19=9 +onstitution omes in# 3his is so, beause, when the a!!liation for a warrant of arrest
is made and the information is filed with the ourt, the 0udge will then determine whether or not a !robable
ause e.ists for the issuane of a warrant of arrest# 3he trial ourt misonstrued the onstitutional !ro$ision
when it 4uashed the information filed by the 'ro$inial ?letion Su!er$isor# 3he order to get the a!!ro$al of
the 'ro$inial Fisal is not only su!erfluous but unwarranted#
136 &a%eran:a vs. Drilon [GR 961(1, 19 A'ril 1991]
En Banc, +egalado (J): !4 concur
Facs! On 1/ Otober 19=/, an information for multi!le murder was filed in the (egional 3rial +ourt,
"ingoog +ity, against Feli!e "alarion, Manuel Sabit, +esar Sabit, Culito Am!o, ?ddie 3orion, Cohn -oe, 'eter
-oe and (ihard -oe, for the deaths on 1 May 19=4 of (enato :uag, his wife Melhora :uag, and their
son (enato :uag 55# Fenue was, howe$er, transferred to +agayan de Oro +ity !er Administrati$e Matter =9>
2>244# Only Feli!e "alarion was tried and found guilty as harged# 3he rest of the aused remained at large#
Feli!e "alarion, howe$er, esa!ed from detention and has not been a!!rehended sine then# 5n an amended
information filed on / Otober 19==, Feli%ardo (o.as, alias A?ly (o.as,A AFely (o.asA and A6olong (o.as,A
was inluded as a o>aused# (o.as retained Atty# Miguel '# 'aderanga as his ounsel# As ounsel for (o.as,
'aderanga filed, among others, an Omnibus Motion to dismiss, to Iuash the 1arrant of Arrest and to Dullify
the Arraignment on 14 Otober 19==# 3he trial ourt in an order dated 9 Canuary 19=9, denied the omnibus
motion but direted the +ity 'roseutor Ato ondut another !reliminary in$estigation or rein$estigation in
order to grant the aused all the o!!ortunity to addue whate$er e$idene he has in su!!ort of his defense#A
5n the ourse of the !reliminary in$estigation, through a signed affida$it, Feli%ardo (o.as im!liated Atty#
'aderanga in the ommission of the rime harged# 3he +ity 'roseutor of +agayan de Oro +ity inhibited
himself from further onduting the !reliminary in$estigation against 'aderanga at the instane of the latter*s
ounsel, !er his resolution dated 9 Culy 19=9# 5n his first indorsement to the -e!artment of Custie, dated 24
Culy 19=9, said ity !roseutor re4uested the -e!artment of Custie to designate a state !roseutor to ontinue
the !reliminary in$estigation against 'aderanga# 5n a resolution dated / Se!tember 19=9, the State 'roseutor
7enri& F# "ingoyon, who was designated to ontinue with the ondut of the !reliminary in$estigation
against 'aderanga, direted the amendment of the !re$iously amended information to inlude and im!lead
'aderanga as one of the aused therein# 'aderanga mo$ed for reonsideration, ontending that the
!reliminary in$estigation was not yet om!leted when said resolution was !romulgated, and that he was
de!ri$ed of his right to !resent a orres!onding ounter>affida$it and additional e$idene ruial to the
determination of his alleged Alin&ageA to the rime harged# 3he motion was, howe$er, denied by "ingoyon in
his order dated 29 Canuary 1998# From the aforesaid resolution and order, 'aderanga filed a 'etition for
(e$iew with the -e!artment of Custie# 3hereafter, he submitted a Su!!lemental 'etition with Memorandum,
and then a Su!!lemental Memorandum with Additional ?.ul!atoryB?.onerating ?$idene Anne.ed,
attahing thereto an affida$it of (o.as dated 28 Cune 1998 and !ur!orting to be a retration of his affida$it of
)8 Marh 1998 wherein he im!liated 'aderanga# On 18 August 1998, the -e!artment of Custie, through
Underseretary Sil$estre 7# :ello 555, issued (esolution /4= dismissing the said !etition for re$iew# 7is
motion for reonsideration ha$ing been li&ewise denied, 'aderanga then filed the !etition for mandamus and
!rohibition before the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether there is no !rima faie e$idene, or !robable ause, or suffiient 0ustifiation to hold
'aderangato a tedious and !rolonged !ubli trial#
$el%! A !reliminary in$estigation is defined as an in4uiry or !roeeding for the !ur!ose of determining
whether there is suffiient ground to engender a well founded belief that a rime ogni%able by the (egional
3rial +ourt has been ommitted and that the res!ondent is !robably guilty thereof, and should be held for
trial# 3he 4uantum of e$idene now re4uired in !reliminary in$estigation is suh e$idene suffiient to
Aengender a well founded beliefA as to the fat of the ommission of a rime and the res!ondent*s !robable
guilt thereof# A !reliminary in$estigation is not the oasion for the full and e.hausti$e dis!lay of the !arties*
e$idene, it is for the !resentation of suh e$idene only as may engender a well grounded belief that an
offense has been ommitted and that the aused is !robably guilty thereof# 'reliminary in$estigation is
generally in4uisitorial, and it is often the only means of diso$ering the !ersons who may be reasonably
harged with a rime, to enable the fisal to !re!are his om!laint or information# 5t is not a trial of the ase
on the merits and has no !ur!ose e.e!t that of determining whether a rime has been ommitted and whether
there is !robable ause to belie$e that the aused is guilty thereof, and it does not !lae the !erson against
whom it is ta&en in 0eo!ardy# 3he institution of a riminal ation de!ends u!on the sound disretion of the
fisal# 7e has the 4uasi>0udiial disretion to determine whether or not a riminal ase should be filed in ourt#
7ene, the general rule is that an in0untion will not be granted to restrain a riminal !roseution# 3he ase of
:ro&a, et al# $s# ?nrile, et al# ites se$eral e.e!tions to the rule, to witH ;a< 3o afford ade4uate !rotetion to
the onstitutional rights of the aused, ;b< 1hen neessary for the orderly administration of 0ustie or to
a$oid o!!ression or multi!liity of ations, ;< 1hen there is a !re0udiial 4uestion whih is sub>0udie, ;d<
1hen the ats of the offier are without or in e.ess of authority, ;e< 1here the !roseution is under an
in$alid law, ordinane or regulation, ;f< 1hen double 0eo!ardy is learly a!!arent, ;g< 1here the ourt has no
0urisdition o$er the offense, ;h< 1here it is a ase of !erseution rather than !roseution, ;i< 1here the
harges are manifestly false and moti$ated by the lust for $engeane, and ;0< 1hen there is learly no !rima
faie ase against the aused and a motion to 4uash on that ground has been denied# A areful analysis of the
irumstanes obtaining in the !resent ase, howe$er, will readily show that the same does not fall under any
of the aforesaid e.e!tions#
132 &ia vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR (1(16, ) >co3er 19(9]
En Banc, 2armiento (J): !- concur, 3 concur in result, ! on leave
Facs! On -eember 1 and ), 19=), !ursuing an Anti>Smut +am!aign initiated by the Mayor of the +ity of
Manila, (amon -# :agatsing, elements of the S!eial Anti>Darotis "rou!, Au.iliary Ser$ies :ureau,
1estern 'olie -istrit, 5D' of the Metro!olitan 'olie Fore of Manila, sei%ed and onfisated from dealers,
distributors, newsstand owners and !eddlers along Manila sidewal&s, maga%ines, !ubliations and other
reading materials belie$ed to be obsene, !ornogra!hi and indeent and later burned the sei%ed materials in
!ubli at the Uni$ersity belt along +#M# (eto A$enue, Manila, in the !resene of Mayor :agatsing and
se$eral offiers and members of $arious student organi%ations# Among the !ubliations sei%ed, and later
burned, was A'inoy 'layboyA maga%ines !ublished and o>edited by 6eo 'ita# On 9 -eember 19=), 'ita filed
a ase for in0untion with !rayer for issuane of the writ of !reliminary in0untion against Mayor :agatsing
and Dariso +abrera, as su!erintendent of 1estern 'olie -istrit of the +ity of Manila, see&ing to en0oin
and or restrain :agatsing, +abrera and their agents from onfisating his maga%ines or from otherwise
!re$enting the sale or irulation thereof laiming that the maga%ine is a deent, artisti and eduational
maga%ine whih is not !er se obsene, and that the !ubliation is !roteted by the +onstitutional guarantees of
freedom of s!eeh and of the !ress# On 12 -eember 19=), 'ita filed an Urgent Motion for issuane of a
tem!orary restraining order against indisriminate sei%ure, onfisation and burning of !laintiffs A'inoy
'layboyA Maga%ines, !ending hearing on the !etition for !reliminary in0untion in $iew of Mayor :agatsing*s
!ronounement to ontinue the Anti>Smut +am!aign# 3he +ourt granted the tem!orary restraining order on
14 -eember 19=)# On 5 Canuary 19=4, 'ita filed his Memorandum in su!!ort of the issuane of the writ of
!reliminary in0untion, raising the issue as to Awhether or not the defendants, and or their agents an without a
ourt order onfisate or sei%e !laintiff*s maga%ine before any 0udiial finding is made on whether said
maga%ine is obsene or not#A 3he restraining order la!sed on ) Canuary 19=4, 'ita filed an urgent motion for
issuane of another restraining order, whih was o!!osed by :agatsing on the ground that issuane of a
seond restraining order would $iolate the (esolution of the Su!reme +ourt dated 11 Canuary 19=), !ro$iding
for the 5nterim (ules (elati$e to the 5m!lementation of :atas 'ambansa 129, whih !ro$ides that a tem!orary
restraining order shall be effeti$e only for 28 days from date of its issuane# On 11 Canuary 19=4, the trial
ourt issued an Order setting the ase for hearing on 1/ Canuary 19=4 Afor the !arties to addue e$idene on
the 4uestion of whether the !ubliation *'inoy 'layboy Maga%ine* alleged ;si< sei%ed, onfisated and or
burned by the defendants, are obsene !er se or not#A On ) February 19=4, the trial ourt !romulgated the
Order a!!ealed from denying the motion for a writ of !reliminary in0untion, and dismissing the ase for la&
of merit# 6i&ewise, the A!!ellate +ourt dismissed the a!!eal, holding that the freedom of the !ress is not
without restraint, as the state has the right to !rotet soiety from !ornogra!hi literature that is offensi$e to
!ubli morals, as indeed we ha$e laws !unishing the author, !ublishers and sellers of obsene !ubliations,
and that the right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures reogni%es ertain e.e!tions, as when there is
onsent to the searh or sei%ure, or searh is an inident to an arrest, or is onduted in a $ehile or mo$able
struture# 'ita filed the !etition for re$iew with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the Mayor an order the sei%ure of RobseneO materials as a result of an anti>smut am!aign#
$el%! 3he +ourt is not on$ined that :agatsing and +abrera ha$e shown the re4uired !roof to 0ustify a ban
and to warrant onfisation of the literature for whih mandatory in0untion had been sought below# First of
all, they were not !ossessed of a lawful ourt orderH ;1< finding the said materials to be !ornogra!hy, and ;2<
authori%ing them to arry out a searh and sei%ure, by way of a searh warrant# 3he fat that the former
Mayor*s at was santioned by A!olie !owerA is no liense to sei%e !ro!erty in disregard of due !roess#
'residential -erees 9/8 and 9/9 are, arguably, !olie !ower measures, but they are not, by themsel$es,
authorities for high>handed ats# 3hey do not e.em!t our law enforers, in arrying out the deree of the twin
!residential issuanes, from the ommandments of the +onstitution, the right to due !roess of law and the
right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, s!eifially# Signifiantly, the -erees themsel$es lay down
!roedures for im!lementation# 5t is basi that searhes and sei%ures may be done only through a 0udiial
warrant, otherwise, they beome unreasonable and sub0et to hallenge# 3he +ourt finds greater reason to
re!robate the 4uestioned raid, in the om!lete absene of a warrant, $alid or in$alid# 3he fat that the !resent
ase in$ol$es an obsenity ra! ma&es it no different from :urgos $s# +hief of Staff AF', a !olitial ase,
beause s!eeh is s!eeh, whether !olitial or Aobsene#A Although the +ourt is not ruling out warrantless
searhes, the searh must ha$e been an inident to a lawful arrest, and the arrest must be on aount of a
rime ommitted# 7ere, no !arty has been harged, nor are suh harges being readied against any !arty,
under Artile 281, as amended, of the (e$ised 'enal +ode# 3here is no AausedA here to s!ea& of, who ought
to be A!unishedA# Further, to say that the Mayor ould ha$e $alidly ordered the raid ;as a result of an anti>smut
am!aign< without a lawful searh warrant beause, in his o!inion, A$iolation of !enal lawsA has been
ommitted, is to ma&e the Mayor 0udge, 0ury, and e.eutioner rolled into one# 3hus, the ourt mae a resume,
to witH ;1< 3he authorities must a!!ly for the issuane of a searh warrant from a 0udge, if in their o!inion, an
obsenity ra! is in order, ;2< 3he authorities must on$ine the ourt that the materials sought to be sei%ed are
AobseneA, and !ose a lear and !resent danger of an e$il substanti$e enough to warrant State interferene and
ation, ;)< 3he 0udge must determine whether or not the same are indeed AobseneHA the 4uestion is to be
resol$ed on a ase>to>ase basis and on 7is 7onor*s sound disretion# ;4< 5f, in the o!inion of the ourt,
!robable ause e.ists, it may issue the searh warrant !rayed for, ;5< 3he !ro!er suit is then brought in the
ourt under Artile 281 of the (e$ised 'enal +ode, and ;/< Any on$ition is sub0et to a!!eal# 3he a!!ellate
ourt may assess whether or not the !ro!erties sei%ed are indeed Aobsene#A 3he +ourt states, howe$er, that
Athese do not forelose, howe$er, defenses under the +onstitution or a!!liable statutes, or remedies against
abuse of offiial !ower under the +i$il +ode or the (e$ised 'enal ode#A
13( A3%#la vs. G#iani [GR 11((21, 1( Fe3r#ary 2111]
Third Division, .on6aga1+eyes (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 24 Cune 1994, a om!laint for murder ;5S 94>1)/1< was filed before the +riminal 5n$estigation
Ser$ie +ommand, A(MM (egional Offie E55 against Mayor :ai Unggie -# Abdula and Odin Abdula and /
other !ersons in onnetion with the death of a ertain Abdul -imalen, the former +OM?6?+ (egistrar of
Jabuntalan, Maguindanao# 3he om!laint alleged that the Abdulas !aid the / other !ersons the total amount
of '288,888#88 for the death of -imalen# Ating on this om!laint, the 'ro$inial 'roseutor of
Maguindanao, Sali& U# 'anda, in a (esolution dated 22 August 1994, dismissed the harges of murder
against the Abdulas and 5 other res!ondents on a finding that there was no !rima faie ase for murder against
them# 'roseutor 'anda, howe$er, reommended the filing of an information for murder against one of the
res!ondents, a ertain Jasan Mama# 'ursuant to this (esolution, an information for murder was thereafter
filed against Jasan Mama before the sala of Cudge Ca!al M# "uiani# 5n an Order dated 1) Se!tember 1994, the
Cudge ordered that the ase ;+riminal +ase 2))2<, be returned to the 'ro$inial 'roseutor for further
in$estigation# 5n this Order, the 0udge noted that although there were = res!ondents in the murder ase, the
information filed with the ourt Aharged only 1 of the = res!ondents in the name of Jasan Mama without the
neessary resolution re4uired under Setion 4, (ule 112 of the (e$ised (ules of +ourt to show how the
in$estigating !roseutor arri$ed at suh a onlusion#A As suh, the 0udge reasons, the trial ourt annot issue
the warrant of arrest against Jasan Mama# U!on the return of the reords of the ase to the Offie of the
'ro$inial 'roseutor for Maguindanao, it was assigned to 2nd Assistant 'roseutor ?no& 3# -imaraw for
further in$estigation# 5n addition to the e$idene !resented during the initial in$estigation of the murder
harge, two new affida$its of witnesses were submitted to su!!ort the harge of murder against the Abdulas
and the other res!ondents in the murder om!laint# 3hus, 'roseutor -imaraw treated the same as a re>filing
of the murder harge and !ursuant to law, issued sub!oena to the res!ondents named therein# On / -eember
1994, the Abdulas submitted and filed their 0oint ounter>affida$its# After e$aluation of the e$idene,
'roseutor -imaraw, in a (esolution dated 2= -eember 1994, found a !rima faie ase for murder against
the Abdulas and ) other res!ondents# 7e thus reommended the filing of harges against the Abdulas, as
!rini!als by induement, and against the ) others, as !rini!als by diret !artii!ation# 6i&ewise in this 2=
-eember 1994 (esolution, 'ro$inial 'roseutor Sali& U# 'anda, who onduted the earlier !reliminary
in$estigation of the murder harge, added a notation stating that he was inhibiting himself from the ase and
authori%ing the in$estigating !roseutor to dis!ose of the ase without his a!!ro$al# 3he reasons he ited were
that the ase was !re$iously handled by him and that the $itim was the father>in>law of his son# On 2 Canuary
1995, an information for murder dated 2= -eember 1994 was filed against the Abdulas and Jasan Mama,
+ueno Usman and Cun Mama before :ranh 14 of the (egional 3rial +ourt of +otabato +ity, then the sala of
Cudge "uiani# 3his information was signed by in$estigating !roseutor ?no& 3# -imaraw# A notation was
li&ewise made on the information by 'ro$inial 'roseutor 'anda, whih e.!lained the reason for his
inhibition# 3he following day, the 0udge issued a warrant for the arrest of the Abdulas# U!on learning of the
issuane of the said warrant, the Abdulas filed on 4 Canuary 1995 an Urgent ?.>!arte Motion for the setting
aside of the warrant of arrest on 4 Canuary 1995# 5n this motion, the Abdulas argued that the enforement of
the warrant of arrest should be held in abeyane onsidering that the information was !rematurely filed and
that the Abdulas intended to file a !etition for re$iew with the -e!artment of Custie# A !etition for re$iew
was filed by the Abdulas with the -e!artment of Custie on 11 Canuary 1995# -es!ite said filing, the 0udge did
not at u!on the Abdulas* !ending Motion to Set Aside the 1arrant of Arrest# 3he Abdulas filed the 'etition
for +ertiorari and 'rohibition with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the 0udge may rely u!on the findings of the !roseutor in determining !robable ause in the
issuane of searh or arrest warrant#
$el%! 3he 19=9 +onstitution re4uires the 0udge to determine !robable ause A!ersonally,A a re4uirement
whih does not a!!ear in the orres!onding !ro$isions of our !re$ious onstitutions# 3his em!hasis e$ines
the intent of the framers to !lae a greater degree of res!onsibility u!on trial 0udges than that im!osed under
!re$ious +onstitutions# 7erein, the Cudge admits that he issued the 4uestioned warrant as there was Ano
reason for ;him< to doubt the $alidity of the ertifiation made by the Assistant 'roseutor that a !reliminary
in$estigation was onduted and that !robable ause was found to e.ist as against those harged in the
information filed#A 3he statement is an admission that the Cudge relied solely and om!letely on the
ertifiation made by the fisal that !robable ause e.ists as against those harged in the information and
issued the hallenged warrant of arrest on the sole basis of the !roseutor*s findings and reommendations# 7e
ado!ted the 0udgment of the !roseutor regarding the e.istene of !robable ause as his own# +learly, the
0udge, by merely stating that he had no reason to doubt the $alidity of the ertifiation made by the
in$estigating !roseutor has abdiated his duty under the +onstitution to determine on his own the issue of
!robable ause before issuing a warrant of arrest# +onse4uently, the warrant of arrest should be delared null
and $oid#
139 &asion ?%a. %e Garcia vs. Locsin [GR 4)9)1, 21 *#ne 193(]
3irst Division, 8aurel (J): & concur
Facs! On 18 Do$ember 19)4, Mariano "# Almeda, an agent of the Anti>Usury :oard, obtained from the
0ustie of the !eae of 3arla, 3arla, a searh warrant ommanding any offier of the law to searh the
!erson, house or store of 6eona 'asion Fda# de "aria at Fitoria, 3arla, for Aertain boo&s, lists, hits,
reei!ts, douments and other !a!ers relating to her ati$ities as usurer#A 3he searh warrant was issued u!on
an affida$it gi$en by the said Almeda Athat he has and there is 0ust and !robable ause to belie$e and he does
belie$e that 6eona 'asion de "aria &ee!s and oneals in her house and store at Fitoria, 3arla, ertain
boo&s, lists, hits, reei!ts, douments, and other !a!ers relating to her ati$ities as usurer, all of whih is
ontrary to the statute in suh ases made and !ro$ided#A On the same date, Almeda, aom!anied by a
a!tain of the 'hili!!ine +onstabulary, went to the offie of 'asion de "aria in Fitoria, 3arla and, after
showing the searh warrant to the latter*s boo&&ee!er, Alfredo Salas, and, without 'asion de "aria*s !resene
who was ill and onfined at the time, !roeeded with the e.eution thereof# 3wo !a&ages of reords and a
lo&ed filing abinet ontaining se$eral !a!ers and douments were sei%ed by Almeda and a reei!t therefor
issued by him to Salas# 3he !a!ers and douments sei%ed were &e!t for a onsiderable length of time by the
Anti>Usury :oard and thereafter were turned o$er by it to the !ro$inial fisal Feli. 5m!erial, who
subse4uently filed, in the +ourt of First 5nstane ;+F5< of 3arla, / se!arate riminal ases against 'asion de
"aria for $iolation of the Anti>Usury 6aw# On se$eral oasions, after sei%ure, 'asion de "aria, through
ounsel, demanded from the Anti>Usury :oard the return of the douments sei%ed# On Canuary 9, and, by
motion, on 4 Cune 19)9, the legality of the searh warrant was hallenged by 'asion de "aria*s ounsel in the
/ riminal ases and the de$olution of the douments demanded# :y resolution of 5 Otober 19)9, Cudge
-iego 6osin ;+F5< denied 'asion de garia*s motion of Cune 4 for the reason that though the searh warrant
was illegal, there was a wai$er on the latter*s !art# A motion for reonsideration was !resented but was denied
by order of ) Canuary 19)=# 'asion de "aria registered her e.e!tion#
"ss#e! 1hether the la& of !ersonal e.amination of witnesses renders the warrant $oid#
$el%! Freedom from unreasonable searhes and sei%ures is delared a !o!ular right and for a searh warrant
to be $alid, ;1< it must be issued u!on !robable ause, ;2< the !robable ause must be determined by the 0udge
himself and not by the a!!liant or any other !erson, ;)< in the determination of !robable ause, the 0udge
must e.amine, under oath or affirmation, the om!lainant and suh witnesses as the latter may !rodue, and
;4< the warrant issued must !artiularly desribe the !lae to be searhed and !ersons or things to be sei%ed#
3hese re4uirements are om!lemented by the +ode of +riminal 'roedure, !artiularly with referene to the
duration of the $alidity of the searh warrant and the obligation of the offier sei%ing the !ro!erty to deli$er
the same to the orres!onding ourt# 7erein, the e.istene of !robable ause was determined not by the 0udge
himself but by the a!!liant# All that the 0udge did was to ae!t as true the affida$it made by agent Almeda#
7e did not deide for himself# 5t does not a!!ear that he e.amined the a!!liant and his witnesses, if any#
?$en ae!ting the desri!tion of the !ro!erties to be sei%ed to be suffiient and on the assum!tion that the
reei!t issued is suffiiently detailed within the meaning of the law, the !ro!erties sei%ed were not deli$ered
to the ourt whih issued the warrant, as re4uired by law# 5nstead, they were turned o$er to the !ro$inial
fisal and used by him in building u! ases against 'asion de "aria# +onsidering that at the time the warrant
was issued there was no ase !ending against 'asion de "aria, the a$erment that the warrant was issued
!rimarily for e.!loration !ur!oses is not without basis# 3he searh warrant was illegally issued by the 0ustie
of the !eae of 3arla, 3arla# 5n any e$ent, the failure on the !art of 'asion de "aria and her boo&&ee!er to
resist or ob0et to the e.eution of the warrant does not onstitute an im!lied wai$er of onstitutional right# 5t
is, as Cudge +ooley obser$es, but a submission to the authority of the law# As the onstitutional guaranty is not
de!endent u!on any affirmati$e at of the iti%en, the ourts do not !lae the iti%en in the !osition of either
ontesting an offier*s authority by fore, or wai$ing his onstitutional rights, but instead they hold that a
!eaeful submission to a searh or sei%ure is not a onsent or an in$itation thereto, but is merely a
demonstration of regard for the su!remay of the law# 3hus,
141 @ee 4#e Aoy vs. Al;e%a [GR 42121, 1) *#ne 1941]
8aurel (J): 3 concur, ! concurs in result
Facs! 5n res!onse to a sworn a!!liation of Mariano "# Almeda, hief agent of the Anti>Usury :oard, dated
5 May 19)=, the 0ustie of the !eae of Sagay, Oidental Degros, after ta&ing the testimony of a!!liant*s
witness, Cose ?strada, s!eial agent of the Anti>Usury :oard, issued on the same date a searh warrant
ommanding any !eae offier to searh during day time the store and !remises ou!ied by Sam Sing G +o#,
situated at Sagay, Oidental Degros, as well as the !erson of said Sam Sing G +o#, and to sei%e the
douments, noteboo&s, lists, reei!ts and !romissory notes being used by said Sam Sing G +o# in onnetion
with their ati$ities of lending money at usurious rates of interest in $iolation of law, or suh as may be found,
and to bring them forthwith before the aforesaid 0ustie of the !eae of Sagay# On the same date, at 18H)8 a#
m#, searh was aordingly made by Mariano "# Almeda, Cose ?strada, 2 internal re$enue agents and 2
members of the 'hili!!ine Army, who sei%ed ertain reei!t boo&s, $ales or !romissory notes, hits,
noteboo&s, 0ournal boo&, and olletion list belonging to Sam Sing G +o# and enumerated in the in$entory
reei!t issued by Mariano "# Almeda to the owner of the douments, !a!ers and artiles sei%ed# 5mmediately
after the searh and sei%ure thus effeted, Mariano "# Almeda filed a return with the 0ustie of the !eae of
Sagay together# 1ith a re4uest that the offie of the Anti>Usury :oard be allowed to retain !ossession of the
artiles sei%ed for e.amination, !ursuant to setion 4 of At 4189, whih re4uest was granted# Under the date
of 11 Marh 19)9, "odofredo '# ?salona, ounsel for Sam Sing G +o# filed a motion with the +ourt of First
5nstane ;+F5< of Oidental Degros !raying that the searh warrant and the sei%ure effeted thereunder be
delared illegal and set aside and that the artiles in 4uestion be ordered returned to Sam Sing G +o#, whih
motion was denied in the order dated 24 Culy 19)9# A similar motion was !resented to the 0ustie of the !eae
of Sagay on 29 Otober 19)9 but was denied the ne.t day# Meanwhile, an information dated )8 Se!tember
19)9 had been filed in the +F5 Oidental Degros, harging See Fo& alias See Sue Joy, S# 3i! and A# Sing,
managers of Sam Sing G +o#, with a $iolation of At 2/55# :efore the riminal ase ould be tried, See Sue
Joy and See 3i! filed the !etition with the Su!reme +ourt on / Do$ember 19)9# 3he !etition is grounded on
the !ro!ositions ;1< that the searh warrant issued on 2 May 19)=, by the 0ustie of the !eae of Sagay and the
sei%ure aom!lished thereunder are illegal, beause the warrant was issued three days ahead of the
a!!liation therefor and of the affida$it of the Cose ?strada whih is insuffiient in itself to 0ustify the issuane
of a searh warrant, and beause the issuane of said warrant manifestly ontra$enes the mandatory
!ro$isions both of setion 1, !aragra!h ), of Artile 555 of the +onstitution and of setion 99 of "eneral
Orders 5=, and ;2< that the sei%ure of the aforesaid artiles by means of a searh warrant for the !ur!ose of
using them as e$idene in the riminal ase against the aused, is unonstitutional beause the warrant
thereby beomes unreasonable and amounts to a $iolation of the onstitutional !rohibition against om!elling
the aused to testify against themsel$es#
"ss#e! 1hether the a!!liation of the searh warrant is su!!orted by the !ersonal &nowledge of the witness,
besides the a!!liant, for the 0udge to determine !robable ause in issuing the warrant#
$el%! Strit obser$ane of the formalities under setion 1, !aragra!h ), of Artile 555 of the +onstitution and
of setion 99 of "eneral Orders 5= was followed# 3he a!!liant Mariano "# Almeda, in his a!!liation, swore
that Ahe made his own !ersonal in$estigation and asertained that Sam Sing G +o# is lending money without
liense, harging usurious rate of interest and is &ee!ing, utili%ing and onealing in the store and !remises
ou!ied by it situated at Sagay, Oidental Degros, douments, noteboo&s, lists, reei!ts, !romissory notes,
and boo& of aounts and reords, all of whih are being used by it in onnetion with its ati$ities of lending
money at usurious rate of interest in $iolation of the Usury 6aw#A 5n turn, the witness Cose ?strada, in his
testimony before the 0ustie of the !eae of Sagay, swore that he &new that Sam Sing G +o# was lending
money without liense and harging usurious rate of interest, beause he !ersonally in$estigated the $itims
who had seured loans from said Sam Sing G +o# and were harged usurious rate of interest, that he &new
that the said Sam Sing G +o# was &ee!ing and using boo&s of aounts and reords ontaining its transations
relati$e its ati$ities as money lender and the entries of the interest !aid by its debtors, beause he saw the
said Sam Sing G d ma&e entries and reords of their debts and the interest !aid thereon# As both Mariano "#
Almeda and Cose ?strada swore that they had !ersonal &nowledge, their affida$its were suffiient for,
thereunder, they ould be held liable for !er0ury if the fats would turn out to be not as their were stated under
oath# 3hat the e.istene of !robable ause had been determined by the 0ustie of the !eae of Sagay before
issuing the searh warrant om!lained of, is shown by the following statement in the warrant itself, to witH
AAfter e.amination under oath of the om!lainant, Mariano "# Almeda, +hief Agent of the Anti>Usury :oard,
-e!artment of Custie and S!eial Agent of the 'hili!!ine Army, Manila, and the witness he !resented, # # #
and this +ourt, finding that there is 0ust and !robable ause to belie$e as it does belie$e, that the abo$e
desribed artiles, relating to the ati$ities of said Sam Sing G +o# of lending money at usurious rate of
interest, are being utili%ed and &e!t and onealed at its store and !remises ou!ied by said Sam Sing G +o#,
all in $iolation of law#A
141 Alvarez vs. .o#r o7 Firs "nsance o7 <aya3as [GR 4)3)(, 29 *an#ary 1932]
3irst Division, 9m#erial (J): 4 concur
Facs! On ) Cune 19)/, the hief of the seret ser$ie of the Anti>Usury :oard, of the -e!artment of Custie,
!resented to Cudge ?duardo "utierre% -a$id then !residing o$er the +ourt of First 5nstane of 3ayabas, an
affida$it alleging that aording to reliable information, Dariso Al$are% &e!t in his house in 5nfanta, 3ayabas,
boo&s, douments, reei!ts, lists, hits and other !a!ers used by him in onnetion with his ati$ities as a
moneylender, harging usurious rates of interest in $iolation of the law# 5n his oath at the end of the affida$it,
the hief of the seret ser$ie stated that his answers to the 4uestions were orret to the best of his &nowledge
and belief# 7e did not swear to the truth of his statements u!on his own &nowledge of the fats but u!on the
information reei$ed by him from a reliable !erson# U!on the affida$it the 0udge, on said date, issued the
warrant whih is the sub0et matter of the !etition, ordering the searh of the Al$are%*s house at any time of
the day or night, the sei%ure of the boo&s and douments and the immediate deli$ery thereof to him to be
dis!osed of in aordane with the law# 1ith said warrant, se$eral agents of the Anti>Usury :oard entered
Al$are%*s store and residene at 9H88 !#m# of 4 Cune 19)/, and sei%ed and too& !ossession of the following
artilesH internal re$enue lienses for the years 19)) to 19)/, 1 ledger, 2 0ournals, 2 ashboo&s, 9 order boo&s,
4 noteboo&s, 4 he& stubs, 2 memorandums, ) ban&boo&s, 2 ontrats, 4 stubs, 4= stubs of !urhases of
o!ra, 2 in$entories, 2 bundles of bills of lading, 1 bundle of redit reei!ts, 1 bundle of stubs of !urhases of
o!ra, 2 !a&ages of orres!ondene, 1 reei!t boo& belonging to 6uis Fernande%, 14 bundles of in$oies and
other !a!ers, many douments and loan ontrats with seurity and !romissory notes, 584 hits, !romissory
notes and stubs of used he&s of the 7ong&ong G Shanghai :an&ing +or!oration ;7S:+<# 3he searh for
and sei%ure of said artiles were made with the o!!osition of Al$are% who stated his !rotest below the
in$entories on the ground that the agents sei%ed e$en the originals of the douments# As the artiles had not
been brought immediately to the 0udge who issued the searh warrant, Al$are%, through his attorney, filed a
motion on = Cune 19)/, !raying that the agent ?milio 6# Siongo, or any other agent, be ordered immediately
to de!osit all the sei%ed artiles in the offie of the ler& of ourt and that said agent be delared guilty of
ontem!t for ha$ing disobeyed the order of the ourt# On said date the ourt issued an order direting Siongo
to de!osit all the artiles sei%ed within 24 hours from the reei!t of notie thereof and gi$ing him a !eriod of
5 days within whih to show ause why he should not be !unished for ontem!t of ourt# On 18 Cune,
Attorney Arsenio (odrigue%, re!resenting the Anti>Usury :oard, filed a motion !raying that the order of the
=th of said month be set aside and that the Anti>Usury :oard be authori%ed to retain the artiles sei%ed for a
!eriod of )8 days for the neessary in$estigation# On Cune 25, the ourt issued an order re4uiring agent
Siongo forthwith to file the searh warrant and the affida$it in the ourt, together with the !roeedings ta&en
by him, and to !resent an in$entory duly $erified by oath of all the artiles sei%ed# On Culy 2, the attorney for
the !etitioner filed a !etition alleging that the searh warrant issued was illegal and that it had not yet been
returned to date together with the !roeedings ta&en in onnetion therewith, and !raying that said warrant be
anelled, that an order be issued direting the return of all the artiles sei%ed to Al$are%, that the agent who
sei%ed them be delared guilty of ontem!t of ourt, and that harges be filed against him for abuse of
authority# On Se!tember 18, the ourt issued an order holdingH that the searh warrant was obtained and
issued in aordane with the law, that it had been duly om!lied with and, onse4uently, should not be
anelled, and that agent Siongo did not ommit any ontem!t of ourt and must, therefore, be e.onerated,
and ordering the hief of the Anti>Usury :oard in Manila to show ause, if any, within the une.tendible
!eriod of 2 days from the date of notie of said order, why all the artiles sei%ed a!!earing in the in$entory
should not be returned to Al$are%# 3he assistant hief of the Anti>Usury :oard of the -e!artment of Custie
filed a motion !raying, for the reasons stated therein, that the artiles sei%ed be ordered retained for the
!ur!ose of onduting an in$estigation of the $iolation of the Anti>Usury 6aw ommitted by Al$are%# On
Otober 18, said offiial again filed another motion alleging that he needed /8 days to e.amine the douments
and !a!ers sei%ed, whih are designated on !ages 1 to 4 of the in$entory by Dos# 5, 18, 1/, 2), 25>29, )8>)1 ,
)4, )/>4) and 45, and !raying that he be granted said !eriod of /8 days# 5n an order of Otober 1/, the ourt
granted him the !eriod of /8 days to in$estigate said 19 douments# Al$are%, herein, as&s that the searh
warrant as well as the order authori%ing the agents of the Anti>Usury :oard to retain the artiles sei%ed, be
delared illegal and set aside, and !rays that all the artiles in 4uestion be returned to him#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh warrant issued by the ourt is illegal beause it has been based u!on the affida$it of
agent Almeda in whose oath he delared that he had no !ersonal &nowledge of the fats whih were to ser$e
as a basis for the issuane of the warrant but that he had &nowledge thereof through mere information seured
from a !erson whom he onsidered reliable, and that it is illegal as it was not su!!orted by other affida$its
aside from that made by the a!!liant#
$el%! Setion 1, !aragra!h ), of Artile 555 of the +onstitution and Setion 99 of "eneral Orders 5= re4uire
that there be not only !robable ause before the issuane of a searh warrant but that the searh warrant must
be based u!on an a!!liation su!!orted by oath of the a!!liant and the witnesses he may !rodue# 5n its
broadest sense, an oath inludes any form of attestation by whih a !arty signifies that he is bound in
onsiene to !erform an at faithfully and truthfully, and it is sometimes defined as an outward !ledge gi$en
by the !erson ta&ing it that his attestation or !romise is made under an immediate sense of his res!onsibility
to "od# 3he oath re4uired must refer to the truth of the fats within the !ersonal &nowledge of the !etitioner
or his witnesses, beause the !ur!ose thereof is to on$ine the ommitting magistrate, not the indi$idual
ma&ing the affida$it and see&ing the issuane of the warrant, of the e.istene of !robable ause# 3he true test
of suffiieny of an affida$it to warrant issuane of a searh warrant is whether it has been drawn in suh a
manner that !er0ury ould be harged thereon and affiant be held liable for damages aused# 3he affida$it,
whih ser$ed as the e.lusi$e basis of the searh warrant, is insuffiient and fatally defeti$e by reason of the
manner in whih the oath was made, and therefore, the searh warrant and the subse4uent sei%ure of the
boo&s, douments and other !a!ers are illegal# Further, it is the !ratie in this 0urisdition to attah the
affida$it of at least the a!!liant or om!lainant to the a!!liation# 5t is admitted that the 0udge who issued the
searh warrant in this ase, relied e.lusi$ely u!on the affida$it made by agent Almeda and that he did not
re4uire nor ta&e the de!osition of any other witness# Deither the +onstitution nor "eneral Orders 5= !ro$ides
that it is of im!erati$e neessity to ta&e the de!ositions of the witnesses to be !resented by the a!!liant or
om!lainant in addition to the affida$it of the latter# 3he !ur!ose of both in re4uiring the !resentation of
de!ositions is nothing more than to satisfy the ommitting magistrate of the e.istene of !robable ause#
3herefore, if the affida$it of the a!!liant or om!lainant is suffiient, the 0udge may dis!ense with that of
other witnesses# 5nasmuh as the affida$it of the agent was insuffiient beause his &nowledge of the fats
was not !ersonal but merely hearsay, it is the duty of the 0udge to re4uire the affida$it of one or more
witnesses for the !ur!ose of determining the e.istene of !robable ause to warrant the issuane of the searh
warrant# 1hen the affida$it of the a!!liant or om!lainant ontains suffiient fats within his !ersonal and
diret &nowledge, it is suffiient if the 0udge is satisfied that there e.ists !robable ause, when the a!!liant*s
&nowledge of the fats is mere hearsay, the affida$it of one or more witnesses ha$ing a !ersonal &nowledge of
the fats is neessary# 3hus the warrant issued is li&ewise illegal beause it was based only on the affida$it of
the agent who had no !ersonal &nowledge of the fats#
142 Maa vs. +ayona [GR )1221, 26 Marc, 19(4]
2econd Division, de %astro (J): 3 concur, ( concur in result, ! too) no #art
Facs! Soriano Mata was aused under 'residential -eree ;'-< =18, as amended by '- 1)8/, the
information against him alleging that Soriano Mata offered, too& and arranged bets on the Cai Alai game by
Aselling illegal ti&ets &nown as *Masiao ti&ets* without any authority from the 'hili!!ine Cai Alai G
Amusement +or!oration or from the go$ernment authorities onerned#A Mata laimed that during the
hearing of the ase, he diso$ered that nowhere from the reords of the said ase ould be found the searh
warrant and other !ertinent !a!ers onneted to the issuane of the same, so that he had to in4uire from the
+ity Fisal its whereabouts, and to whih in4uiry Cudge Cose!hine J# :ayona, !residing Cufe of the +ity +ourt
of Ormo re!lied, Ait is with the ourtA# 3he Cudge then handed the reords to the Fisal who attahed them to
the reords# 3his led Mata to file a motion to 4uash and annul the searh warrant and for the return of the
artiles sei%ed, iting and in$o&ing, among others, Setion 4 of (ule 12/ of the (e$ised (ules of +ourt# 3he
motion was denied by the Cudge on 1 Marh 1999, stating that the ourt has made a thorough in$estigation
and e.amination under oath of :ernardo U# "oles and (eynaldo 3# Mayote, members of the 5ntelligene
Setion of )52nd '+ +o#B'olie -istrit 55 5D', that in fat the ourt made a ertifiation to that effet, and
that the fat that douments relating to the searh warrant were not attahed immediately to the reord of the
riminal ase is of no moment, onsidering that the rule does not s!eify when these douments are to be
attahed to the reords# Mata*s motion for reonsideration of the aforesaid order ha$ing been denied, he ame
to the Su!reme +ourt, with the !etition for ertiorari, !raying, among others, that the +ourt delare the searh
warrant to be in$alid for its alleged failure to om!ly with the re4uisites of the +onstitution and the (ules of
+ourt, and that all the artiles onfisated under suh warrant as inadmissible as e$idene in the ase, or in
any !roeedings on the matter#
"ss#e! 1hether the 0udge must before issuing the warrant !ersonally e.amine on oath or affirmation the
om!lainant and any witnesses he may !rodue and ta&e their de!ositions in writing, and attah them to the
reord, in addition to any affida$its !resented to him#
$el%! Under the +onstitution Ano searh warrant shall issue but u!on !robable ause to be determined by the
Cudge or suh other res!onsible offier as may be authori%ed by law after e.amination under oath or
affirmation of the om!lainant and the witnesses he may !rodueA# More em!hati and detailed is the
im!lementing rule of the onstitutional in0untion, 3he (ules !ro$ide that the 0udge must before issuing the
warrant !ersonally e.amine on oath or affirmation the om!lainant and any witnesses he may !rodue and
ta&e their de!ositions in writing, and attah them to the reord, in addition to any affida$its !resented to him#
Mere affida$its of the om!lainant and his witnesses are thus not suffiient# 3he e.amining Cudge has to ta&e
de!ositions in writing of the om!lainant and the witnesses he may !rodue and to attah them to the reord#
Suh written de!osition is neessary in order that the Cudge may be able to !ro!erly determine the e.istene
or none.istene of the !robable ause, to hold liable for !er0ury the !erson gi$ing it if it will be found later
that his delarations are false# 1e, therefore, hold that the searh warrant is tainted with illegality by the
failure of the Cudge to onform with the essential re4uisites of ta&ing the de!ositions in writing and attahing
them to the reord, rendering the searh warrant in$alid#
143 >laez vs. &eo'le o7 ,e &,ili''ines [GR 2(342-49, 9 =ove;3er 19(2]
3irst Division, %ru6 (J): 4 concur
Facs! Adolfo Olaes and 6inda M# +ru% were harged for $iolation of the -angerous -rugs At# Olaes and
+ru% filed a !etition for ertiorari and !rohibition with !reliminary in0untion, hallenging the admission by
Cudge Aliia 6# Santos ;in her a!aity as 'residing Cudge of the (egional 3rial +ourt of Olonga!o +ity,
:ranh 9)< of e$idene sei%ed by $irtue of an allegedly in$alid searh warrant and of an e.tra0udiial
onfession ta&en from them without aording them the right to assistane of ounsel, and thus see& to
restrain further !roeedings in the riminal ase against them and as& that they be a4uitted with the setting
aside of the 4uestioned orders ;the fats do not !ro$ide the dis!osition of the said orders<# Olaes and +ru%
laim that the searh warrant issued by the 0udge is unonstitutional beause it does not indiate the s!eifi
offense they are su!!osed to ha$e ommitted# 3here is, therefore, aording to them, no $alid finding of
!robable ause as a 0ustifiation for the issuane of the said warrant in onformity with the :ill of (ights#
"ss#e! 1hether the la& of s!eifi setion of the -angerous -rugs At renders the a!tion $ague, and negate
the laim that the s!eifi offense was ommitted to ser$e as basis for the finding of !robable ause#
$el%! Do# 3he searh warrant issued does not ome under the stritures of the Stonehill dotrine# 1hile in the
ase ited, there was a bare referene to the laws in general, without any s!eifiation of the !artiular
setions thereof that were alleged to ha$e been $iolated out of the hundreds of !rohibitions ontained in suh
odifiations, there is no similar ambiguity herein# 1hile it is true that the a!tion of the searh warrant states
that it is in onnetion with AFiolation of (A /425, otherwise &nown as the -angerous -rugs Ats of 1992,A
it is learly reited in the te.t thereof that A3here is !robable ause to belie$e that Adolfo Olaes alias *-ebie*
and alias *:aby* of Do# /2= +omia St#, Filtration, Sta# (ita, Olonga!o +ity, has in their !ossession and ontrol
and ustody of mari0uana dried stal&sBlea$esBseedsBigarettes and other regulatedB!rohibited and e.em!t
narotis !re!arations whih is the sub0et of the offense stated abo$e#A Although the s!eifi setion of the
-angerous -rugs At is not !in!ointed, there is no 4uestion at all of the s!eifi offense alleged to ha$e been
ommitted as a basis for the finding of !robable ause# 3he searh warrant also satisfies the re4uirement in the
:ill of (ights of the !artiularity of the desri!tion to be made of the A!lae to be searhed and the !ersons or
things to be sei%ed#A
144 &r#%ene vs. Dayri [GR (2(21, 14 Dece;3er 19(9]
En Banc, 7adilla (J): !4 concur
Facs! On )1 Otober 19=9, 'BMa0or Alladin -imagmaliw, +hief of the 5ntelligene S!eial Ation -i$ision
;5SA-< of the 1estern 'olie -istrit ;1'-<, filed with the (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of Manila, :ranh
)), !resided o$er by Cudge Abelardo -ayrit, now Assoiate Custie of the +ourt of A!!eals, an a!!liation for
the issuane of a searh warrant ;Searh 1arrant =9>14< for $iolation of 'residential -eree 1=// ;5llegal
'ossession of Firearms, et#< entitled A'eo!le of the 'hili!!ines $s# Demesio ?# 'rudente#A On the same day,
the Cudge issued the Searh 1arrant, ommanding -imagmaliw Ato ma&e an immediate searh at any time in
the day or night of the !remises of 'olytehni Uni$ersity of the 'hili!!ines, more !artiularly ;a< offies of
the -e!artment of Military Siene and 3atis at the ground floor and other rooms at the ground floor, ;b<
offie of the 'resident, -r# Demesio 'rudente at 'U', Seond Floor and other rooms at the seond floor, and
forthwith sei%e and ta&e !ossession of the following !ersonal !ro!erties, to witH ;a< M 1/ Armalites with
ammunition, ;b< #)= and #45 +aliber handguns and !istols, ;< e.!losi$es and hand grenades, and ;d< assorted
wea!ons with ammunitions#A On 1 Do$ember 19=9, a Sunday and All Saints -ay, the searh warrant was
enfored by some 288 1'- o!erati$es led by 'B+ol# ?dgar -ula 3orre, -e!uty Su!erintendent, 1'-, and
'BMa0or (omeo Maganto, 'reint = +ommander# 5n his affida$it, dated 2 Do$ember 19=9, (iardo Abando
y Susay, a member of the searhing team, alleged that he found in the drawer of a abinet inside the wash
room of -r# 'rudente*s offie a bulging brown en$elo!e with ) li$e fragmentation hand grenades se!arately
wra!!ed with old news!a!ers# On / Do$ember 19=9, 'rudente mo$ed to 4uash the searh warrant# 7e
laimed that ;1< the om!lainant*s lone witness, 6t# Florenio +# Angeles, had no !ersonal &nowledge of the
fats whih formed the basis for the issuane of the searh warrant, ;2< the e.amination of the said witness
was not in the form of searhing 4uestions and answers, ;)< the searh warrant was a general warrant, for the
reason that it did not !artiularly desribe the !lae to be searhed and that it failed to harge one s!eifi
offense, and ;4< the searh warrant was issued in $iolation of +irular 19 of the Su!reme +ourt in that the
om!lainant failed to allege under oath that the issuane of the searh warrant on a Saturday was urgent# On 9
Marh 19==, the Cudge issued an order, denying 'rudente*s motion and su!!lemental motion to 4uash#
'rudente*s motion for reonsideration was li&ewise denied in the order dated 28 A!ril 19==# 'rudente filed a
!etition for ertiorari with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the allegations ontained in the a!!liation of 'B Ma0or Alladin -imagmaliw and the
delaration of 'B6t# Florenio +# Angeles in his de!osition were suffiient basis for the issuane of a $alid
searh warrant#
$el%! 3he A!robable auseA for a $alid searh warrant, has been defined Aas suh fats and irumstanes
whih would lead a reasonably disreet and !rudent man to belie$e that an offense has been ommitted, and
that ob0ets sought in onnetion with the offense are in the !lae sought to be searhed#A 3his !robable ause
must be shown to be within the !ersonal &nowledge of the om!lainant or the witnesses he may !rodue and
not based on mere hearsay# 3hus, for a $alid searh warrant to issue, there must be !robable ause, whih is to
be determined !ersonally by the 0udge, after e.amination under oath or affirmation of the om!lainant and the
witnesses he may !rodue, and !artiularly desribing the !lae to be searhed and the !ersons or things to be
sei%ed# 3he !robable ause must be in onnetion with one s!eifi offense,and the 0udge must, before issuing
the warrant, !ersonally e.amine in the form of searhing 4uestions and answers, in writing and under oath,
the om!lainant and any witness he may !rodue, on fats !ersonally &nown to them and attah to the reord
their sworn statements together with any affida$its submitted# 7erein, in his a!!liation for searh warrant,
'BMa0or Alladin -imagmaliw stated that Ahe has been informedA that Demesio 'rudente Ahas in his ontrol
and !ossessionA the firearms and e.!losi$es desribed therein, and that he Ahas $erified the re!ort and found it
to be a fat#A On the other hand, in his su!!orting de!osition, 'B6t# Florenio +# Angeles delared that, as a
result of their ontinuous sur$eillane for se$eral days, they Agathered informations from $erified souresA
that the holders of the said firearms and e.!losi$es are not liensed to !ossess them# 5n other words, the
a!!liant and his witness had no !ersonal &nowledge of the fats and irumstanes whih beame the basis
for issuing the 4uestioned searh warrant, but a4uired &nowledge thereof only through information from
other soures or !ersons# 1hile it is true that in his a!!liation for searh warrant, a!!liant 'BMa0or
-imagmaliw stated that he $erified the information he had earlier reei$ed that !etitioner had in his
!ossession and ustody the firearms and e.!losi$es desribed in the a!!liation, and that he found it to be a
fat, yet there is nothing in the reord to show or indiate how and when said a!!liant $erified the earlier
information a4uired by him as to 0ustify his onlusion that he found suh information to be a fat# 7e might
ha$e larified this !oint if there had been searhing 4uestions and answers, but there were none# 5n fat, the
reords yield no 4uestions and answers, whether searhing or not, $is>a>$is the said a!!liant# ?$idently, the
allegations ontained in the a!!liation of 'B Ma0or Alladin -imagmaliw and the delaration of 'B6t# Florenio
+# Angeles in his de!osition were insuffiient basis for the issuane of a $alid searh warrant#
14) .,ia vs. Acin: .ollecor o7 .#so;s [GR L-43(11, 26 4e'e;3er 19(9]
3irst Division, .rino1:,uino (J): 4 concur
Facs! Ating on a $erified re!ort of a onfidential informant that assorted eletroni and eletrial e4ui!ment
and other artiles illegally im!orted into the 'hili!!ines by a syndiate engaged in unlawful Ashi!sideA
ati$ities ;foreign goods are unloaded from foreign shi!s in transit through 'hili!!ine waters into motori%ed
banas and landed on 'hili!!ine soil without !assing through the :ureau of +ustoms, thereby e$ading
!ayment of the orres!onding ustoms duties and ta.es thereon< were found inside A3om*s ?letronisA and
ASony Merhandising ;'hili!!ines<A stores loated at /98 and /91 "on%alo 'uyat orner ?$angelista Street,
Iuia!o, Manila, a letter>re4uest dated 2) A!ril 199/ was addressed to the +olletor of +ustoms by the -e!uty
-iretor of the (egional Anti>Smuggling Ation +enter, Manila :ay Area ;(ASA+>M:A< for the issuane of
warrants of sei%ure and detention# After e$aluation, the +olletor of +ustoms issued 1arrants of Sei%ure and
-etention 14925 and 14925>A, direting the Anti>Smuggling Ation +enter to sei%e the goods mentioned
therein, i#e# $arious eletroni e4ui!ments li&e assette ta!e reorders, ar stereos, !honogra!h needles
;diamond<, !ortable 3F sets, im!orted long !laying reords, s!are !arts of 3Fs and radios and other eletrial
a!!lianes# A (ASA+ team was formed and gi$en a mission order to enfore the warrants, whih it
im!lemented with the assistane ofH ;1< the Dational +ustoms 'olie ;augmenting the team with 2 members<,
;2< the -eteti$e :ureau of the Manila 1estern 'olie -istrit 7ead4uarters ;with ) deteti$es<, as well as,
;)< 'reint ) of the Manila 1estern 'olie -istrit whih e.erised 0urisditional ontrol o$er the !lae to be
raided# 3he intended raid was entered in the res!eti$e !olie blotters of the !olie deteti$e bureaus# On the
strength of the warrants of sei%ure and detention, the raid was onduted in the afternoon of 25 A!ril 199/ at
the 2 stores of 3omas +hia# ASA+ team leader "ener Sula, together with his agents :adron -obli, Arturo
Manuel, (odolfo Molina and Ser$illano Florentin of +am! Aguinaldo, Iue%on +ity, assisted by two ustoms
!oliemen, Fal Martine% and (enato Sorima, and Manila !oliemen (ogelio Finas and Cohn 'eralta,
reo$ered from the stores, assorted eletroni e4ui!ment and other artiles, the ustoms duties on whih
allegedly had not been !aid# 3hey were turned o$er to the +ustoms Aution and +argo -is!osal Unit of the
:ureau of +ustoms# On 19 May 199/, in the afternoon, the hearing offier of Ating +olletor of +ustoms
Alfredo Franiso onduted a hearing on the onfisation of the goods ta&en by "ener Sula and his agents# 2
days later, +hia filed the !etition for ertiorari, !rohibition and mandamus before the Su!reme +ourt to en0oin
the +olletor of +ustoms andBor his agents from further !roeeding with the forfeiture hearing and !rayed that
the searh warrants be delared null and $oid, that the latter be ordered to return the onfisated artiles to
+hia, and to !ay damages#
"ss#e! 1hether the warrants issued by the +olletor of +ustoms !arta&es the nature of a general warrants, and
thus are in$alid#
$el%! Dot only may goods be sei%ed without a searh and sei%ure warrant under Setion 25)/ of the +ustoms
and 3ariff +ode, when they ;the goods< are o!enly offered for sale or &e!t in storage in a store as herein, but
the fat is that +hia*s stores K A3om*s ?letronisA and ASony Merhandising ;'hil#<A K were searhed u!on
warrants of searh and detention issued by the +olletor of +ustoms, who, under the 199) +onstitution, was
Aa res!onsible offier authori%ed by lawA to issue them# Setions 228= and 2289 of the 3ariff and +ustoms
+ode !ro$ide when a searh may be made without a warrant and when a warrant is neessary# Setion 228=
!ro$ides that AFor the more effeti$e disharge of his offiial duties, any !erson e.erising the !owers herein
onferred, may at any time enter, !ass through or searh any land or inlosure or any warehouse, store or
other building, not being a dwelling house# A warehouse, store or other building or inlosure used for the
&ee!ing or storage of artiles does not beome a dwelling house within the meaning hereof merely by reason
of the fat that a !erson em!loyed as wathman li$es in the !lae, nor will the fat that his family stays there
with him alter the ase#A On the other hand, Setion 2289 !ro$ides that AA dwelling house may be entered and
searhed only u!on warrant issued by a Cudge of the ourt or suh other res!onsible offiers as may be
authori%ed by law, u!on sworn a!!liation showing !robable ause and !artiularly desribing the !lae to be
searhed and the !erson or thing to be sei%ed#A 3he warrants issued by the +olletor of +ustoms in this ase
were not general warrants for they identified the stores to be searhed, desribed the artiles to be sei%ed and
s!eified the !ro$ision of the 3ariff and +ustoms +ode $iolated# U!on effeting the sei%ure of the goods, the
:ureau of +ustoms a4uired e.lusi$e 0urisdition not only o$er the ase but also o$er the goods sei%ed for
the !ur!ose of enforing the tariff and ustoms laws# Further, a !arty dissatisfied with the deision of the
+olletor may a!!eal to the +ommissioner of +ustoms, whose deision is a!!ealable to the +ourt of 3a.
A!!eals in the manner and within the !eriod !resribed by law and regulations# 3he deision of the +ourt of
3a. A!!eals may be ele$ated to the Su!reme +ourt for re$iew# Sine +hia did not e.haust his administrati$e
remedies, his reourse to this +ourt is !remature#
146 21, .en#ry FoB Fil; .or'oraion vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR L-26649-)1, 19 A#:#s 19((]
Third Division, .utierre6 J* (J): 4 concur
Facs! 5n a letter>om!laint dated 2/ August 19=5, 28th +entury Fo. Film +or!oration through ounsel
sought the Dational :ureau of 5n$estigation*s ;D:5< assistane in the ondut of searhes and sei%ures in
onnetion with the D:5*s anti>film !iray am!aign# S!eifially, the letter>om!laint alleged that ertain
$ideota!e outlets all o$er Metro Manila are engaged in the unauthori%ed sale and renting out of o!yrighted
films in $ideota!e form whih onstitute a flagrant $iolation of 'residential -eree 49 ;-eree on the
'rotetion of 5ntelletual 'ro!erty<# Ating on the letter>om!laint, the D:5 onduted sur$eillane and
in$estigation of the outlets !in!ointed by the film or!oration and subse4uently filed ) a!!liations for searh
warrants against the $ideo outlets owned by ?duardo M# :arreto, (aul Sagullo, and Fortune 6edesma# 3he
a!!liations were onsolidated and heard by the (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of Ma&ati, :ranh 1)2# On 4
Se!tember 19=5, the lower ourt issued the desired searh warrants, desribing the artiles sought to be sei%ed
asA;< 3ele$ision sets, Fideo +assettes (eorders, rewinders, ta!e head leaners, aessories, e4ui!ments and
other mahines used or intended to be used in the unlawful re!rodution, sale, rentalBlease, distribution of the
abo$e>mentioned $ideo ta!es whih she is &ee!ing and onealing in the !remises abo$e>desribed#A# Armed
with the searh warrants, the D:5 aom!anied by the film or!oration*s agents, raided the $ideo outlets and
sei%ed the items desribed therein# An in$entory of the items sei%ed was made and left with :arreto, et# al#
Ating on a motion to lift searh warrants and release sei%ed !ro!erties filed by :arreto, et# al#, the lower
ourt issued an order dated = Otober 19=5, lifting the ) searh warrants issued earlier against them by the
ourt, due to the failure of the D:5 to deli$er the artiles to the +ourt, and thus ordered the return of the
artiles to their res!eti$e owners# 3he lower ourt denied a motion for reonsideration filed by the film
or!oration in its order dated 2 Canuary 19=/# 3he film or!oration filed a !etition for ertiorari with the
+ourt of A!!eals to annul the orders of the lower ourt# 3he !etition was dismissed# 3he 28th +entury Fo.
Film +or!oration filed the !etition for re$iew with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the inlusion of ertain artiles of !ro!erty whih are usually onneted to legitimate
business, and not in$ol$ing !iray of intelletual !ro!erty or infringement of o!yright laws, renders the
warrant to be unreasonable#
$el%! 3ele$ision sets, $ideo assette reorders, rewinders and ta!e leaners are artiles whih an be found in
a $ideo ta!e store engaged in the legitimate business of lending or renting out betama. ta!es# 5n short, these
artiles and a!!lianes are generally onneted with, or related to a legitimate business not neessarily
in$ol$ing !iray of intelletual !ro!erty or infringement of o!yright laws# 7ene, inluding these artiles
without s!eifiation andBor !artiularity that they were really instruments in $iolating an Anti>'iray law
ma&es the searh warrant too general whih ould result in the onfisation of all items found in any $ideo
store# 5n fat, this atually ha!!ened in the !resent ase# Although the a!!liations and warrants themsel$es
o$ered ertain artiles of !ro!erty usually found in a $ideo store, the +ourt belie$es that the searh !arty
should ha$e onfined themsel$es to artiles that are aording to them, e$idene onstituti$e of infringement
of o!yright laws or the !iray of intelletual !ro!erty, but not to other artiles that are usually onneted
with, or related to, a legitimate business, not in$ol$ing !iray of intelletual !ro!erty, or infringement of
o!yright laws# So that a tele$ision set, a rewinder, and a whiteboard listing :etama. ta!es, $ideo assette
leaners $ideo assette reorders as refleted in the (eturns of Searh 1arrants, are items of legitimate
business engaged in the $ideo ta!e industry, and whih ould not be the sub0et of sei%ure# 3he a!!liant and
his agents therefore e.eeded their authority in sei%ing !erfetly legitimate !ersonal !ro!erty usually found in
a $ideo assette store or business establishment# 3he searh and sei%ure is unreasonable#
142 =olasco vs. .r#z &ano [GR L-69(13, ( >co3er 19()]
En Banc, 5elencio1;errera (J): concur, ! concurs in the result, ! too) no #art, ! reserves his vote
Facs! 'rior to / August 19=4, Mila Aguilar>(o4ue was one of the aused of (ebellion in +riminal +ase
SM+>1>1 before S!eial Military +ommission 1, and also one of the aused of Sub$ersion in +riminal +ase
M+>25>11) of Military +ommission 25, both ases being entitled A'eo!le of the 'hili!!ines $s# Cose Ma#
Sison, et al#A She was then still at large# At around 9H88 a#m# on August /, 6t# +ol# Firgilio "# Salda0eno of the
+S", a!!lied for a Searh 1arrant from the 7on# ?rnani +ru% 'aNo, ?.euti$e Cudge of the (egional 3rial
+ourt in Iue%on +ity, to be ser$ed at Do# 2)9>: Mayon Street, Iue%on +ity, determined to be the leased
residene of Aguilar>(o4ue, after almost a month of Around the lo& sur$eillaneA of the !remises as a
Asus!eted underground house of the +''BD'A#A Aguilar>(o4ue has been long wanted by the military for
being a high ran&ing offier of the +ommunist 'arty of the 'hili!!ines, !artiularly onneted with the MF
JaragatanB-oNa Andrea ases# At 11H)8 a#m#, Aguilar>(o4ue and +ynthia -# Dolaso were arrested by a
+onstabulary Seurity "rou! ;+S"< at the intersetion of Mayon Street and '# Margall Street, Iue%on +ity#
3he reord does not dislose that a warrant of arrest had !re$iously been issued against Dolaso# At 12H88
noon on the same day, elements of the +S" searhed the !remises at 2)9>: Mayon Street, Iue%on +ity#
1illie +# 3olentino, a !erson then in harge of the !remises, was arrested by the searhing !arty !resumably
without a warrant of arrest# 3he searhing !arty sei%ed 42= douments and written materials, and additionally
a !ortable ty!ewriter, and 2 wooden bo.es, ma&ing 4)1 items in all# On August 18, Aguilar>(o4ue, Dolaso
and 3olentino, were harged before the Iue%on +ity Fisal*s Offie u!on om!laint filed by the +S" against
the former for ASub$ersionB(ebellion andBor +ons!iray to +ommit (ebellionBSub$ersion# On August 1), the
+ity Fisal filed an 5nformation for Fiolation of 'residential -eree ;'-< )) ;5llegal 'ossession of Sub$ersi$e
-ouments< against Aguilar>(o4ue, et# al# before :ranh 42 of the Metro!olitan 3rial +ourt of Iue%on +ity,
Cudge Antonio '# Santos, !residing# On August 1/, +S" filed a Motion for (eonsideration with the +ity
Fisal, !raying that Aguilar>(o4ue and Dolaso be harged with Sub$ersion# 3he Motion was denied on
Do$ember 1/# On Se!tember 18, the +S" submitted an Amended (eturn in the Searh 1arrant ase !raying,
inter alia, that the +S" be allowed to retain the sei%ed 4)1 douments and artiles, Ain onnetion with ases
that are !resently !ending against Mila Aguilar (o4ue before the Iue%on +ity Fisal*s Offie and the ourt#A
On -eember 1), Cudge 'aNo admitted the Amended (eturn and ruled that the sei%ed douments Ashall be
sub0et to dis!osition of the tribunal trying the ase against res!ondent#A A day before that, Aguilar>(o4ue, et#
al# filed a Motion to Su!!ress, !raying that suh of the 4)1 items belonging to them be returned to them# 5t
was laimed that the !roeedings under the Searh 1arrant were unlawful# Cudge Santos denied the Motion
on 9 Canuary 19=5 on the ground that the $alidity of the Searh 1arrant has to be litigated in the other ase,
a!!arently unaware of the Order issued by Cudge 'aNo on -eember 1)# Dolaso, Aguilar>(o4ue, and
3olentino filed the 'etition for +ertiorari, 'rohibition and Mandamus to annul and set aside the ;1< Searh
1arrant issued by (3+ Cudge 'aNo, ;2< his Order admitting the Amended (eturn and granting the Motion to
(etain Sei%ed 5tems, and ;)< Order of M3+ Cudge Santos denying Aguilar>(o4ue, et# al#*s Motion to
Su!!ress#
"ss#e! 1hether the desri!tion of the !ersonalities to be sei%ed in the searh warrant is too general to render
the warrant $oid#
$el%! 3he dis!uted Searh 1arrant ;=8>=4< desribes the !ersonalities to be sei%ed as A-ouments, !a!ers
and other reords of the +ommunist 'arty of the 'hili!!inesBDew 'eo!les Army andBor the Dational
-emorati Front, suh as Minutes of the 'arty Meetings, 'lans of these grou!s, 'rograms, 6ist of !ossible
su!!orters, sub$ersi$e boo&s and instrutions, manuals not otherwise a$ailable to the !ubli, and su!!ort
money from foreign or loal soures#A 5t is at one e$ident that the Searh 1arrant authori%es the sei%ure of
!ersonal !ro!erties $aguely desribed and not !artiulari%ed# 5t is an all>embraing desri!tion whih inludes
e$erything onei$able regarding the +ommunist 'arty of the 'hili!!ines and the Dational -emorati Front#
5t does not s!eify what the sub$ersi$e boo&s and instrutions are, what the manuals not otherwise a$ailable
to the !ubli ontain to ma&e them sub$ersi$e or to enable them to be used for the rime of rebellion# 3here is
absent a definite guideline to the searhing team as to what items might be lawfully sei%ed thus gi$ing the
offiers of the law disretion regarding what artiles they should sei%e as, in fat, ta&en also were a !ortable
ty!ewriter and 2 wooden bo.es# 5t is thus in the nature of a general warrant and infringes on the onstitutional
mandate re4uiring !artiular desri!tion of the things to be sei%ed# Searh warrants of similar desri!tion
were onsidered null and $oid for being too general# Dotwithstanding the irregular issuane of the Searh
1arrant and although, ordinarily, the artiles sei%ed under an in$alid searh warrant should be returned, they
annot be ordered returned to Aguilar>(o4ue# Some searhes may be made without a warrant# Setion 12,
(ule 12/, (ules of +ourt, is delaratory in the sense that it is onfined to the searh, without a searh warrant,
of a !erson who had been arrested# 5t is also a general rule that, as an inident of an arrest, the !lae or
!remises where the arrest was made an also be searh without a searh warrant# 5n this latter ase, Athe e.tent
and reasonableness of the searh must be deided on its own fats and irumstanes, and it has been stated
that, in the a!!liation of general rules, there is some onfusion in the deisions as to what onstitutes the
e.tent of the !lae or !remises whih may be searhedA# +onsidering that Aguilar>(o4ue has been harged
with (ebellion, whih is a rime against !ubli order, that the warrant for her arrest has not been ser$ed for a
onsiderable !eriod of time, that she was arrested within the general $iinity of her dwelling, and that the
searh of her dwelling was made within a half hour of her arrest, the +ourt was of the o!inion that, in her
res!et, the searh at Do# 2)9>: Mayon Street, Iue%on +ity, did not need a searh warrant, this, for !ossible
effeti$e results in the interest of !ubli order# Suh being the ase, the !ersonalities sei%ed may be retained
by +S", for !ossible introdution as e$idene in the (ebellion +ase, lea$ing it to Aguilar>(o4ue to ob0et to
their rele$ane and to as& S!eial Military +ommission 1 to return to her any all irrele$ant douments and
artiles#
14( &a'er "n%#sries .or'oraion o7 ,e &,ili''ines vs. As#ncion [GR 122192, 19 May 1999]
Third Division, 7angani/an (J): 3 concur, ! too) no #art
Facs! On 25 Canuary 1995, 'olie +hief 5ns!etor Da!oleon :# 'asua a!!lied for a searh warrant before
the (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+<, :ranh 184, of Iue%on +ity, stating A;1< that the management of 'a!er
5ndustries +or!oration of the 'hili!!ines, loated at '5+O' om!ound, :arangay 3abon, :islig, Surigao del
Sur, re!resented by its Sr# Fie 'resident (iardo "# Santiago, is in !ossession or has in its ontrol high
!owered firearms, ammunitions, e.!losi$es, whih are the sub0et of the offense, or used or intended to be
used in ommitting the offense, and whih are being &e!t and onealed in the !remises herein desribed, ;2<
that a Searh 1arrant should be issued to enable any agent of the law to ta&e !ossession and bring to this
7onorable +ourt the following desribed !ro!ertiesH *Se$enty ;98< M1/ Armalite rifles al# 5#5/, ten ;18< M1/
US rifles, two ;2< AJ>49 rifleLsM, two ;2< U@5 submahinegunLsM, two ;2< M28) "renade 6aunherLsM al
48mm#, ten ;18< al# 45 !istolLsM, ten ;18< al# )= re$ol$erLsM, two ;2< ammunition reloading mahineLsM,
assorted ammunitions for said alibers of firearms and ten ;18< handgrenades#*A 3he 0oint -e!osition of S'O)
+iero S# :aolod and S'O2 +eilio 3# Morito, as well as a summary of the information and the
su!!lementary statements of Mario ?nad and Feli!e Moreno were attahed to the a!!liation# After
!ro!ounding se$eral 4uestions to :aolod, Cudge Ma.imiano +# Asunion issued the ontested searh
warrant# On 4 February 1995, the !olie enfored the searh warrant at the '5+O' om!ound and sei%ed
$arious firearms and ammunition# :elie$ing that the warrant was in$alid and the searh unreasonable, 'a!er
5ndustries +or!oration of the 'hili!!ines, ?$aristo M# Dar$ae% Cr#, (iardo "# Santiago, (oberto A#
-ormendo, (eydande -# A%uena, Dieforo F# A$ila, Florentino M# Mula, Feli. O# :aito, 7arold :#
+elestial, ?lmedenio +# +ali.tro, +arlito S# 6egaion, Albino 3# 6ubang, Ceremias 5# Abad and 7erminio F#
Fillamil filed a AMotion to IuashA 1/ before the trial ourt# Subse4uently, they also filed a ASu!!lemental
'leading to the Motion to IuashA and a AMotion to Su!!ress ?$idene#A On 2) Marh 1995, the (3+ issued
the Order whih denied '5+O', et# al#*s motions# On ) August 1995, the trial ourt rendered its Order denying
their Motion for (eonsideration# '5+O', et# al# filed a 'etition for +ertiorari and 'rohibition#
"ss#e! 1hether the fat that the warrant identifies only one !lae, i#e# the A'a!er 5ndustries +or!oration of the
'hili!!ines, loated at '5+O' +om!ound, :arangay 3abon, :islig, Surigao del Sur,A satisfies the
re4uirements of the !artiularity of the !lae to be searh, and thus render the warrant $alid#
$el%! Do# 3he fundamental right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures and the basi onditions for the
issuane of a searh warrant are laid down in Setion 2, Artile 555 of the 19=9 +onstitution# +onsistent with
the foregoing onstitutional !ro$ision, Setions ) and 4, (ule 12/ of the (ules of +ourt, detail the re4uisites
for the issuane of a $alid searh warrant# 3he re4uisites of a $alid searh warrant areH ;1< !robable ause is
!resent, ;2< suh !resene is determined !ersonally by the 0udge, ;)< the om!lainant and the witnesses he or
she may !rodue are !ersonally e.amined by the 0udge, in writing and under oath or affirmation, ;4< the
a!!liant and the witnesses testify on fats !ersonally &nown to them, and ;5< the warrant s!eifially
desribes the !lae to be searhed and the things to be sei%ed# 5n $iew of the manifest ob0eti$e of the
onstitutional safeguard against unreasonable searh, the +onstitution and the (ules limit the !lae to be
searhed only to those desribed in the warrant# 3hus, this +ourt has held that Athis onstitutional right is the
embodiment of a s!iritual one!tH the belief that to $alue the !ri$ay of home and !erson and to afford it
onstitutional !rotetion against the long reah of go$ernment no less than to $alue human dignity, and that
his !ri$ay must not be disturbed e.e!t in ase of o$erriding soial need, and then only under stringent
!roedural safeguards#A Additionally, the re4uisite of !artiularity is related to the !robable ause re4uirement
in that, at least under some irumstanes, the la& of a more s!eifi desri!tion will ma&e it a!!arent that
there has not been a suffiient showing to the magistrate that the desribed items are to be found in a
!artiular !lae# 7erein, the searh warrant is in$alid beause ;1< the trial ourt failed to e.amine !ersonally
the om!lainant and the other de!onentsH ;2< S'O) +iero :aolod, who a!!eared during the hearing for the
issuane of the searh warrant, had no !ersonal &nowledge that '5+O', et# al# were not liensed to !ossess the
sub0et firearms, and ;)< the !lae to be searhed was not desribed with !artiularity# As to the !artiularity
of the !lae to be searhed, the assailed searh warrant failed to desribed the !lae with !artiularity# 5t
sim!ly authori%es a searh of Athe aforementioned !remises,A but it did not s!eify suh !remises# 3he
warrant identifies only one !lae, and that is the A'a!er 5ndustries +or!oration of the 'hili!!ines, loated at
'5+O' +om!ound, :arangay 3abon, :islig, Surigao del Sur#A 3he '5+O' om!ound, howe$er, is made u! of
A288 offiesBbuildings, 15 !lants, =4 staff houses, 1 airstri!, ) !iersBwhar$es, 2) warehouses, / 'O6
de!otsB4ui& ser$ie outlets and some =88 misellaneous strutures, all of whih s!read out o$er some one
hundred fifty>fi$e hetares#A Ob$iously, the warrant gi$es the !olie offiers unbridled and thus illegal
authority to searh all the strutures found inside the '5+O' om!ound# :eause the searh warrant was
!roured in $iolation of the +onstitution and the (ules of +ourt, all the firearms, e.!losi$es and other
materials sei%ed were Ainadmissible for any !ur!ose in any !roeeding#A
149 @o#se7 Al-G,o#l vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 126()9, 4 4e'e;3er 2111]
2econd Division, <uisum/ing (J): 4 concur
Facs! On )1 Marh 1995, Cudge "eronimo S# Mangay, !residing 0udge of the (egional 3rial +ourt, Dational
+a!ital Cudiial (egion, :ranh 125, Jaloo&an +ity, issued searh warrants 54>95 and 55>95 for the searh
and sei%ure of ertain items in A!artment 2 at 154 Obiniana +om!ound, -e!aro (oad, Jaloo&an +ity# On 1
A!ril 1995, the !olie searhed A!artment =, in the same om!ound and found one ;1< #45 aliber !istol#
Found in A!artment 2 were 2 M>1/ rifles with 2 maga%ines and 28 li$e M>1/ ammunitions, 1 :ar of
demolition harge, 1 +aliber 'istol with no# /)4 and other nos# were !laed with maga%ine of +aliber #45 and
) li$e 45 ammunitions, 1 22 +aliber handgun with 5 li$e ammunitions in its ylinder, 1 :o. ontaining 48
!iees of #25 aliber ammunitions, 2 !iees of fragmentation grenade, 1 roll of detonating ord olor yellow, 2
big bags of ammonium nitrate sus!eted to be e.!losi$es substane, 22 detonating ords with blasting a!s, T
and U !ound of high e.!losi$es 3D3, 1 timer alarm lo&, 2 bags of sus!eted gun !owder, 2 small !lasti
bag of sus!eted e.!losi$e substane, 1 small bo. of !lasti bag of sus!eted dynamites, One weighing sale,
and 2 batteries 9 $olts with blasting a!s and detonating ord# 3he firearms, ammunitions, e.!losi$es and
other inendiary de$ies sei%ed at the a!artments were a&nowledged in the reei!t signed by S'O2 Melanio
de la +ru%# Sousef Al "houl, 5sam Mohammad Abdulhadi, 1ail (ashid Al>Jhatib, Dabeel Dasser Al>(iyami,
Ashraf 7assam Al>Sa%ori, and Mohammad Abushendi were harged before the (egional 3rial +ourt of
Jaloo&an +ity, :ranh 12), in informations ;+riminal +ases +>4=///>/9< ausing them with illegal
!ossession of firearms, ammunitions and e.!losi$es, !ursuant to 'residential -eree 1=//# 3hereafter, they
were arrested and detained# 3hey filed a motion for bail on 24 May 1995, the resolution of whih was held in
abeyane by the (3+ !ending the !resentation of e$idene from the !roseution to determine whether or not
the e$idene !resented is strong# On 9 February 199/, at the hearing for bail, the (3+ Aadmitted all e.hibits
being offered for whate$er !ur!ose that they maybe worthA after the !roseution had finished adduing its
e$idene des!ite the ob0etion by the !etitioners on the admissibility of said e$idene# On 19 February 199/,
the (3+ denied their motion for bail earlier filed# As their ation before a!!ellate ourt also !ro$ed futile,
with the a!!ellate ourt dismissing their s!eial i$il ation for ertiorari, they filed the !etition for re$iew
before the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh and sei%ure orders are $alid, and the ob0ets sei%ed admissible in e$idene#
$el%! As held in '5+O' $# Asunion, the !lae to be searhed annot be hanged, enlarged nor am!lified by
the !olie# 'oliemen may not be restrained from !ursuing their tas& with $igor, but in doing so, are must be
ta&en that onstitutional and legal safeguards are not disregarded# ?.lusion of unlawfully sei%ed e$idene is
the only !ratial means of enforing the onstitutional in0untion against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures#
7ene, the searh made at A!artment Do# = is illegal and the #45 aliber !istol ta&en thereat is inadmissible in
e$idene against Al>"houl, et# al# 5n ontrast, the searh onduted at A!artment 2 ould not be similarly
faulted# 3he searh warrants s!eifially mentioned A!artment 2# 3he searh was done in the !resene of its
ou!ants, in aordane with Setion 9 of (ule 12/, (e$ised (ules of +ourt# 3he artiles sei%ed during the
searh of A!artment 2 are of the same &ind and nature as those items enumerated in the searh warrant# 3he
items sei%ed from A!artment 2 were desribed with s!eifiity in the warrants in 4uestion# 3he nature of the
items ordered to be sei%ed did not re4uire a tehnial desri!tion# Moreo$er, the law does not re4uire that the
things to be sei%ed must be desribed in !reise and minute details as to lea$e no room for doubt on the !art
of the searhing authorities, otherwise, it would be $irtually im!ossible for the a!!liants to obtain a searh
warrant as they would not &now e.atly what &ind of things they are loo&ing for# One desribed, howe$er,
the artiles sub0et of the searh and sei%ure need not be so in$ariant as to re4uire absolute onordane
between those sei%ed and those desribed in the warrant# Substantial similarity of those artiles desribed as a
lass or s!eies would suffie#
1)1 &eo'le v. >;aCen: [GR 991)1, 2 4e'e;3er 1992]
Third Division, Davide (J): 3 concur, ! on leave
Facs! 5n the morning of 12 Se!tember 19==, '+ onstables with the Mt# 'ro$ine '+ +ommand !ut u! a
he&!oint at the 0untion of the roads, one going to Sagada and the other to :onto# 3hey sto!!ed and
he&ed all $ehiles that went through the he&!oint# At 9H15 a#m#, they flagged down a ream>olored Ford
Fiera ;A:3>/)4< oming from the :onto 'oblaion and headed towards :aguio# 3he $ehile was dri$en by
+onway Omaweng and had no !assengers# 3he +onstables ;6ayong, et#al#< as&ed !ermission to ins!et the
$ehile to whih Omaweng aeded to# 1hen they !eered into the rear of the $ehile, they saw a tra$elling
bag whih was !artially o$ered by the rim of a s!are tire under the !assenger seat on the right side of the
$ehile# 3hey as&ed !ermission to see the ontents of the bag to whih Omaweng onsented to# 1hen they
o!ened the bag, they found that it ontained 41 !lasti !a&ets of different si%es ontaining !ul$eri%ed
substanes# 3he onstable ga$e a !a&et to his team leader, who, after sniffing the stuff onluded that it was
mari0uana# 3he +onstables thereafter boarded the $ehiles and !roeeded to the :onto !oblaion to re!ort
the inident to the '+ 7ead4uarters# 3he !rohibited drugs were surrendered to the e$idene ustodian# 3he '+
Forensi +hemist at +am! -angwa, 6a 3rinidad, :enguet onduted 2 hemistry e.aminations of the
substane ontained in the !lasti !a&ets ta&en from a!!ellant and found them to be !ositi$e for hashish or
mari0uana# Omaweng was indited for the $iolation of Setion 4, Artile 55 of (A /425 ;-angerous -rugs At
of 1992<, as amended, in a riminal om!laint filed with the M3+ :onto, Mountain 'ro$ine on 12
Se!tember 19==# U!on his failure to submit ounter>affida$its des!ite the granting of an e.tension of time to
do so, the ourt delared that he had wai$ed his right to a !reliminary in$estigation and, finding !robable
ause against Omaweng, ordered the ele$ation of the ase to the !ro!er ourt# On 14 Do$ember 19==, the
Offie of the 'ro$inial Fisal of Mountain 'ro$ine filed an 5nformation harging Omaweng with the
$iolation of Setion 49 Artile 55 of the -angerous -rugs At of 1992, as amended ;+rim +ase 91)<# After his
motion for rein$estigation was denied by the 'ro$inial Fisal, Omaweng entered a !lea of not guilty during
his arraignment on 28 Cune 19=9# -uring the trial on the merits, the !roseution !resented 4 witnesses#
Omaweng did not !resent any e$idene other than !ortions of the Coint +larifiatory Sworn Statement, dated
2) -eember 19==, of !roseution witnesses Cose!h 6ayong and -a$id Fomood# On 21 Marh 1991, the
trial ourt !romulgated its Cudgment on$iting Omaweng of the rime of trans!orting !rohibited drugs
;Setion 4, Artile 55 of (A /425, as amended<# Omaweng a!!ealed to the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether Omaweng was sub0eted to searh whih $iolates his +onstitutional right against
unreasonable searhes and sei%ures#
$el%! Omaweng was not sub0eted to any searh whih may be stigmati%ed as a $iolation of his
+onstitutional right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures# 7e willingly ga$e !rior onsent to the searh
and $oluntarily agreed to ha$e it onduted on his $ehile and tra$elling bag# 3he testimony of the '+
+onstable ;6ayung< was not dented on ross>e.amination or rebutted by Omaweng for he hose not to testify
on his own behalf# Omaweng wai$ed his right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures when he $oluntarily
submitted to a searh or onsents to ha$e it made in his !erson or !remises# 7e is !reluded from later
om!laining thereof right to be seure from unreasonable searh may, li&e e$ery right, be wai$ed and suh
wai$er may be made either e.!ressly or im!liedly# Sine in the ourse of the $alid searh 41 !a&ages of
drugs were found, it behoo$ed the offiers to sei%e the same, no warrant was neessary for suh sei%ure#
1)1 &eo'le vs. .orrea [GR 119246, 31 *an#ary 199(]
En Banc, 5artine6 (J): !( concur
Facs! A wee& before 1= Cune 1994, 6eonardo -ulay was !laed under sur$eillane by the 'olie O!erati$es
from the -rug ?nforement Unit of the 1estern 'olie -istrit +ommand ;-?U>1'-+< on aount of
onfidential and intelligene re!orts reei$ed in said Unit about his drug traffi&ing around :ambang Street,
3ondo, Manila# 3he !olie sur$eillane brought forth !ositi$e results and onfirmed -ulay*s illegal drug trade#
On 19 Cune 1994, o!erati$es were alerted that -ulay would trans!ort and deli$er a ertain 4uantity of drugs
that night on board a owner>ty!e 0ee! ;FM(94=<# 3hereafter, the o!erati$es, together with the informer
!roeeded to A# :onifaio Street on board ) $ehiles, and inons!iuously !ar&ed along the side of Dorth
+emetery and waited for the sus!et# 3he !olie informant s!otted -ulay2s $ehile at )H88 am# 3he o!erati$es
tailed the sub0et 0ee!ney until they reahed :ambang e.tension and Cose Abad Santos A$enue, where they
aosted the !assengers of said 0ee!ney# 3he team ins!eted a ylindrial tin an of ?l +ielo Fegetable
+oo&ing 6ard, about two feet high, loaded in the $ehile of the a!!ellants# 3he an ontained = bundles of
sus!eted dried mari0uana flowering to!s wra!!ed in !iees of !a!er and !lasti ta!es# 3he team sei%ed the
sus!eted ontrabands and mar&ed eah bundle onseuti$ely# 3he ) sus!ets were brought to the !olie
head4uarters at -?U>1'-+ for in$estigation# 3he !a&ages of sus!eted mari0uana were submitted to the
D:5 for laboratory analysis to determine their hemial om!osition# 3he tests onfirmed that the onfisated
stuff were !ositi$e for mari0uana and weighed 1/#19=9 &ilograms# 3he defense, howe$er, ontends that the )
aused were arrested without warrant in +amarin -, +alooan +ity, enroute to -ulay2s house to get the
things of his hild allegedly rushed !re$iously to the Metro!olitan 7os!ital, for an alleged harge of
traffi&ing on *shabu,* and were brought to the 1'-+ head4uarters at U#D# A$enue, where they were
detained# On 12 Culy 1994, an 5nformation was filed with the (3+ Manila ;:ranh )5< inditing Antonio
+orrea y +ayton Q A:oyet,A (ito "unida y Sesante Q A-odong,A and 6eonardo -ulay y Santos Q A:oy
JubaA for ha$ing $iolated Setion 4, Artile 55 of (A /425, as amended# 1hen arraigned, the ) aused
!leaded not guilty# After trial and on ) Marh 1995, the lower ourt found the a!!ellants guilty as harged and
were sentened to death and a fine of '18 million#
"ss#e! 1hether the aused are !reluded from assailing the warrantless searh and sei%ure, due to wai$er on
their !art#
$el%! Antonio +orrea y +ayton Q A:oyet,A (ito "unida y Sesante Q A-odong,A and 6eonardo -ulay y
Santos Q A:oy JubaA are !reluded from assailing the warrantless searh and sei%ure when they $oluntarily
submitted to it as shown by their atuation during the searh and sei%ure# 3hey ne$er !rotested when the
!olie offier o!ened the tin an loaded in their $ehile, nor when he o!ened one of the bundles, nor when
they, together with their argo of drugs and their $ehile, were brought to the !olie station for in$estigation
and subse4uent !roseution# 1hen one $oluntarily submits to a searh or onsents to ha$e it made on his
!erson or !remises, he is !reluded from later om!laining thereof 3he right to be seure from unreasonable
searh may, li&e e$ery right, be wai$ed and suh wai$er may be made either e.!ressly or im!liedly#A Further,
they effeti$ely wai$ed their onstitutional right against the searh and sei%ure by their $oluntary submission
to the 0urisdition of the trial ourt, when they entered a !lea of not guilty u!on arraignment and by
!artii!ating in the trial#
1)2 &eo'le v. Ra;os [GR ()411-12, 4 *#ne 1991]
Third Division, .utierre6 Jr* (J): 3 concur, ! too) no #art
Facs! On 29 Do$ember 19=2, a i$ilian informer ame to the Darotis +ommand Offie in Olonga!o +ity
and re!orted that a igarette $endor by the name of AMama (oseA ;(osalinda (amos< was selling mari0uana at
the orner of )rd Street and (i%al A$enue in Olonga!o +ity# 3ests buys were made using mar&ed money# 3he
Darotis +ommand ;DA(+OM< team !roeeded to the !lae where a!!ellant was selling igarettes, and
arrested the latter for illegal !eddling of mari0uana# (amos was re4uested to ta&e out the ontents of her
wallet# 3he four mar&ed fi$e>!eso bills used in the test buys were found among her !ossessions and were
onfisated after the serial numbers were onfirmed# Searh of (amos2 stall yielded 28 sti&s of mari0uana
igarettes in a trash an !laed under the small table where (amos dis!layed the wares she was selling#
(amos was thereafter brought to the station# At the station, (amos e.euted a statement onfessing to her
rimes whih she swore to before Assistant +ity Fisal# 3he mari0uana sti&s onfisated were sent to the
'hili!!ine +onstabulary +rime 6aboratory ;'++6< for analysis, and thereafter were onfirmed to be
mari0uana# 3he defense ontends howe$er that she assented to the in$itation of the DA(+OM o!erati$es for
in$estigation, after searh of her buri bags ;whih she stores the fruits that she sells< were fruitless# She
laimed that she was fored to affi. her signature on the four 5>!eso bills by one Sgt# Sudiaal, !ur!ortedly to
be the same money whih was used to buy mari0uana from her, but whih she insists was her money being
sa$ed for the rentals# She was later brought to the Fisal2s Offie after in$estigation, where she signed a
doument# She laimed she was not assisted by any ounsel during the in$estigation, neither during the time
she signed the doument at the Fisal2s Offie# 3wo informations were filed against (amos, one for sale
;+riminal +ase 5991< and the other for !ossession of mari0uana ;+riminal +ase 5998<# After trial, the (3+
Olonga!o +ity ;:ranh 9)< found her guilty beyond reasonable doubt in +riminal +ase 5998 for $iolating
Setion = of (A /425 and sentened her to im!risonment of / years and 1 day and a fine of '/,888# She was
li&ewise found guilty beyond reasonable doubt in +riminal +ase 5991 for $iolating Setion 4 of (A /425 and
was sentened to life im!risonment and a fine of '28,888# (amos sought re$ersal of the deisions with the
Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether (amos wai$ed her right against the warrantless searh of the trash an, where illegal drugs
were found, under her ontrol#
$el%! 3he trash an ;where the ontraband were found< was found under the table where her legitimate wares
were being sold# (amos he was the only !erson who had aess to the trash an# 3he same was under her
immediate !hysial ontrol# She had om!lete harge of the ontents of the trash an under the table to the
e.lusion of all other !ersons# 5n law, atual !ossession e.ists when the thing is in the immediate ou!any
and ontrol of the !arty# :ut this is not to say that the law re4uires atual !ossession# 5n riminal law,
!ossession neessary for on$ition of the offense of !ossession of ontrolled substanes with intent to
distribute may be onstruti$e as well as atual# 5t is only neessary that the defendant must ha$e dominion
and ontrol o$er the ontraband# 3hese re4uirements are !resent in the situation desribed, where the
!rohibited drugs were found inside the trash an !laed under the stall owned by (amos# 5n fat, the
DA(+OM agents who onduted the searh testified that they had to as& (am!s to stand so that they ould
loo& inside the trash an under (amos* !a!ag# 3he trash an was !ositioned in suh a way that it was diffiult
for another !erson to use the trash an# 3he trash an was ob$iously not for use by her ustomers# 3herefore,
the twenty sti&s of mari0uana are admissible in e$idene and the trial ourt*s finding that (amos is guilty of
!ossession is orret#
1)3 &eo'le v. +arros [GR 91641, 29 Marc, 1994]
Third Division, 3eliciano (J): 3 concur
Facs! On / Se!tember 19=9, MBSgt# Franis Sag>as and SBSgt# Cames Ayan, both members of the '#+#
Mountain 'ro$ine +ommand, rode the -angwa :us bearing 'late A:@>242 bound for Sabangan, Mountain
'ro$ine# U!on reahing +ha&ha&an, :onto, Mountain 'ro$ine, the bus sto!!ed and both MBSgt# Sag>as
and SBSgt# Ayan, who were seated at the ba&, saw :onifaio :arros arrying a arton, board the bus and
seated himself on seat 1= after !utting the arton under his seat# 3hereafter, the bus ontinued and u!on
reahing Sabangan, MBSgt# Sag>as and SBSgt# Ayan before they alighted, it being their station, alled +2+
LFernandoM :ongyao to ins!et the arton under seat 1=# After +2+ :ongyao ins!eted the arton, he found
out that it ontained mari0uana and he as&ed the !assengers who the owner of the arton was but nobody
answered# 3hereafter, +2+ :ongyao alighted with the arton and SBSgt# Ayan and +2+ :ongyao in$ited
:arros to the detahment for 4uestioning as the latter was the sus!eted owner of the arton ontaining
mari0uana# U!on entering the detahment the arton was o!ened in the !resene of :arros# 1hen :arros
denied ownershi! of the arton of mari0uana, the '#+# offiers alled for the bus ondutor who !in!ointed to
:arros as the owner of the arton of mari0uana# :arros was harged with $iolating Setion 4 of (A /425, as
amended ;-angerous -rugs At of 1992<# After trial, the trial ourt on$ited :onifaio :arros of $iolation of
Setion 4 of (A /425 as amended and sentened him to suffer the !enalty of relusion !er!etua and to !ay a
fine of '28,888#88# :arros a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the failure of the arton bearer to ob0et to the searh made in the mo$ing $ehile, resulting to
his warrantless arrest, onstitutes a wai$er#
$el%! 3he general rule is that a searh and sei%ure must be arried out through or with a 0udiial warrant,
otherwise suh searh and sei%ure beomes AunreasonableA within the meaning of Setion 2, Artile 555 of the
19=9 +onstitution# 3he e$idene seured thereby K i#e#, the AfruitsA of the searh and sei%ure K will be
inadmissible in e$idene Afor any !ur!ose in any !roeeding#A 3he re4uirement that a 0udiial warrant must be
obtained !rior to the arrying out of a searh and sei%ure is, howe$er, not absolute# 3here are ertain
e.e!tions reogni%ed in our law, one of whih relates to the searh of mo$ing $ehiles# 'eae offiers may
lawfully ondut searhes of mo$ing $ehiles K automobiles, tru&s, et# K without need of a warrant, it not
being !ratiable to seure a 0udiial warrant before searhing a $ehile, sine suh $ehile an be 4ui&ly
mo$ed out of the loality or 0urisdition in whih the warrant may be sought# 5n arrying out warrantless
searhes of mo$ing $ehiles, howe$er, !eae offiers are limited to routine he&s, that is, the $ehiles are
neither really searhed nor their ou!ants sub0eted to !hysial or body searhes, the e.amination of the
$ehiles being limited to $isual ins!etion# 1hen, howe$er, a $ehile is sto!!ed and sub0eted to an e.tensi$e
searh, suh a warrantless searh would be onstitutionally !ermissible only if the offiers onduting the
searh ha$e reasonable or !robable ause to belie$e, before the searh, that either the motorist is a law>
offender or the ontents or argo of the $ehile are or ha$e been instruments or the sub0et matter or the
!roeeds of some riminal offense# 3he +ourt has in the !ast found !robable ause to ondut without a
0udiial warrant an e.tensi$e searh of mo$ing $ehiles in situations where ;1< there had emanated from a
!a&age the distinti$e smell of mari0uana, ;2< agents of the Darotis +ommand ;ADaromA< of the
'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;A'D'A< had reei$ed a onfidential re!ort from informers that a si%eable $olume
of mari0uana would be trans!orted along the route where the searh was onduted, ;)< Darom agents were
informed or Ati!!ed offA by an undero$er Adee! !enetrationA agent that !rohibited drugs would be brought
into the ountry on a !artiular airline flight on a gi$en date, ;4< Darom agents had reei$ed information that
a +auasian oming from Sagada, Mountain 'ro$ine, had in his !ossession !rohibited drugs and when the
Darom agents onfronted the aused +auasian, beause of a ons!iuous bulge in his waistline, he failed
to !resent his !ass!ort and other identifiation !a!ers when re4uested to do so, and ;5< Darom agents had
reei$ed onfidential information that a woman ha$ing the same !hysial a!!earane as that of the aused
would be trans!orting mari0uana# 7erein, there is nothing in the reord that any irumstane whih
onstituted or ould ha$e reasonably onstituted !robable ause for the !eae offiers to searh the arton bo.
allegedly owned by :arros# 3he testimony of the law enforement offiers who had a!!rehended the aused
;MBSgt# Franis Sag>as and SBSgt# Cames Ayan<, and who had searhed the bo. in his !ossession, ;+2+
Fernando :ongyao<, sim!ly did not suggest or indiate the !resene of any suh !robable ause# Further, 3he
aused is not to be !resumed to ha$e wai$ed the unlawful searh onduted on the oasion of his
warrantless arrest Asim!ly beause he failed to ob0et#A 3o onstitute a wai$er, it must a!!ear first that the
right e.ists, seondly, that the !erson in$ol$ed had &nowledge, atual or onstruti$e, of the e.istene of suh
a right, and lastly, that said !erson had an atual intention to relin4uish the right# 3he fat that the aused
failed to ob0et to the entry into his house does not amount to a !ermission to ma&e a searh therein# As the
onstitutional 4uaranty is not de!endent u!on any affirmati$e at of the iti%en, the ourts do not !lae the
iti%en in the !osition of either ontesting an offier*s authority by fore, or wai$ing his onstitutional rights,
but instead they hold that a !eaeful submission to a searh or sei%ure is not a onsent or an in$itation thereto,
but is merely a demonstration of regard for the su!remay of the law# +ourts indulge e$ery reasonable
!resum!tion against wai$er of fundamental onstitutional rights and that we do not !resume a4uiesene in
the loss of fundamental rights# Aordingly, the searh and sei%ure of the arton bo. was e4ually non>
!ermissible and in$alid# 3he AfruitsA of the in$alid searh and sei%ure K i#e#, the 4< &ilos of mari0uana K
should therefore not ha$e been admitted in e$idene against :arros#
1)4 ?eroy v. Laya:#e [GR 9)631, 1( *#ne 1992]
En Banc, 7aras (J): !( concur
Facs! 6eo!oldo and Ma# 6uisa Feroy are husband and wife residing in -a$ao +ity# 1hen Feroy was
!romoted to the !osition of Assistant Administrator of the Soial Seurity System sometime in Cune 19==, he
and his family transferred to Iue%on +ity# 3he are and u!&ee! of their residene in -a$ao +ity was left to 2
houseboys, Cimmy Fa$ia and ?ri :urgos, who had their assigned 4uarters at a !ortion of the !remises# 3he
Feroys would oasionally send money to ?dna So4uilon for the salary of the said houseboys and other
e.!enses for the u!&ee! of their house# 1hile the Feroys had the &eys to the interior of the house, only the
&ey to the &ithen, where the iruit brea&ers were loated, was entrusted to ?dna So4uilon to gi$e her aess
in ase of an emergeny# On 12 A!ril 1998, +a!t# (eynaldo Obrero of the 3alomo 'atrol Station, '+B5D'
raided Feroy2s house in -a$ao +ity on information that the said residene was being used as a safehouse of
rebel soldiers# 3hey were able to enter the yard with the hel! of the areta&ers but did not enter the house
sine the owner was not !resent and they did not ha$e a searh warrant# 'ermission was re4uested by !hone
to Ma# 6uisa Feroy who onsented on the ondition that the searh be onduted in the !resene of Ma0or
Maasaet# 3he following day, +a!t# Obrero and Ma0# Maasaet met at the Feroy2s house to ondut the searh
!ursuant to the authority granted by Ma# 6uisa# +a!t# Obrero reo$ered a #45 al# handgun with a maga%ine
ontaining 9 li$e bullets in a bla& luth bag inside an unlo&ed drawer in the hildren2s room# ) half>full
0ute sa&s ontaining !rinted materials of (AM>SF' were also found in the hildren*s room# A searh of the
hildren*s rereation and study area re$ealed a big tra$elling bag ontaining assorted lothing, a small bla&
bag ontaining a boo& entitled A5slami (e$olution Future 'ath of the DationA, a road ma! of the 'hili!!ines,
a teleso!e, a !lasti bag ontaining assorted mediines and religious !am!hlets was found in the master*s
bedroom# 5n$entory and reei!t of sei%ed artiles were made# 3he ase was referred for !reliminary
in$estigation to the Iue%on +ity Assistant 'roseutor , who was designated Ating 'ro$inial 'roseutor for
-a$ao +ity by the -OC through -e!artment Order == ;1/ May 1998<# 5n a resolution dated / August 1998,
the Fisal reommended the filing of an 5nformation against the Feroys for $iolation of '- 1=// ;5llegal
'ossession of Firearms and Ammunitions in Furtherane of (ebellion<# 7ene, on = August 1998, an
5nformation for the said offense was filed by the Offie of the +ity 'roseutor of -a$ao +ity before the (3+
-a$ao +ity<# Do bail was reommended by the !roseution# 3he fisal2s resolution was reei$ed by the
Feroys on 1) August 1998# 3he latter filed a motion for bail on the same day whih was denied for being
!remature, as they ha$e not been arrested yet# 3he Feroys $oluntarily surrendered to "en# 'antaleon -umlao,
but who refused to reei$e them o the ground that his offie has not reei$ed o!ies of their warrants of arrest#
5n the meantime, on 15 August 1998, the Feroys were admitted to the St# 6u&e*s 7os!ital for $arious ailments
brought about or aggra$ated by the stress and an.iety aused by the filing of the riminal om!laint# On 19
August 1998, "en# -umlao granted their re4uest that they be allowed to be onfined at the hos!ital and
!laed under guard thereat# U!on arraignment on 1 Otober 1998, the Feroys !leaded not guilty and filed a
motion for hos!ital onfinement, whih was denied# 3he ourt ordered their ommitment at the -a$ao +ity
(ehabilitation +enter !ending trial on the merits# At the onlusion thereof, the ourt issued a seond order
denying their motion for reonsideration# 3he Feroys were returned to the St# 6u&e*s 7os!ital where their
!hysial ondition remained errati# "en# -umlao informed the Feroys that he had issued a direti$e for their
transfer from the St# 6u&e*s 7os!ital to +am! +rame on the basis of the 2 Otober 1998 Order# 3hey would
!roeed with their transfer !ursuant to the order of the trial ourt, unless otherwise restrained by the ourt#
3he Feroys filed the !etition for ertiorari, mandamus and !rohibition#
"ss#e! 1hether the !ermission granted by ma# 6uisa Feroy for asertaining thereat the !resene of alleged
Rrebel soldiersO inlude the authority to ondut a room to room searh one inside the house#
$el%! 3he +onstitution guarantees the right of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons, houses, !a!ers and
effets against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures ;Artile 555, Setion 2 of the 19=9 +onstitution<# 7owe$er,
the rule that searhes and sei%ures must be su!!orted by a $alid warrant is not an absolute one# Among the
reogni%ed e.e!tions thereto areH ;1< a searh inidental to an arrest, ;2< a searh of a mo$ing $ehile, and
;)< sei%ure of e$idene in !lain $iew ;'eo!le $# 6o 7o 1ing<# 3he neessity of the !ermission obtained from
Ma# 6uisa underlines the reognition of +a!t# Obrero of the need of a searh warrant to enter the house# 3he
!ermission granted by was for the !ur!ose of asertaining thereat the !resene of the alleged ArebelA soldiers#
3he !ermission did not inlude any authority to ondut a room to room searh one inside the house# 3he
!olie offiers had am!le time to !roure a searh warrant but did not# 1arrantless searhes were delared
illegal beause the offiials onduting the searh had e$ery o!!ortunity to seure a searh warrant# 3he items
ta&en were, therefore, !roduts of an illegal searh, $iolati$e of their onstitutional rights# As suh, they are
inadmissible in e$idene in the riminal ations instituted against them# 3he offense of illegal !ossession of
firearms is malum !rohibitum but it does not follow that the sub0et thereof is neessarily illegal !er se#
Moti$e is immaterial in mala !rohibita but the sub0ets of this &ind of offense may not be summarily sei%ed
sim!ly beause they are !rohibited# A searh warrant is still neessary# 7ene, the rule ha$ing been $iolated
and no e.e!tion being a!!liable, the artiles sei%ed were onfisated illegally and are therefore !roteted by
the e.lusionary !rini!le# 3hey annot be used as e$idene against the Feroys in the riminal ation against
them for illegal !ossession of firearms# :esides, assuming that there was indeed a searh warrant, still in mala
!rohibita, while there is no need of riminal intent, there must be &nowledge that the same e.isted# 1ithout
the &nowledge or $oluntariness there is no rime#
1)) &eo'le vs. Da;aso [GR 93)16, 12 A#:#s 1992]
3irst Division, 5edialdea (J): 3 concur
Facs! On 1= Cune 19==, 6t# +andido Iui0ardo, a 'hili!!ine +onstabulary offier onneted with the 152nd
'+ +om!any at 6ingayen, 'angasinan, and some om!anions were sent to $erify the !resene of +''BD'A
members in :arangay +atadang, Arellano>:ani, -agu!an +ity# 5n said !lae, the grou! a!!rehended
"regorio Flameniano, :erlina Aritumba, (e$elina "amboa and -eograias Mayaoa# 1hen interrogated, the
!ersons a!!rehended re$ealed that there was an underground safehouse at "raia Fillage in Urdaneta,
'angasinan# After oordinating with the Station +ommander of Urdaneta, the grou! !roeeded to the house in
"raia Fillage# 3hey found sub$ersi$e douments, a radio, a 1 . 9 aliber #45 firearm and other items# After
the raid, the grou! !roeeded to :onuan, -agu!an +ity, and !ut under sur$eillane the rented a!artment of
(osemarie Aritumba, sister of :erlina Aritumba whom they earlier arrested# 3hey inter$iewed 6u%$iminda
Morados, a $isitor of (osemarie Aritumba# She stated that she wor&ed with :ernie Mendo%aB:asilio -amaso#
She guided the grou! to the house rented by -amaso;QMendo%a<# 1hen they reahed the house, the grou!
found that it had already $aated by the ou!ants# Sine Morados was hesitant to gi$e the new address of
-amaso ;QMendo%a<, the grou! loo&ed for the :arangay +a!tain of the !lae and re4uested him to !oint out
the new house rented by -amaso ;QMendo%a<# 3he grou! again re4uired Morados to go with them# 1hen
they reahed the house, the grou! saw 6u% 3aniango outside# 3hey told her that they already &new that she
was a member of the D'A in the area# At first, she denied it, but when she saw Morados she re4uested the
grou! to go inside the house# U!on entering the house, the grou!, as well as the :arangay +a!tain, saw radio
sets, !am!hlets entitled AAng :ayan,A .ero. o!iers and a om!uter mahine# 3hey also found !ersons who
were om!anions of 6u% 3aniango ;namely, 3eresita +alosa, (iardo +alosa, Marites +alosa, ?ri
3aniango and 6u%$iminda Morados<# 3he grou! re4uested the !ersons in the house to allow them to loo&
around# 1hen 6u% 3aniango o!ened one of the rooms, they saw boo&s used for sub$ersi$e orientation, one
M>14 rifle, bullets and ammunitions, Jenwood radio, artifiial beard, ma!s of the 'hili!!ines, @ambales,
Mindoro and 6aguna and other items# 3hey onfisated the artiles and brought them to their head4uarters for
final in$entory# 3hey li&ewise brought the !ersons found in the house to the head4uarters for in$estigation#
Said !ersons re$ealed that -amaso ;QMendo%a< was the lessee of the house and owned the items onfisated
therefrom# 3hus, :asilio -amaso, was originally harged in an information filed before the (egional 3rial
+ourt of -agu!an +ity with $iolation of 'residential -eree 1=// in furtherane of, or inident to, or in
onnetion with the rime of sub$ersion, together with 6u%$iminda Morados y "alang Q Ja Mel, 3eresita
+alosa y Maabangon Q Ja 3essie, (iardo +alosa y 'ere% Q Ja (i, Marites +alosa y ?$angelista Q Ja
3ess, ?ri 3aniango y +a!ira Q Ja (i and 6u% 3aniango y 'enial Q Ja 6u%# Suh information was
later amended to e.lude all other !ersons e.e!t -amaso from the riminal harge# U!on arraignment,
-amaso !leaded not guilty to the rime harged# 3rial on the merits ensued# 3he !roseution rested its ase
and offered its e.hibits for admission# 3he defense ounsel inter!osed his ob0etions to the admissibility of
the !roseution*s e$idene on grounds of its being hearsay, immaterial or irrele$ant and illegal for la& of a
searh warrant, and thereafter, manifested that he was not !resenting any e$idene for the aused# On 19
Canuary 1998, the trial ourt rendered its deision, finding -amaso guilty beyond reasonable doubt,
sentening the latter to suffer the !enalty of (elusion 'er!etua and to !ay the osts of the !roeedings#
-amaso a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether there was wai$er on the !art of -amaso to allow the warrantless searh of his house#
$el%! -amaso was singled out as the sole $iolator of '- 1=//, in furtherane of, or inident to, or in
onnetion with the rime of sub$ersion# 3here is no substantial and redible e$idene to establish the fat
that the a!!ellant is allegedly the same !erson as the lessee of the house where the M>14 rifle and other
sub$ersi$e items were found or the owner of the said items# ?$en assuming for the sa&e of argument that
-amaso is the lessee of the house, the ase against him still will not !ros!er, the reason being that the law
enforers failed to om!ly with the re4uirements of a $alid searh and sei%ure !roeedings# 3he onstitutional
immunity from unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, being a !ersonal one annot he wai$ed by anyone e.e!t
the !erson whose rights are in$aded or one who is e.!ressly authori%ed to do so in his or her # 3he reords
show that -amaso was not in his house at that time 6u% 3aniango and 6u% Morados, his alleged hel!er,
allowed the authorities to enter it# 3here is no e$idene that would establish the fat that 6u% Morados was
indeed -amaso*s hel!er or if it was true that she was his hel!er, that -amaso had gi$en her authority to o!en
his house in his absene# 3he !roseution li&ewise failed to show if 6u% 3aniango has suh an authority#
1ithout this e$idene, the authorities* intrusion into -amaso*s dwelling annot be gi$en any olor of legality#
1hile the !ower to searh and sei%e is neessary to the !ubli welfare, still it must be e.erised and the law
enfored without transgressing the onstitutional rights of the iti%ens, for the enforement of no statute is of
suffiient im!ortane to 0ustify indifferene to the basi !rini!les of go$ernment# As a onse4uene, the
searh onduted by the authorities was illegal# 5t would ha$e been different if the situation here demanded
urgeny whih ould ha$e !rom!ted the authorities to dis!ense with a searh warrant# :ut the reord is silent
on this !oint# 3he fat that they ame to -amaso*s house at nighttime, does not grant them the liense to go
inside his house#
1)6 Lo'ez vs. .o;;issioner o7 .#so;s [GR L-2296(, 3 Dece;3er 192)]
2econd Division, 3ernando (J): 4 concur, ! too) no #art
Facs! MBF Colo 6ema had been under strit sur$eillane by the ombined team of agents of the D:5, '+,
(ASA+, and +ity 'olie of -a$ao !rior to its a!!rehension at a !ri$ate wharf in :at0a&, Sasa, -a$ao +ity#
MBF LColo 6emaM was s&i!!ered ;si< by +a!t# A4uilino 'antino!le and hartered by Mr# 3omas Felaso#
-uring the !eriod from the latter !art of August to Se!tember 1=, 19//, the said $essel was in 5ndonesian
waters where it loaded o!ra and offee beans from 3aruna, 'itta, and Mangenito, all of 5ndonesia# 5n its tri!
to 5ndonesia it brought $arious merhandise from the 'hili!!ines whih were e.hanged andBor bartered for
o!ra and offee beans and subse4uently ta&en to -a$ao +ity# Said $essel !assed Marore, 5ndonesia on 1=
Se!tember 19// on its a way to 3ahuna, 5ndonesia before !roeeding to -a$ao +ity where it was
a!!rehended on 19 Se!tember 19//# At about )H88 !#m# of the said day, when the $essel was searhed and
after +a!tain 'antino!le informed the team that Felaso, the harterer of the $essel, had other douments
showing that $essel ame from 5ndonesia arrying smuggled o!ra and offee, a ombined team of
+onstabulary and (egional Anti>Smuggling +enter o!erati$es headed by ?arl (eynolds, Senior D:5 Agent of
-a$ao, !roeeded to the Felaso*s room at the S&yroom 7otel in -a$ao +ity, to as& for said doument#
Felaso was not inside the hotel room when they entered the room# 3here are onfiting laims whether the
maniurist 3eofila 5baNe% or whether Felaso*s wife, who was allegedly inside the room at that time,
$oluntarily allowed the !olie offiers to enter, and whether the !olie offiers Aforibly o!ened luggages and
bo.es from whih only se$eral douments and !a!ers were found, then sei%ed, onfisated and too& away the
same,A or whether Mrs# Felaso $olunteered to o!en the suitases and baggages of Felaso and deli$ered the
douments and things ontained therein to (eynolds# 3he +olletor of +ustoms of -a$ao sei%ed 1,4=8 sa&s
of o!ra and =/ sa&s of offee from the MBF motor $essel Colo 6ema# 3he sei%ure was delared lawful by the
+ourt of 3a. A!!eals, and its deision was affirmed by the Su!reme +ourt on 29 Do$ember 1994 in Dasiad
$s# +ourt of 3a. A!!eals ;"( 6>29)1=, Do$ember 29, 1994, /1 S+(A 2)=<# 5n the !resent s!eial i$il ation
for ertiorari, !rohibition and mandamus, the only 4uestion left then is whether the searh onduted by a
!arty headed by (eynolds without the searh warrant for the hotel room of Felaso, who entered into a
ontrat with Cose "# 6o!e%, the awardee of suh 'hili!!ine (e!arations +ommission $essel, for its
o!eration and use ostensibly for fishing, is $iolati$e of suh onstitutional !ro$ision#
"ss#e! 1hether there was onsent on the !art of the !erson who was the ou!ant of the hotel room then
rented by Felaso#
$el%! 3here was an attem!t on the !art of 6o!e% and Felaso to ounterat the fore of the reital of the
written statement of 3eofila 5baNe% ;allegedly wife of 3omas Felaso< by an affida$it of one +ora%on S#
Felaso, who stated that she is the legal wife of Felaso, and another by Felaso himself, reiterating that the
!erson who was !resent at his hotel room was one 3eofila 5baNe%, Aa maniurist by ou!ation#A 5f suh
indeed were the ase, then it is muh more easily understandable why that !erson, 3eofila 5baNe%, who ould
be a!tly desribed as the wrong !erson at the wrong !lae and at the wrong time, would ha$e signified her
onsent readily and immediately# Under the irumstanes, that was the most !rudent ourse of ation# 5t
would sa$e her and e$en Felaso himself from any gossi! or innuendo# Dor ould the offiers of the law be
blamed if they would at on the a!!earanes# 3here was a !erson inside who from all indiations was ready to
aede to their re4uest# ?$en ommon ourtesy alone would ha$e !reluded them from in4uiring too losely
as to why she was there# Under all the irumstanes, therefore, it an readily be onluded that there was
onsent suffiient in law to dis!ense with the need for a searh warrant#
1)2 .a3alles vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 136292, 1) *an#ary 2112]
3irst Division, 7uno (J): 4 concur
Facs! About 9H15 !#m# of 2= Cune 19=9, Sgt# Fitorino Doe0a and 'at# Ale. de +astro, while on a routine
!atrol in :arangay Sam!aluan, 'agsan0an, 6aguna, s!otted a !assenger 0ee! unusually o$ered with
A&a&awatiA lea$es# Sus!eting that the 0ee! was loaded with smuggled goods, the two !olie offiers flagged
down the $ehile# 3he 0ee! was dri$en by (udy +aballes y 3aiNo# 1hen as&ed what was loaded on the 0ee!,
he did not answer, but he a!!eared !ale and ner$ous# 1ith +aballes* onsent, the !olie offiers he&ed the
argo and they diso$ered bundles of )#8= mm aluminumBgal$ani%ed ondutor wires e.lusi$ely owned by
Dational 'ower +or!oration ;DAO+O(<# 3he ondutor wires weighed 988 &ilos and $alued at '55,244#45#
Doe0a as&ed +aballes where the wires ame from and +aballes answered that they ame from +a$inti, a
town a!!ro.imately = &ilometers away from Sam!aluan# 3hereafter, +aballes and the $ehile with the high>
$oltage wires were brought to the 'agsan0an 'olie Station# -anilo +abale too& !itures of +aballes and the
0ee! loaded with the wires whih were turned o$er to the 'olie Station +ommander of 'agsan0an, 6aguna#
+aballes was inarerated for 9 days in the Munii!al 0ail# +aballes was harged with the rime of theft in an
information dated 1/ Otober 19=9# -uring the arraignment, +aballes !leaded not guilty and hene, trial on
the merits ensued# On 29 A!ril 199), (egional 3rial +ourt of Santa +ru%, 6aguna rendered 0udgment, finding
+aballes, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the rime of theft# 5n a resolution dated 9 Do$ember 199=, the
trial ourt denied +aballes* motion for reonsideration# 3he +ourt of A!!eals affirmed the trial ourt deision
on 15 Se!tember 199=# +aballes a!!ealed the deision by ertiorari#
"ss#e! 1hether +aballes2 !assi$e submission to the statement of Sgt# Doe0a that the latter Awill loo& at the
ontents of his $ehile and he answered in the !ositi$eA be onsidered as wai$er on +aballes2 !art on
warrantless searh and sei%ure#
$el%! ?nshrined in our +onstitution is the in$iolable right of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons and
!ro!erties against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, as defined under Setion 2, Artile 555 thereof# 3he
e.lusionary rule under Setion );2<, Artile 555 of the +onstitution bars the admission of e$idene obtained in
$iolation of suh right# 3he onstitutional !rosri!tion against warrantless searhes and sei%ures is not
absolute but admits of ertain e.e!tions, namelyH ;1< warrantless searh inidental to a lawful arrest
reogni%ed under Setion 12, (ule 12/ of the (ules of +ourt and by !re$ailing 0uris!rudene, ;2< sei%ure of
e$idene in !lain $iew, ;)< searh of mo$ing $ehiles, ;4< onsented warrantless searh, ;5< ustoms searh,
;/< sto! and fris& situations ;3erry searh<, and ;9< e.igent and emergeny irumstanes# 5n ases where
warrant is neessary, the ste!s !resribed by the +onstitution and reiterated in the (ules of +ourt must be
om!lied with# 5n the e.e!tional e$ents where warrant is not neessary to effet a $alid searh or sei%ure, or
when the latter annot be !erformed e.e!t without a warrant, what onstitutes a reasonable or unreasonable
searh or sei%ure is !urely a 0udiial 4uestion, determinable from the uni4ueness of the irumstanes
in$ol$ed, inluding the !ur!ose of the searh or sei%ure, the !resene or absene of !robable ause, the
manner in whih the searh and sei%ure was made, the !lae or thing searhed and the harater of the artiles
!roured# 5t is not ontro$erted that the searh and sei%ure onduted by the !olie offiers was not authori%ed
by a searh warrant# 3he mere mobility of these $ehiles, howe$er, does not gi$e the !olie offiers unlimited
disretion to ondut indisriminate searhes without warrants if made within the interior of the territory and
in the absene of !robable ause# 7erein, the !olie offiers did not merely ondut a $isual searh or $isual
ins!etion of +aballes* $ehile# 3hey had to reah inside the $ehile, lift the &a&awati lea$es and loo& inside
the sa&s before they were able to see the able wires# 5t thus annot be onsidered a sim!le routine he&#
Also, +aballes* $ehile was flagged down beause the !olie offiers who were on routine !atrol beame
sus!iious when they saw that the ba& of the $ehile was o$ered with &a&awati lea$es whih, aording to
them, was unusual and unommon# 3he fat that the $ehile loo&ed sus!iious sim!ly beause it is not
ommon for suh to be o$ered with &a&awati lea$es does not onstitute A!robable auseA as would 0ustify the
ondut of a searh without a warrant# 5n addition, the !olie authorities do not laim to ha$e reei$ed any
onfidential re!ort or ti!!ed information that !etitioner was arrying stolen able wires in his $ehile whih
ould otherwise ha$e sustained their sus!iion# 'hili!!ine 0uris!rudene is re!lete with ases where ti!!ed
information has beome a suffiient !robable ause to effet a warrantless searh and sei%ure# Unfortunately,
none e.ists in the !resent ase# Further, the e$idene is la&ing that +aballes intentionally surrendered his
right against unreasonable searhes# 3he manner by whih the two !olie offiers allegedly obtained the
onsent of +aballes for them to ondut the searh lea$es muh to be desired# 1hen +aballes* $ehile was
flagged down, Sgt# Doe0a a!!roahed +aballes and Atold him 5 will loo& at the ontents of his $ehile and he
answered in the !ositi$e#A :y uttering those words, it annot be said the !olie offiers were as&ing or
re4uesting for !ermission that they be allowed to searh the $ehile of +aballes# For all intents and !ur!oses,
they were informing, nay, im!osing u!on +aballes that they will searh his $ehile# 3he AonsentA gi$en
under intimidating or oeri$e irumstanes is no onsent within the !ur$iew of the onstitutional guaranty#
5n addition, in ases where the +ourt u!held the $alidity of onsented searh, it will be noted that the !olie
authorities e.!ressly as&ed, in no unertain terms, for the onsent of the aused to be searhed# And the
onsent of the aused was established by lear and !ositi$e !roof# Deither an +aballes* !assi$e submission
be onstrued as an im!lied a4uiesene to the warrantless searh# +asting aside the able wires as e$idene,
the remaining e$idene on reord are insuffiient to sustain +aballes* on$ition# 7is guilt an only be
established without $iolating the onstitutional right of the aused against unreasonable searh and sei%ure#
1)( &eo'le vs. Asis [GR 142)31, 1) >co3er 2112]
En Banc, 7angani/an (J): concur, & on o""icial leave
Facs! -anilo Asis y Fon!erada and "ilbert Formento y Sarion were harged in an 5nformation dated 1=
February 199=, the information stating A3hat on or about February 18, 199=, in the +ity of Manila,
'hili!!ines, the said aused, ons!iring and onfederating together and mutually hel!ing eah other, did then
and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to gain and by means of fore and $iolene u!on
!erson, to witH by then and there stabbing one SU 75D" "UAD Q (OS +75D" with a bladed instrument on
the different !arts of the body thereafter ta&e, rob and arry away the following, to witH +ash money in the
amount of '28,888#88, one ;1< wristwath* one ;1< gold ne&lae, and undetermined items, or all in the total
amount of '28,888#88 more or less, belonging to said SU 75D" "UAD Q (OS +75D" against his will, to
the damage and !re0udie of the said owner in the aforesaid amount more or less of '28,888#88, 'hili!!ine
+urreny, and as a result thereof, he sustained mortal stab wounds whih were the diret and immediate ause
of his death#A 1hen arraigned on 9 Culy 199=, both aused !leaded not guilty# Found to be deaf>mutes, they
were assisted, not only by a ounsel de ofiio, but also by an inter!reter from the +al$ary :a!tist +hurh# 3he
!roseution !resented 9 witnesses# Although none of them had atually seen the rime ommitted, strong and
substantial irumstantial e$idene !resented by them attem!ted to lin& both aused to the rime# After due
trial, both aused were found guilty and sentened to death# 3he (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of Manila
;:ranh 54, +riminal +ase 9=>1/)898<, on = Marh 2888, held that the Arime harged and !ro$ed is robbery
with homiide under Artile 294, Do# 1 of the (e$ised 'enal +ode,A ruled that Aalthough no witnesses to the
atual &illing and robbery were !resented, the irumstantial e$idene inluding the reo$ery of bloodstained
lothing from both aused definitely !ro$ed that the two ;2< . . . ommitted the rime,A and a!!reiated the
aggra$ating irumstanes of abuse of onfidene, su!erior strength and treahery and thus sentened both
aused to the su!reme !enalty of death# 7ene, the automati re$iew before the Su!reme +ourt# :oth the
aused do not 4uestion the legality of their arrest, as they made no ob0etion thereto before the arraignment,
but ob0et to the introdution of the bloodstained !air of shorts allegedly reo$ered from the bag of Formento,
arguing that the searh was illegally done, ma&ing the obtainment of the !air of shorts illegal and taints them
as inadmissible# 3he !roseution, on the other hand, ontends that it was Formento*s wife who $oluntarily
surrendered the bag that ontained the bloodstained trousers of the $itim, and thus laims that her at
onstituted a $alid onsent to the searh without a warrant#
"ss#e! 1hether Formento, a deaf>mute, has gi$en onsent to the reo$ery of the bloodstained !air of short, in
his !ossession during the warrantless searh#
$el%! 'rimarily, the onstitutional right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, being a !ersonal one,
annot be wai$ed by anyone e.e!t the !erson whose rights are in$aded or who is e.!ressly authori%ed to do
so on his or her behalf# 5n the !resent ase, the testimonies of the !roseution witnesses show that at the time
the bloodstained !air of shorts was reo$ered, Formento, together with his wife and mother, was !resent#
:eing the $ery sub0et of the searh, neessarily, he himself should ha$e gi$en onsent# Sine he was
!hysially !resent, the wai$er ould not ha$e ome from any other !erson# 6o!e% $s# +ommissioner of
+ustoms does not a!!ly as the aused therein was not !resent when the searh was made# Further, to
onstitute a $alid wai$er, it must be shown that first, the right e.ists, seond, the !erson in$ol$ed had
&nowledge, atual or onstruti$e, of the e.istene of suh a right, and third, the !erson had an atual
intention to relin4uish the right# 7erein, Formento ould not ha$e onsented to a warrantless searh when, in
the first !lae, he did not understand what was ha!!ening at that moment# 3here was no inter!reter to assist
him >> a deaf>mute >> during the arrest, searh and sei%ure# 3he !oint in the ase 'asion $da# de "aria $#
6osin, i#e# Aas the onstitutional guaranty is not de!endent u!on any affirmati$e at of the iti%en, the ourts
do not !lae the iti%en in the !osition of either ontesting an offier2s authority by fore, or wai$ing his
onstitutional rights, but instead they hold that a !eaeful submission to a searh or sei%ure is not a onsent or
an in$itation thereto, but is merely a demonstration of regard for the su!remay of the law,A beomes e$en
more !ronouned in the !resent ase, in whih Formento is a deaf>mute, and there was no inter!reter to
e.!lain to him what was ha!!ening# 7is seeming a4uiesene to the searh without a warrant may be
attributed to !lain and sim!le onfusion and ignorane# 3he bloodstained !air of shorts was a !iee of
e$idene sei%ed on the oasion of an unlawful searh and sei%ure# 3hus, it is tainted and should thus be
e.luded for being the !ro$erbial fruit of the !oisonous tree# 5n the language of the fundamental law, it shall
be inadmissible in e$idene for any !ur!ose in any !roeeding# 6astly, as to e$idene $is>a>is the ase in its
totality, irumstantial e$idene that merely arouses sus!iions or gi$es room for on0eture is not suffiient
to on$it# 5t must do more than 0ust raise the !ossibility, or e$en the !robability, of guilt# 5t must engender
moral ertainty# Otherwise, the onstitutional !resum!tion of innoene !re$ails, and the aused deser$es
a4uittal#
1)9 &eo'le vs. <#%#% [GR 144132, 26 4e'e;3er 2113]
2econd Division, Tinga (J): 3 concur, ! "iled a se#arate dissenting o#inion
Facs! Sometime during the months of Culy and August 1999, the 3oril 'olie Station, -a$ao +ity reei$ed a
re!ort from a Ri$ilian assetO named :obong Solier about a ertain Doel 3udtud# Solier related that his
neighbors ha$e been om!laining about 3udtud, who was allegedly res!onsible for the !roliferation of
mari0uana in their area# (eating to the re!ort, 'O1 (onald -esierto, 'O1 (amil Floreta and their su!erior,
S'O1 Fillalonghan, all members of the 5ntelligene Setion of the 3oril 'olie Station, onduted sur$eillane
in Solier2s neighborhood in Sa!a, 3oril, -a$ao +ity# For 5 days, they gathered information and learned that
3udtud was in$ol$ed in illegal drugs# Aording to his neighbors, 3udtud was engaged in selling mari0uana#
On 1 August 1999, Solier informed the !olie that 3udtud had headed to +otabato and would be ba& later
that day with new sto&s of mari0uana# Solier desribed 3udtud as big>bodied and short, and usually wore a
hat# At around 4H88 !#m# that same day, a team om!osed of 'O1 -esierto, 'O1 Floreta and S'O1
Fillalonghan !osted themsel$es at the orner of Sai!on and MArthur 7ighway to await 3udtud2s arri$al# All
wore i$ilian lothes# About =H88 !#m#, 2 men disembar&ed from a bus and hel!ed eah other arry a arton
mar&ed RJing Fla&es#O Standing some 5 feet away from the men, 'O1 -esierto and 'O1 Floreta obser$ed
that one of the men fit 3udtud2s desri!tion# 3he same man also toted a !lasti bag# 'O1 Floreta and 'O1
-esierto then a!!roahed the sus!ets and identified themsel$es as !olie offiers# 'O1 -esierto informed
them that the !olie had reei$ed information that sto&s of illegal drugs would be arri$ing that night# 3he
man who resembled 3udtud2s desri!tion denied that he was arrying any drugs# 'O1 -esierto as&ed him if
he ould see the ontents of the bo.# 3udtud obliged, saying, Rit was alright#O 3udtud o!ened the bo. himself
as his om!anion loo&ed on# 3he bo. yielded !iees of dried fish, beneath whih were two bundles, one
wra!!ed in a stri!ed !lasti bag and another in news!a!ers# 'O1 -esierto as&ed 3udtud to unwra! the
!a&ages# 3hey ontained what seemed to the !olie offiers as mari0uana lea$es# 3he !olie thus arrested
3udtud and his om!anion, informed them of their rights and brought them to the !olie station# 3he two did
not resist# 3he onfisated items were turned o$er to the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;'D'< +rime 6aboratory
for e.amination# Forensi tests on s!eimens ta&en from the onfisated items onfirmed the !olie offiers2
sus!iion# 3he !lasti bag ontained ),288 grams of mari0uana lea$es while the news!a!ers ontained
another =98 grams# Doel 3udtud and his om!anion, -indo :ulong, were subse4uently harged before the
(egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of -a$ao +ity with illegal !ossession of !rohibited drugs# U!on arraignment,
both aused !leaded not guilty# 3he defense, howe$er, reser$ed their right to 4uestion the $alidity of their
arrest and the sei%ure of the e$idene against them# 3rial ensued thereafter# 3udtud, denying the harges
against them, ried frame>u!# Swayed by the !roseution2s e$idene beyond reasonable doubt, the (3+
rendered 0udgment on$iting both aused as harged and sentening them to suffer the !enalty of relusion
!er!etua and to !ay a fine of '588,888#88# On a!!eal, Doel 3udtud and -indo :olong assign, among other
errors, the admission in e$idene of the mari0uana lea$es, whih they laim were sei%ed in $iolation of their
right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures#
"ss#e! 1hether the 3udtud2s im!lied a4uiesene ;3udtud2s statement of Rit2s all rightO when the !olie
offiers re4uested that the bo. be o!ened< be onsidered a wai$er#
$el%! 3he right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures is seured by Setion 2, Artile 555 of the
+onstitution# 3he (3+ 0ustified the warrantless searh of a!!ellants2 belongings under the first e.e!tion, as a
searh inident to a lawful arrest# A searh inidental to a lawful arrest is santioned by the (ules of +ourt# 5t
is signifiant to note that the searh in 4uestion !reeded the arrest# (eent 0uris!rudene holds that the arrest
must !reede the searh, the !roess annot be re$ersed# De$ertheless, a searh substantially
ontem!oraneous with an arrest an !reede the arrest if the !olie ha$e !robable ause to ma&e the arrest at
the outset of the searh# 3he 4uestion, therefore, is whether the !olie herein had !robable ause to arrest
3udtud, et# al# 3he long>standing rule in this 0urisdition, a!!lied with a great degree of onsisteny, is that
Rreliable informationO alone is not suffiient to 0ustify a warrantless arrest under Setion 5 ;a<, (ule 11)# 3he
rule re4uires, in addition, that the aused !erform some o$ert at that would indiate that he Rhas ommitted,
is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense#O For the e.e!tion in Setion 5 ;a<, (ule 11) to
a!!ly, this +ourt ruled, two elements must onurH ;1< the !erson to be arrested must e.eute an o$ert at
indiating he has 0ust ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit a rime, and ;2< suh
o$ert at is done in the !resene or within the $iew of the arresting offier# (eliable information alone is
insuffiient# 3hus, herein, in no sense an the &nowledge of the arresting offiers that 3udtud was in
!ossession of mari0uana be desribed as R!ersonal,O ha$ing learned the same only from their informant Solier#
Solier, for his !art, testified that he obtained his information only from his neighbors and the friends of
3udtud# Solier2s information is hearsay# +onfronted with suh a dubious informant, the !olie !erha!s felt it
neessary to ondut their own Rsur$eillane#O 3his Rsur$eillane,O it turns out, did not atually onsist of
sta&ing out 3udtud to ath him in the at of !lying his illegal trade, but of a mere Rgathering of information
from the assets there#O 3he !olie offiers who onduted suh Rsur$eillaneO did not identify who these
RassetsO were or the basis of the latter2s information# +learly, suh information is also hearsay, not of
!ersonal &nowledge# Finally, there is an effeti$e wai$er of rights against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures
only if the following re4uisites are !resentH ;1< 5t must a!!ear that the rights e.ist, ;2< 3he !erson in$ol$ed
had &nowledge, atual or onstruti$e, of the e.istene of suh right, ;)< Said !erson had an atual intention
to relin4uish the right# 7ere, the !roseution failed to establish the seond and third re4uisites# (eords
dislose that when the !olie offiers introdued themsel$es as suh and re4uested 3udtud that they see the
ontents of the arton bo. su!!osedly ontaining the mari0uana, 3udtud said Rit was alright#O 7e did not resist
and o!ened the bo. himself# 3udtud*s im!lied a4uiesene, if at all, ould not ha$e been more than mere
!assi$e onformity gi$en under oeri$e or intimidating irumstanes and is, thus, onsidered no onsent at
all within the !ur$iew of the onstitutional guarantee# +onse4uently, 3udtud*s la& of ob0etion to the searh
and sei%ure is not tantamount to a wai$er of his onstitutional right or a $oluntary submission to the
warrantless searh and sei%ure# As the searh of 3udtud*s bo. does not ome under the reogni%ed e.e!tions
to a $alid warrantless searh, the mari0uana lea$es obtained thereby are inadmissible in e$idene# And as
there is no e$idene other than the hearsay testimony of the arresting offiers and their informant, the
on$ition of 3udtud, et# al# annot be sustained#
161 .,i;el vs. .ali7ornia [39) 84 2)2, 23 *#ne 1969]
2te$art (J)
Facs! 6ate in the afternoon of 1) Se!tember 19/5, three !olie offiers arri$ed at the Santa Ana, +alifornia,
home of the +himel with a warrant authori%ing his arrest for the burglary of a oin sho!# 3he offiers &no&ed
on the door, identified themsel$es to +himel*s wife, and as&ed if they might ome inside# She ushered them
into the house, where they waited 18 or 15 minutes until +himel returned home from wor&# 1hen +himel
entered the house, one of the offiers handed him the arrest warrant and as&ed for !ermission to Aloo&
around#A +himel ob0eted, but was ad$ised that Aon the basis of the lawful arrest,A the offiers would
nonetheless ondut a searh# Do searh warrant had been issued# Aom!anied by +himel*s wife, the
offiers then loo&ed through the entire three>bedroom house, inluding the atti, the garage, and a small
wor&sho!# 5n some rooms the searh was relati$ely ursory# 5n the master bedroom and sewing room,
howe$er, the offiers direted +himel*s wife to o!en drawers and Ato !hysially mo$e ontents of the drawers
from side to side so that they might $iew any items that would ha$e ome from the burglary#A After
om!leting the searh, they sei%ed numerous items > !rimarily oins, but also se$eral medals, to&ens, and a
few other ob0ets# 3he entire searh too& between 45 minutes and an hour# At +himel*s subse4uent state trial
on two harges of burglary, the items ta&en from his house were admitted into e$idene against him, o$er his
ob0etion that they had been unonstitutionally sei%ed# 7e was on$ited, and the 0udgments of on$ition
were affirmed by both the +alifornia +ourt of A!!eal, and the +alifornia Su!reme +ourt# :oth ourts
ae!ted +himel*s ontention that the arrest warrant was in$alid beause the su!!orting affida$it was set out
in onlusory terms, but held that sine the arresting offiers had !roured the warrant Ain good faith,A and
sine in any e$ent they had suffiient information to onstitute !robable ause for +himel*s arrest, that arrest
had been lawful# From this onlusion the a!!ellate ourts went on to hold that the searh of +himel*s home
had been 0ustified, des!ite the absene of a searh warrant, on the ground that it had been inident to a $alid
arrest#
"ss#e! 1hether the Rsearh inident to arrestO e.tends to the whole of the house where the aused was
arrested#
$el%! A!!ro$al of a warrantless searh inident to a lawful arrest seems first to ha$e been artiulated by the
+ourt in 1914 as ditum in 1ee&s $# United States, 2)2 US )=)# 3he statement therein howe$er made no
referene to any right to searh the !lae where an arrest ours, but was limited to a right to searh the
A!erson#A 11 years later, the ase of +arroll $# United States ;2/9 U#S# 1)2< brought the following
embellishment of the 1ee&s statementH A1hen a man is legally arrested for an offense, whate$er is found
u!on his !erson or in his ontrol whih it is unlawful for him to ha$e and whih may be used to !ro$e the
offense may be sei%ed and held as e$idene in the !roseution#A A similar analysis underlies the Asearh
inident to arrestA !rini!le, and mar&s its !ro!er e.tent# 1hen an arrest is made, it is reasonable for the
arresting offier to searh the !erson arrested in order to remo$e any wea!ons that the latter might see& to use
in order to resist arrest or effet his esa!e# Otherwise, the offier*s safety might well be endangered, and the
arrest itself frustrated# 5n addition, it is entirely reasonable for the arresting offier to searh for and sei%e any
e$idene on the arrestee*s !erson in order to !re$ent its onealment or destrution# And the area into whih
an arrestee might reah in order to grab a wea!on or e$identiary items must, of ourse, be go$erned by a li&e
rule# 3here is am!le 0ustifiation, therefore, for a searh of the arrestee*s !erson and the area Awithin his
immediate ontrolA > onstruing that !hrase to mean the area from within whih he might gain !ossession of a
wea!on or destrutible e$idene# 3here is no om!arable 0ustifiation, howe$er, for routinely searhing any
room other than that in whih an arrest ours > or, for that matter, for searhing through all the des& drawers
or other losed or onealed areas in that room itself# Suh searhes, in the absene of well>reogni%ed
e.e!tions, may be made only under the authority of a searh warrant# 3he Aadherene to 0udiial !roessesA
mandated by the Fourth Amendment re4uires no less# 7erein, the searh went far beyond +himel*s !erson
and the area from within whih he might ha$e obtained either a wea!on or something that ould ha$e been
used as e$idene against him# 3here was no onstitutional 0ustifiation, in the absene of a searh warrant, for
e.tending the searh beyond that area# 3he so!e of the searh was, therefore, AunreasonableA under the
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and +himel*s on$ition annot stand#
161 &eo'le vs. %ela .r#z [GR (3261, 1( A'ril 1991]
2econd Division, +egalado (J): 4 concur
Facs! After reei$ing a onfidential re!ort from Arnel, their informant, a Abuy>bustA o!eration was
onduted by the 1)th Darotis (egional Unit through a team om!osed of 3BSgt# Caime (a!osas as 3eam
6eader, SBSgt# (odelito Oblie, Sgt# -ante Sang, Sgt# Fiente Cimene%, 'B'f# Adolfo Aroy as !oseur>buyer
and 'at# -eograias "orgonia at Malili St#, 3ondo, Manila at around 2H)8 !#m# of 4 May 19=9 to ath the
!usherBs# 'B'f# Adolfo Aroy ated as the !oseur>buyer with Arnel as his om!anion to buy mari0uana worth
'18#88 from the two aused, Cuan de la +ru% and (eynaldo :eltran# At the sene, it was Cuan de la +ru%
whom Aroy first negotiated with on the !urhase and when Aroy told -e la +ru% that he was buying '18#88
worth of mari0uana, -e la +ru% instruted (eynaldo :eltran to gi$e one aluminum foil of mari0uana whih
:eltran got from his !ants* !o&et and deli$ered it to Aroy# After asertaining that the foil of sus!eted
mari0uana was really mari0uana, Aroy ga$e the !rearranged signal to his teammates by srathing his head
and his teammates who were strategially !ositioned in the $iinity, on$erged at the !lae, identified
themsel$es as DA(+OM agents and effeted the arrest of -e la +ru% and :eltran# 3he '18#88 mar&ed bill
used by Aroy was found in the !ossession of Cuan de la +ru% together with two aluminum foils and
ontaining mari0uana# Cuan de la +ru% y "on%ales and (eynaldo :eltran y Aniban were harged in +riminal
+ase =9>54419 of the (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of Manila with $iolation of Setion 4, Art# 55, in relation to
Setion 21, Artile 5F of (e!ubli At /425, as amended# 3he ourt, on 15 Marh 19==, found -ela +ru% and
:eltran guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentened eah of them to suffer the !enalty of relusion
!er!etua, with the aessory !enalties !ro$ided by law, to !ay a fine of '28,888#88, without subsidiary
im!risonment in ase of insol$eny, and eah to !ay one>half of the osts# From this deision, de la +ru% and
:eltran a!!ealed# 5n a letter of the 1arden, Manila +ity Cail, dated ) Marh 19=9, the +ourt was informed of
the death of de la +ru% on 21 February 19=9# 3hus, the riminal ase against de la +ru% was dismissed in the
Su!reme +ourt resolution of 25 Se!tember 19=9# 3he !resent a!!ellate !roeeding is limited only to :eltran#
"ss#e! 1hether the warrantless sei%ure inidental to the buy>bust o!eration $iolates :eltran2s onstitutional
rights against unreasonable searh and sei%ure#
$el%! A buy>bust o!eration is the method em!loyed by !eae offiers to tra! and ath a malefator in
flagrante delito# 5t is essentially a form of entra!ment sine the !eae offier neither instigates nor indues
the aused to ommit a rime# ?ntra!ment is the em!loyment of suh ways and means for the !ur!ose of
tra!!ing or a!turing a lawbrea&er from whose mind the riminal intent originated# Oftentimes, it is the only
effeti$e way of a!!rehending a riminal in the at of the ommission of the offense# 1hile it is oneded that
in a buy>bust o!eration, there is sei%ure of e$idene from one*s !erson without a searh warrant, needless to
state a searh warrant is not neessary, the searh being inident to a lawful arrest# A !eae offier may,
without a warrant, arrest a !erson when, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually
ommitting or is attem!ting to ommit an offense# 5t is a matter of 0udiial e.!eriene that in the arrest of
$iolators of the -angerous -rugs At in a buy>bust o!eration, the malefators were in$ariably aught red>
handed# 3here being no $iolation of the onstitutional right against unreasonable searh and sei%ure, the
onfisated artiles are admissible in e$idene#
162 &eo'le v. Aal#3iran [GR (4129, 6 May 1991]
Facs! Destor Jalubiran was arrested on 12 Culy 19=5, in -umaguete +ity, by Darotis +ommand
;DA(+OM< elements# 7is arrest was the result of a Abuy>bustA o!eration in whih 'at# 6eon Iuindo ated as
the buyer while the other team members lay in wait to arrest Jalubiran at the !re>arranged signal# Iuindo
a!!roahed the aused>a!!ellant, who was with a grou! of friends in front of the "amo Memorial +lini,
and as&ed if he ould Asore,A the 0argon for buying mari0uana# Jalubiran immediately !rodued two sti&s of
mari0uana, for whih Iuindo !aid him a !re$iously mar&ed '5#88 bill# Iuindo then ga$e the signal and +!l#
6e$i -orado a!!roahed and arrested Jalubiran# -orado fris&ed the aused>a!!ellant# 7e reo$ered the
mar&ed money and found 19 more sti&s of mari0uana on Jalubiran*s !erson# 3he other team members,
namely MBSgt# (anulfo Fillamor and Sgt# (uben 6addaran, ame later in a 0ee!, where they boarded
Jalubiran to ta&e him to the !olie station# 3he 19 sti&s of mari0uana were mar&ed and then ta&en to the '+
+rime 6aboratory, where they were analy%ed, with !ositi$e results# Jalubiran ontended howe$er that one
Iuindo a!!roahed and fris& him on the same night, and found nothing on him# 7owe$er, he was alled ba&
by one Fillamor, who told him at gun !oint to board the 0ee! and ta&en to '+ head4uarters, then to the !olie
station# 7e was released the following day with the hel! of a lawyer# After trial, the (egional 3rial +ourt
;(3+< -umaguete +ity found Jalubiran guilty as harged and sentened him to life im!risonment !lus a
'28,888 fine# Jalubiran a!!ealed#
"ss#eD 1hether Jalubiran should be made to answer for the 19 sti&s of mari0uana found in his !ossession
during his arrest#
$el%! Jalubiran was arrested in flagrante delito as a result of the entra!ment and so ame under Setion 5,
(ule 11) of the (ules of +ourt, authori%ing a warrantless arrest of any !erson atually ommitting a rime#
3he searh was made as an inident of a lawful arrest and so was also lawful under Setion 12 of (ule 11/# 5n
addition to the (ules, there is abundant 0uris!rudene 0ustifying warrantless searhes and sei%ures under the
onditions established in the ase# 7owe$er, Jalubiran was aused only of selling the two sti&s of
mari0uana under Setion 4 of the -angerous -rugs At when he should also ha$e been harged with
!ossession of the 19 other sti&s found on his !erson at the time of his arrest# 5t is unfortunate that he annot
be held to answer for the seond offense beause he has not been im!leaded in a se!arate information for
$iolation of Setion = of the said law#
163 &eo'le v. Mal;se% [GR 91112, 19 *#ne 1991]
En Banc, 7adilla (J): = concur, ! on leave
Facs! Mi&ael Malmstedt, a Swedish national, entered the 'hili!!ines for the )rd time in -eember 19== as a
tourist# 7e had $isited the ountry sometime in 19=2 and 19=5# 5n the e$ening of 9 May 19=9, Malmstedt left
for :aguio +ity# U!on his arri$al thereat in the morning of the following day, he too& a bus to Sagada and
stayed in that !lae for 2 days# On 11 May 19=9, +a!t# Alen Faso of DA(+OM, stationed at +am! -angwa,
ordered his men to set u! a tem!orary he&!oint at Jilometer 14, Ao!, 3ublay, Mountain 'ro$ine, for the
!ur!ose of he&ing all $ehiles oming from the +ordillera (egion# 3he order to establish a he&!oint in
the said area was !rom!ted by !ersistent re!orts that $ehiles oming from Sagada were trans!orting
mari0uana and other !rohibited drugs# Moreo$er, information was reei$ed by the +ommanding Offier of
DA(+OM, that same morning, that a +auasian oming from Sagada had in his !ossession !rohibited drugs#
At about 1H)8 !m, the bus where Malmstedt was riding was sto!!ed# Sgt# Fider and +5+ "alutan boarded the
bus and announed that they were members of the DA(+OM and that they would ondut an ins!etion#
-uring the ins!etion, +5+ "alutan notied a bulge on Malmstedt*s waist# Sus!eting the bulge on
Malmstedt*s waist to be a gun, the offier as&ed for Malmstedt*s !ass!ort and other identifiation !a!ers#
1hen Malmstedt failed to om!ly, the offier re4uired him to bring out whate$er it was that was bulging on
his waist, whih was a !ouh bag# 1hen Malmstedt o!ened the same bag, as ordered, the offier notied 4
sus!iious>loo&ing ob0ets wra!!ed in brown !a&ing ta!e, whih turned out to ontain hashish, a deri$ati$e
of mari0uana, when o!ened# Malmstedt sto!!ed to get 2 tra$elling bags from the luggage arrier, eah
ontaining a teddy bear, when he was in$ited outside the bus for 4uestioning# 5t was obser$ed that there were
also bulges inside the teddy bears whih did not feel li&e foam stuffing# Malmstedt was then brought to the
head4uarters of the DA(+OM at +am! -angwa for further in$estigation# At the in$estigation room, the
offiers o!ened the teddy bears and they were found to also ontain hashish# (e!resentati$e sam!les were
ta&en from the hashish found among the !ersonal effets of Malmstedt and the same were brought to the '+
+rime 6aboratory for hemial analysis, whih established the ob0ets e.amined as hashish# Malmstedt
laimed that the hashish was !lanted by the DA(+OM offiers in his !ouh bag and that the 2 tra$elling bags
were not owned by him, but were merely entrusted to him by an Australian ou!le whom he met in Sagada#
7e further laimed that the Australian ou!le intended to ta&e the same bus with him but beause there were
no more seats a$ailable in said bus, they deided to ta&e the ne.t ride and as&ed Malmstedt to ta&e harge of
the bags, and that they would meet eah other at the -angwa Station# An information was filed against
Malmstedt for $iolation of the -angerous -rugs At# -uring the arraignment, Malmstedt entered a !lea of
Anot guilty#A After trial and on 12 Otober 19=9, the trial ourt found Malmstedt guilty beyond reasonable
doubt for $iolation of Setion 4, Artile 55 of (A /425 and sentened him to life im!risonment and to !ay a
fine of '28,888# Malmstedt sought re$ersal of the deision of the trial ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the !ersonal effets of Malmstedt may be searhed without an issued warrant#
$el%! 3he +onstitution guarantees the right of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons, houses, !a!ers and
effets against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures# 7owe$er, where the searh is made !ursuant to a lawful
arrest, there is no need to obtain a searh warrant# A lawful arrest without a warrant may be made by a !eae
offier or a !ri$ate !erson under the following irumstanes# Setion 5 !ro$ides that Ra !eae offier or a
!ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant, arrest a !erson ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has
ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen an offense has in fat 0ust
been ommitted, and he has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has
ommitted it, and ;< 1hen the !erson to be arrested is a !risoner who has esa!ed from a !enal
establishment or !lae where he is ser$ing final 0udgment or tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending,
or has esa!ed while being transferred from one onfinement to another# 5n ases falling under !aragra!hs ;a<
and ;b< hereof, the !erson arrested without a warrant shall be forthwith deli$ered to the nearest !olie station
or 0ail, and he shall be !roeeded against in aordane with (ule 112, Setion 9#A 7erein, Malmstedt was
aught in flagrante delito, when he was trans!orting !rohibited drugs# 3hus, the searh made u!on his
!ersonal effets falls s4uarely under !aragra!h ;1< of the foregoing !ro$isions of law, whih allow a
warrantless searh inident to a lawful arrest#
!&4 7eo#le v* %uenco, .*+* !(&(, >ovem/er !&, !?==
16) Es'ano vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 121431, 1 A'ril 199(]
Third Division, +omero (J): 3 concur
Facs! On 14 Culy 1991, at about 12H)8 a#m#, 'at# (omeo 'agilagan and other !olie offiers, namely, 'at#
1ilfredo A4uilino, Sim!liio (i$era, and ?rlindo 6umboy of the 1estern 'olie -istrit ;1'-<, Darotis
-i$ision went to @amora and 'andaan Streets, Manila to onfirm re!orts of drug !ushing in the area# 3hey
saw (odolfo ?s!ano selling AsomethingA to another !erson# After the alleged buyer left, they a!!roahed
?s!ano, identified themsel$es as !oliemen, and fris&ed him# 3he searh yielded two !lasti ello!hane tea
bags of mari0uana # 1hen as&ed if he had more mari0uana, he re!lied that there was more in his house# 3he
!oliemen went to his residene where they found ten more ello!hane tea bags of mari0uana# ?s!ano was
brought to the !olie head4uarters where he was harged with !ossession of !rohibited drugs# On 24 Culy
1991, ?s!ano !osted bail and the trial ourt issued his order of release on 29 Culy 1991# On 14 August 1992,
the trial ourt rendered a deision, on$iting ?s!ano of the rime harged# ?s!ano a!!ealed the deision to
the +ourt of A!!eals# 3he a!!ellate ourt, howe$er, on 15 Canuary 1995 affirmed the deision of the trial
ourt in toto# ?s!ano filed a !etition for re$iew with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh of ?s!ano2s home after his arrest does not $iolate against his right against
unreasonable searh and sei%ure#
$el%! ?s!ano*s arrest falls s4uarely under (ule 11) Setion 5;a< of the (ules of +ourt# 7e was aught in
flagranti as a result of a buy>bust o!eration onduted by !olie offiers on the basis of information reei$ed
regarding the illegal trade of drugs within the area of @amora and 'andaan Streets, Manila# 3he !olie
offier saw ?s!ano handing o$er something to an alleged buyer# After the buyer left, they searhed him and
diso$ered two ello!hanes of mari0uana# 7is arrest was, therefore, lawful and the two ello!hane bags of
mari0uana sei%ed were admissible in e$idene, being the fruits of the rime# As for the 18 ello!hane bags of
mari0uana found at ?s!ano*s residene, howe$er, the same inadmissible in e$idene# 3he artiles sei%ed from
?s!ano during his arrest were $alid under the dotrine of searh made inidental to a lawful arrest# 3he
warrantless searh made in his house, howe$er, whih yielded ten ello!hane bags of mari0uana beame
unlawful sine the !olie offiers were not armed with a searh warrant at the time# Moreo$er, it was beyond
the reah and ontrol of ?s!ano# 3he right of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons, houses, !a!ers and
effets against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures of whate$er nature and for any !ur!oses shall be
in$iolable, and no searh warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue e.e!t u!on !robable ause to be determined
!ersonally by the 0udge after e.amination under oath or affirmation of the om!lainant and the witnesses he
may !rodue, and !artiularly desribing the !lae to be searhed and the !ersons or things to be sei%ed#A An
e.e!tion to the said rule is a warrantless searh inidental to a lawful arrest for dangerous wea!ons or
anything whih may be used as !roof of the ommission of an offense# 5t may e.tend beyond the !erson of the
one arrested to inlude the !remises or surroundings under his immediate ontrol# 7erein, the ten ello!hane
bags of mari0uana sei%ed at !etitioner*s house after his arrest at 'andaan and @amora Streets do not fall under
the said e.e!tions#
166 &eo'le vs. <an:li3en [GR L-63631, 6 A'ril 1991]
Third Division, .utierre6 Jr* (J): 4 concur
Facs! 5n the late e$ening of 2 Marh 19=2, 'atrolmen Sil$erio Iue$edo and (omeo 6# 'un%alan of the San
Fernando 'olie Station, together with :arangay 3anod Maario Sadalan, were onduting sur$eillane
mission at the Fitory 6iner 3erminal om!ound loated at :arangay San Diolas, San Fernando, 'am!anga#
3he sur$eillane mission was aimed not only against !ersons who may ommit misdemeanors at the said
!lae but also on !ersons who may be engaging in the traffi of dangerous drugs based on informations
su!!lied by informers# Around 9H)8 !#m#, said 'atrolmen notied a !erson arrying a red tra$eling bag who
was ating sus!iiously and they onfronted him# 3he !erson was re4uested by 'atrolmen Iue$edo and
'un%alan to o!en the red tra$eling bag but the !erson refused, only to aede later on when the !atrolmen
identified themsel$es# Found inside the bag were mari0uana lea$es wra!!ed in a !lasti wra!!er and weighing
one &ilo, more or less# 3he !erson was as&ed of his name and the reason why he was at the said !lae and he
ga$e his name as Medel 3angliben and e.!lained that he was waiting for a ride to Olonga!o +ity to deli$er
the mari0uana lea$es# 3he aused was ta&en to the !olie head4uarters at San Fernando, 'am!anga, for
further in$estigation, and that 'at# Sil$erio Iue$edo submitted to his Station +ommander his 5n$estigator*s
(e!ort# 3he (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh 41, 3hird Cudiial (egion at San Fernando, 'am!anga, found
Medel 3angliben y :ernardino guilty beyond reasonable doubt of $iolating Setion 4, Artile 55 of (e!ubli
At /425 ;-angerous -rugs At of 1992 as amended< and sentened him to life im!risonment, to !ay a fine
of '28,888 and to !ay the osts# 3angliben a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the warrantless searh inident to a lawful arrest, e$en in light of the +ourt2s ruling in 'eo!le
$s# Aminnudin#
$el%! One of the e.e!tions to the general rule re4uiring a searh warrant is a searh inident to a lawful
arrest# 3hus, Setion 12 ;Searh inident to a lawful arrest< of (ule 12/ of the 19=5 (ules on +riminal
'roedure !ro$ides that AA !erson lawfully arrested may be searhed for dangerous wea!ons or anything
whih may be used as !roof of the ommission of an offense, without a searh warrant#A Meanwhile, (ule
11), Se# 5;a< !ro$ides that AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant, arrest a !ersonH ;a<
1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to
ommit an offense#A 3angliben was aught in flagrante, sine he was arrying mari0uana at the time of his
arrest# 3his ase therefore falls s4uarely within the e.e!tion# 3he warrantless searh was inident to a lawful
arrest and is onse4uently $alid# 3he +ourt is not unmindful of its deision in 'eo!le $# Aminnudin ;1/)
S+(A 482 L19==M<# 5n that ase the '+ offiers had earlier reei$ed a ti! from an informer that aused>
a!!ellant was on board a $essel bound for 5loilo +ity and was arrying mari0uana# Ating on this ti!, they
waited for him one e$ening, a!!roahed him as he desended from the gang!lan&, detained him and ins!eted
the bag he was arrying# Said bag ontained mari0uana lea$es# 3he +ourt held that the mari0uana ould not be
admitted in e$idene sine it was sei%ed illegally, as there was la& of urgeny, and thus a searh warrant an
still be !roured# 7owe$er, herein, the ase !resented urgeny# Although the trial ourt*s deision did not
mention it, the transri!t of stenogra!hi notes re$eals that there was an informer who !ointed to 3angliben as
arrying mari0uana# Faed with suh on>the>s!ot information, the !olie offiers had to at 4ui&ly# 3here was
not enough time to seure a searh warrant# 3he +ourt annot therefore a!!ly the ruling in Aminnudin herein#
3o re4uire searh warrants during on>the>s!ot a!!rehensions of drug !ushers, illegal !ossessors of firearms,
0ueteng olletors, smugglers of ontraband goods, robbers, et# would ma&e it e.tremely diffiult, if not
im!ossible to ontain the rimes with whih these !ersons are assoiated#
162 &eo'le v. .,e .,#n <in: [GR 131)6(-69, 21 Marc, 2111]
En Banc, Bellosillo (J): !4 concur
Facs! Following a series of buy>bust o!erations, the elements of the S!eial O!eration Unit, Darotis
+ommand, a!!rehended a sus!eted drug ourier, Mabel +heung Mei 'o, after she deli$ered a trans!arent
!lasti bag ontaining a white rystalline substane to an informant, in full $iew of DA(+OM agents# 1hen
4uestioned, Mabel +heung Mei 'o oo!erated with the go$ernment agents and re$ealed the name of +he
+hun 3ing as the soure of the drugs# On 29 Cune 199/ DA(+OM de!loyed a team of agents for the
entra!ment and arrest of +he +hun 3ing# At 9H88 am they !roeeded to the (o.as Seafront "arden in 'asay
+ity where +he +hun 3ing was and had the !lae under sur$eillane# 1hen they mo$ed to the M-onald*s
!ar&ing lot, Mabel alled +he +hun 3ing through her ellular !hone and s!o&e to him in +hinese, ordering
one ;1< &ilo of shabu# At 18H)8 am Mabel reei$e a all from the aused# Mabel, along with DA(+OM
agents, !roeeded to the (o.as Seafront "arden# Mabel hon&ed twie u!on arri$ing at the said !lae and went
to Unit 122# DA(+OM agents !ar&ed 2 meters away saw the door of the unit o!en as a man went out to hand
Mabel a trans!arent !lasti bag ontaining a white rystalline substane# 3he DA(+OM agents immediately
alighted and arrested the sur!rised man who was !ositi$ely identified by Mabel as +he +hun 3ing# Unit 122
was searhed by the agents, where a bla& bag with se$eral !lasti bags ontaining a white rystalline
substane in an o!en abinet in the seond floor was sei%ed# 3he bag was e.amined in the !resene of Ma0#
"arbo, the aused and his girlfriend# 3he aused and the e$idene were brought to +am! +rame# 3he
ontents of the ban& were tested and found !ositi$e for shabu# 3he -efense alleged otherwise# 5t alleged that
it was Doli Orti%, the brother of +he +hun 3ing2s girlfriend who rang the doorbell of Unit 122# 1hen Dimfa
o!ened the door, 2 DA(+OM offiers suddenly fored their way inside and searhed the !remises# Doli
alleged that he did not see any bla& bag sei%ed but saw his sister2s $ideo amera being arted away by the
DA(+OM agents# 7e laimed that his sister was frightened and rying during the ondut of the searh while
+he +hun 3ing was aslee! at the seond floor# -efense further ontends that Unit 122 is owned by Dimfa
Orti% and that +he +hun 3ing li$ed at 1881 -omingo 'oblete St#, :F 7omes, 'araNa4ue# +he +hun 3ing was
found guilty by the trial ourt on 22 August 1999 of deli$ering, distributing and dis!athing in transit 999#4=
grams of shabu, and, ha$ing in his ustody, !ossession and ontrol 5,59=#/= grams of the same regulated
drug# 7e was meted two ;2< death sentenes, one for $iolation of Se# 15 and the other for $iolation of Se#
1/, both of Art# 555, of (A /425 ;3he -angerous -rugs At of 1992, as amended<# 7e was li&ewise ordered to
!ay a fine of '1,888,888#88 in the first ase, and '12,888,888#88 in the seond# 7e is now before the Su!reme
+ourt on automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh of Unit 122 is within the !ur$iew of the warrantless searh inidental to an arrest#
$el%! 3he 19=9 +onstitution ordains that no arrest, searh or sei%ure an be made without a $alid warrant
issued by a om!etent 0udiial authority# 3he right of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons, houses, !a!ers
and effets against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures of whate$er nature and for any !ur!ose, shall be
in$iolable, and no searh warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue e.e!t u!on !robable ause to be determined
!ersonally by the 0udge after e.amination under oath or affirmation of the om!lainant and the witnesses he
may !rodue, and !artiularly desribing the !lae to be searhed and the !ersons or things to be sei%ed# 3he
right is not absolute and admits of ertain well>reogni%ed e.e!tions# A !erson lawfully arrested may be
searhed for dangerous wea!ons or anything whih may be used as !roof of the ommission of the offense,
without a searh warrant# 3he searh may e.tend beyond the !erson of the one arrested to inlude the
!ermissible area or surroundings within his immediate ontrol# 3he lawful arrest being the sole 0ustifiation
for the $alidity of the warrantless searh under the e.e!tion, the same must be limited to and irumsribed
by the sub0et, time and !lae of the arrest# As to sub0et, the warrantless searh is santioned only with
res!et to the !erson of the sus!et, and things that may be sei%ed from him are limited to Adangerous
wea!onsA or Aanything whih may be used as !roof of the ommission of the offense#A 1ith res!et to the
time and !lae of the warrantless searh, it must be ontem!oraneous with the lawful arrest# Stated otherwise,
to be $alid, the searh must ha$e been onduted at about the time of the arrest or immediately thereafter and
only at the !lae where the sus!et was arrested, or the !remises or surroundings under his immediate ontrol#
7erein, although the ase falls within the e.e!tion, +he +hun 3ing was admittedly outside unit 122, whih
was not his residene but a so0ourner thereof, and in the at of deli$ering to Mabel +heung Mei 'o a bag of
shabu when he was arrested by the DA(+OM o!erati$es# 3he inner !ortion of the house an hadly be said to
onstitute a !ermissible area within his reah or immediate ontrol, to 0ustify a warrantless searh therein#
3he searh in Unit 122 and the sei%ure therein of some 5,59=#/= grams of shabu were illegal for being
$iolati$e of one*s basi onstitutional right and guarantee against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, and thus
are inadmissible in e$idene under the e.lusionary rule# 3he inadmissibility of suh howe$er does not totally
e.onerate the aused# 3he illegal searh in Unit 122 was !reeded by a $alid arrest# 3he aused was aught
in flagrante delito as a result of an entra!ment onduted by DA(+OM o!erati$es on the basis of the
information !ro$ided by Mabel +heung Mei 'o regarding the aused*s illegal trade# DA(+OM agents
'B5ns!# Santiago and S'O) +am!anilla saw him handing o$er a bag of white rystalline substane to Mabel
+heung Mei 'o# 7is arrest was lawful and the sei%ed bag of shabu weighing 999#4) grams was admissible in
e$idene, being the fruit of the rime#
16( &eo'le vs. Esrella [GR 13()39-41, 21 *an#ary 2113]
Third Division, 7angani/an (J): 4 concur
Facs! 'rior to 28 Do$ember 199/, ?.euti$e Cudge (omulo ?strada of the (egional 3rial +ourt of @ambales
issued a warrant for the ondut of a searh and sei%ure in the residene of Antonio +# ?stella at 'uro& Sa&al,
:arangay :aloganon, Masinlo, @ambales# 5n the morning of 28 Do$ember 199/, Senior 'olie Offier 1
;S'O1< Antonio :uloron, then 5ntelligene and 5n$estigation Offier, together with S'O1 Cose Ara and
se$eral other members of the 'ro$inial S!eial O!eration "rou! based in :urgos, San Marelino, @ambales
!roeeded to Masinlo# 3hey oordinated with the members of the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;'D'< in
Masinlo and sought the assistane of :arangay +a!tain (ey :arnahea of :aloganon, Masinlo for the
enforement of the searh warrant# :arangay +a!tain :arnahea aom!anied the !olie offiers to 'uro&
Sa&al, :arangay :aloganon, Masinlo, the !lae mentioned in the searh warrant# On their way to 'uro&
Sa&al, S'O1 :uloron saw ?strella sitting on a ro&ing hair loated about 2 meters away from a hut owned
by Darding ?stella, the latter*s brother, and being rented by ?strella*s li$e>in !artner, named ?$a# 3hey
a!!roahed ?strella and introdued themsel$es as !olie offiers# 3hey showed ?strella the searh warrant
and e.!lained the ontents to him# S'O1 :uloron as&ed ?strella if indeed he had in his !ossession !rohibited
drug and if so, to surrender the same so he would deser$e a lesser !enalty# 1hile inside the hut, ?strella
surrendered to the team 2 ans ontaining dried mari0uana fruiting to!s# One an ontained 28 bri&s of
fruiting to!s# 3he team searhed the hut in the !resene of ?strella and his li$e>in !artner# 3hey found a
!lasti ontainer under the &ithen table, whih ontained 4 big bri&s of dried mari0uana lea$es and a #)=
aliber re$ol$er with four li$e ammunitions# 3he team sei%ed the !rohibited drug, the re$ol$er and
ammunitions# 3he team sei%ed and signed a reei!t for the sei%ed items# :arangay +a!tain :arnahea and
S'O1 ?dgar :ermude% of the Masinlo 'olie Station also signed the reei!t as witnesses# S'O1 :uloron and
his om!anions arrested ?strella and brought him to San Marelino, @ambales# 3he defense, howe$er, alleged
otherwise and laimed that on 28 Do$ember 199/ between 18H)8 and 11H88 a#m#, while ?strella was tal&ing
with his friends (ael 3a!ado and Fitor de 6eon at a $aant lot 0ust outside the house of +amillo 3orres and
about 98 meters away from his house, a grou! of men a!!roahed them# 3he grou! introdued themsel$es as
!oliemen and told them that they were loo&ing for Antonio ?stella beause they ha$e a searh warrant issued
against him# ?strella identified himself to them# 3he !oliemen in4uired from ?strella as to where his house is
loated and ?strella told them that his house is loated aross the road# 3he !olie did not belie$e him and
insisted that ?strella*s house is that house loated about 5V= meters away from them# ?strella told the
!oliemen to in4uire from the :arangay +a!tain :arnahea as to where his house is and heard the latter
telling the !oliemen that his house is loated near the Abo&abar 0un& sho!# After about half an hour, the
!oliemen went inside the house nearby and when they ame out, they had with them a bul& of !lasti and
had it shown to ?strella# 3hey !hotogra!hed ?strella and brought him to their offie at San Marelino,
@ambales# ?stella was in$estigated at San Marelino, @ambales where he informed the !olie offiers of the
fat that the house they searhed was ou!ied by S!ouses Fiente and Fely :a&dangan# Still, ?strella was
harged for !ossession of !rohibited drugs and unliensed firearms# 3he (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of 5ba,
@ambales ;:ranh /9<, in +riminal +ase (3+ 214)>5 and on 25 August 199=, found ?strella guilty of
$iolating Setion =, Artile 55 of (A /425, as amended by (A 9/59, and sentened him to relusion !er!etua#
3he =#)28 &ilograms of dried mari0uana was ordered onfisated in fa$or of the go$ernment, and the Sheriff
was direted to deli$er the sub0et mari0uana to the -angerous -rugs :oard for its !ro!er dis!osition# On the
other hand, ?strella was a4uitted from the harge of $iolation of '- 1=// 3he #)= aliber re$ol$er without
serial number and 4 li$e ammunitions, sub0et of the offense, were howe$er ordered deli$ered to any
authori%ed re!resentati$e of the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie, Firearms and ?.!losi$es -i$ision, +am! +rame,
Iue%on +ity# ?strella a!!ealed said deision#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh underta&en inside the hut K during whih the inriminating e$idene was
allegedly reo$ered K was legal#
$el%! 3here is no on$ining !roof that ?strella indeed surrendered the !rohibited drug, whether $oluntarily
or otherwise# 5n fat, the testimony of 'roseution 1itness :arnahea louds rather than larifies the
!roseution*s story# "i$en this ba&dro!, the !olie authorities annot laim that the searh was inident to a
lawful arrest# Suh a searh !resu!!oses a lawful or $alid arrest and an only be in$o&ed through Setion 5
;Arrest without warrant, when lawful<, (ule 11) of the (e$ised (ules on +riminal 'roedure, whih !ro$ides
that AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant, arrest a !ersonH ;a< when, in his !resene, the
!erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen
an offense has 0ust been ommitted and he has !robable ause to belie$e based on !ersonal &nowledge of
fats or irumstanes that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it, and ;< 1hen the !erson to be arrested
is a !risoner who has esa!ed from a !enal establishment or !lae where he is ser$ing final 0udgment or is
tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending, or has esa!ed while being transferred from one onfinement
to another# 5n ases falling under !aragra!hs ;a< and ;b< abo$e, the !erson arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith deli$ered to the nearest !olie station or 0ail and shall be !roeeded against in aordane with
Setion 9 (ule 112#A De$er was it !ro$en that ?strella, who was the !erson to be arrested, was in !ossession
of the sub0et !rohibited drug during the searh# 5t follows, therefore, that there was no way of &nowing if he
had ommitted or was atually ommitting an offense in the !resene of the arresting offiers# 1ithout that
&nowledge, there ould ha$e been no searh inident to a lawful arrest# Assuming arguendo that a!!ellant was
indeed ommitting an offense in the !resene of the arresting offiers, and that the arrest without a warrant
was lawful, it still annot be said that the searh onduted was within the onfines of the law# Searhes and
sei%ures inident to lawful arrests are go$erned by Setion 12 ;Searh inident to lawful arrest<, (ule 12/ of
the (e$ised (ules of +riminal 'roedure, whih !ro$ides that AA !erson lawfully arrested may be searhed
for dangerous wea!ons or anything whih may ha$e been used or onstitute !roof in the ommission of an
offense without a searh warrant#A 7owe$er, the so!e of the searh should be limited to the area within
whih the !erson to be arrested an reah for a wea!on or for e$idene that he or she an destroy# 3he
!re$ailing rule is that the arresting offier may ta&e from the arrested indi$idual any money or !ro!erty found
u!on the latter*s !erson K that whih was used in the ommission of the rime or was the fruit of the rime,
or whih may !ro$ide the !risoner with the means of ommitting $iolene or esa!ing, or whih may be used
in e$idene in the trial of the ase# 3he !ur!ose of the e.e!tion in +himel $# +alifornia is to !rotet the
arresting offier from being harmed by the !erson being arrested, who might be armed with a onealed
wea!on, and to !re$ent the latter from destroying e$idene within reah# 3he e.e!tion, therefore, should not
be strained beyond what is needed to ser$e its !ur!ose# 7erein, searhed was the entire hut, whih annot be
said to ha$e been within ?strela*s immediate ontrol# 3hus, the searh e.eeded the bounds of that whih may
be onsidered to be inident to a lawful arrest#
169 &eo'le vs. Li3nao [GR 136(61, 21 *an#ary 2113]
Third Division, 7uno (J): 4 concur
Facs! On August 199/, intelligene o!erati$es of the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;'D'< stationed in 3arla,
3arla began onduting sur$eillane o!eration on sus!eted drug dealers in the area# 3hey learned from their
asset that a ertain woman from 3a0iri, 3arla and a om!anion from :aguio +ity were trans!orting illegal
drugs one a month in big bul&s# On 19 Otober 199/, at about 18 !#m#, +hief 5ns!etor :en0amin Areo,
3arla 'olie +hief, held a briefing in onnetion with a ti! whih his offie reei$ed that the two drug
!ushers, riding in a triyle, would be ma&ing a deli$ery that night# An hour later, the 'olie Alert 3eam
installed a he&!oint in :arangay Sala!ungan to a!!rehend the sus!ets# 1itness S'O1 Marlon "amotea,
'O) Florante Ferrer and S'O) (oberto A4uino were assigned to man the he&!oint# At about 1H88 a#m# of
the following day, S'O1 "amotea and 'O) Ferrer flagged down a !assing triyle# 5t had two female
!assengers seated inside, who were later identified as Ag!anga 6ibnao and (osita Dunga# 5n front of them
was a bla& bag# Sus!iious of the bla& bag and the two2s uneasy beha$ior when as&ed about its ownershi!
and ontent, the offiers in$ited them to Jabayan +enter 2 loated at the same barangay# 3hey brought with
them the bla& bag# U!on reahing the enter, 'O) Ferrer fethed :arangay +a!tain (oy 'asual to witness
the o!ening of the bla& bag# 5n the meantime, the two women and the bag were turned o$er to the
in$estigator on duty, S'O) Arthur Antonio# As soon as the barangay a!tain arri$ed, the bla& bag was
o!ened in the !resene of 6ibnao, Dunga, and !ersonnel of the enter# Found inside it were = bri&s of lea$es
sealed in !lasti bags and o$ered with news!a!er# 3he lea$es were sus!eted to be mari0uana# 3o determine
who owns the bag and its ontents, S'O) Antonio interrogated the two# Dunga stated that it was owned by
6ibnao# 3he latter, in turn, dis!uted this allegation# 3hereafter, they were made to sign a onfisation reei!t
without the assistane of any ounsel, as they were not informed of their right to ha$e one# -uring the ourse
of the in$estigation, not e$en lose relati$es of theirs were !resent# 3he sei%ed artiles were later brought to
the 'D' +rime 6aboratory in San Fernando, 'am!anga on 2) Otober 199/# Forensi +hemist -aisy '# :abu
onduted a laboratory e.amination on them# She onluded that the artiles were mari0uana lea$es weighing
eight &ilos# 6ibnao and Dunga were harged for $iolation of Setion 4, Artile 55 of (A /425, otherwise
&nown as the -angerous -rugs At of 1992, as amended# On 19 Do$ember 199=, the (egional 3rial +ourt,
:ranh /5, 3arla +ity, found 6ibnao and Dunga guilty# For their on$ition, eah was sentened to suffer an
im!risonment of relusion !er!etua and to !ay a fine of two million !esos# 6ibnao a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the warrantless searh and sei%ure made u!on 6ibnao and Dunga was reasonable#
$el%! 3he onstitutional guarantee ;in Artile 555, Setion 2 of the 19=9 +onstitution< is not a blan&et
!rohibition against all searhes and sei%ures as it o!erates only against AunreasonableA searhes and sei%ures#
Searhes and sei%ures are as a rule unreasonable unless authori%ed by a $alidly issued searh warrant or
warrant of arrest# 3hus, the fundamental !rotetion aorded by the searh and sei%ure lause is that between
!ersons and !olie must stand the !roteti$e authority of a magistrate lothed with !ower to issue or refuse to
issue searh warrants and warrants of arrest# :e that as it may, the re4uirement that a 0udiial warrant must be
obtained !rior to the arrying out of a searh and sei%ure is not absolute# 3here are ertain familiar e.e!tions
to the rule, one of whih relates to searh of mo$ing $ehiles# 1arrantless searh and sei%ure of mo$ing
$ehiles are allowed in reognition of the im!ratiability of seuring a warrant under said irumstanes as
the $ehile an be 4ui&ly mo$ed out of the loality or 0urisdition in whih the warrant may be sought# 'eae
offiers in suh ases, howe$er, are limited to routine he&s where the e.amination of the $ehile is limited
to $isual ins!etion# 1hen a $ehile is sto!!ed and sub0eted to an e.tensi$e searh, suh would be
onstitutionally !ermissible only if the offiers made it u!on !robable ause, i#e#, u!on a belief, reasonably
arising out of irumstanes &nown to the sei%ing offier, that an automobile or other $ehile ontains as item,
artile or ob0et whih by law is sub0et to sei%ure and destrution# 3he warrantless searh herein is not bereft
of a !robable ause# 3he 3arla 'olie 5ntelligene -i$ision had been onduting sur$eillane o!eration for
three months in the area# 3he sur$eillane yielded the information that one a month, 6ibnao and Dunga
trans!ort drugs in big bul&s# At 18H88 !m of 19 Otober 199/, the !olie reei$ed a ti! that the two will be
trans!orting drugs that night riding a triyle# Surely, the two were intere!ted three hours later, riding a
triyle and arrying a sus!iious>loo&ing bla& bag, whih !ossibly ontained the drugs in bul&# 1hen they
were as&ed who owned it and what its ontent was, both beame uneasy# Under these irumstanes, the
warrantless searh and sei%ure of 6ibnao2s bag was not illegal# 5t is also lear that at the time she was
a!!rehended, she was ommitting a riminal offense# She was ma&ing a deli$ery or trans!orting !rohibited
drugs in $iolation of Artile 55, Setion 4 of (#A# Do# /425# Under the (ules of +ourt, one of the instanes a
!olie offier is !ermitted to arry out a warrantless arrest is when the !erson to be arrested is aught
ommitting a rime in flagrante delito#
121 &eo'le v. M#sa [GR 96122, 22 *an#ary 1993]
Third Division, +omero (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 1) -eember 19=9, the Darotis +ommand ;DA(+OM< in @amboanga +ity onduted
sur$eillane and test buy on a ertain Mari Musa of Suter$ille, @amboanga +ity# 5nformation reei$ed from
i$ilian informer was that this Mari Musa was engaged in selling mari0uana in said !lae# 3he Darom agent
;Sgt# Ani< was able to buy one news!a!er>wra!!ed dried mari0uana for '18#88, whih was turned o$er to the
Darom offie# 3he ne.t day, a buy>bust was !lanned with Sgt# Ani being the !oseur>buyer# DA(+OM teams
!roeeded to the target site in 2 i$ilian $ehiles# Ani ga$e Musa the '28#88 mar&ed money# Musa returned to
his house and ga$e Ani 2 news!a!er wra!!ers ontaining dried mari0uana# 3he signal to a!!rehend Musa was
gi$en# 3he DA(+OM team rushed to the loation of Ani, and a DA(+OM offier ;Sgt# :elarga< fris&ed
Musa but did not find the mar&ed money# 3he money was gi$en to Musa2s wife who was able to sli! away#
6ater, :elarga found a !lasti bag ontaining dried mari0uana inside it somewhere in the &ithen# Musa was
!laed under arrest and was brought to the DA(+OM offie# One news!a!er>wra!!er mari0uana and the
!lasti bag ontaining more mari0uana was sent to the '+ +rime 6aboratory, the test of whih ga$e !ositi$e
results for the !resene of mari0uana# On the other hand, Mari Musa alleged that the DA(+OM agents,
dressed in i$ilian lothes, got inside his house without any searh warrant, neither his !ermission to enter the
house# 3he DA(+OM agents searhed the house and allegedly found a red !lasti bag whose ontents, Mari
Musa said, he did not &now# 7e also did not &now if the !lasti bag belonged to his brother, Faisal, who was
li$ing with him, or his father, who was li$ing in another house about ten arms>length away# Mari Musa was
handuffed and was ta&en to the DA(+OM offie where he was 0oined by his wife# Musa laimed that he was
sub0eted to torture when he refused to sign the doument ontaining details of the in$estigation# 3he ne.t
day, he was ta&en to the fisalWs offie to whih he was allegedly made to answer to a single 4uestionH that if
he owned the mari0uana# 7e allegedly was not able to tell the fisal that he had been maltreated by the
DA(+OM agents beause he was afraid he might be maltreated in the fisal*s offie# Mari Musa was brought
to the +ity Cail# Still, an information against Musa was filed on 15 -eember 19=9# U!on his arraignment on
11 Canuary 1998, Musa !leaded not guilty# After trial and on )1 August 1998, the (3+ @amboanga +ity
;:ranh E55< found him guilty of selling mari0uana in $iolation of Artile 55, Setion 4 of (A /425# Musa
a!!ealed to the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the ontents of the red !lasti bag found in the &ithen may be admitted as e$idene as
e$idene a4uired inidental to a lawful arrest#
$el%! 1arrantless searh inidental to a lawful arrest authori%es the arresting offier to ma&e a searh u!on
the !erson of the !erson arrested# An offier ma&ing an arrest may ta&e from the !erson arrested and money or
!ro!erty found u!on his !erson whih was used in the ommission of the rime or was the fruit of the rime
or whih might furnish the !risoner with the means of ommitting $iolene or of esa!ing, or whih may be
used as e$idene in the trial of the ause# 7ene, in a buy>bust o!eration onduted to entra! a drug>!usher,
the law enforement agents may sei%e the mar&ed money found on the !erson of the !usher immediately after
the arrest e$en without arrest and searh warrants# 3he warrantless searh and sei%ure, as an inident to a
sus!et*s lawful arrest, may e.tend beyond the !erson of the one arrested to inlude the !remises or
surroundings under his immediate ontrol# Ob0ets in the A!lain $iewA of an offier who has the right to be in
the !osition to ha$e that $iew are sub0et to sei%ure and may be !resented as e$idene# 1hen the diso$ery of
the e$idene did not onstitute a searh, but where the offier merely saw what was !laed before him in full
$iew, the warrantless sei%ure of the ob0et was legal on the basis of the A!lain $iewA dotrine and u!held the
admissibility of said e$idene# 3he A!lain $iewA dotrine, howe$er, may not be used to launh unbridled
searhes and indisriminate sei%ures nor to e.tend a general e.!loratory searh made solely to find e$idene
of defendant*s guilt# 3he A!lain $iewA dotrine is usually a!!lied where a !olie offier is not searhing for
e$idene against the aused, but nonetheless inad$ertently omes aross an inriminating ob0et# 1hat the
*!lain $iew* ases ha$e in ommon is that the !olie offier in eah of them had a !rior 0ustifiation for an
intrusion in the ourse of whih he ame inad$ertently aross a !iee of e$idene inriminating the aused#
3he dotrine ser$es to su!!lement the !rior 0ustifiation K whether it be a warrant for another ob0et, hot
!ursuit, searh inident to lawful arrest, or some other legitimate reason for being !resent unonneted with a
searh direted against the aused K and !ermits the warrantless sei%ure# Of ourse, the e.tension of the
original 0ustifiation is legitimate only where it is immediately a!!arent to the !olie that they ha$e e$idene
before them, the *!lain $iew* dotrine may not be used to e.tend a general e.!loratory searh from one ob0et
to another until something inriminating at last emerges# 3he A!lain $iewA dotrine neither 0ustify the sei%ure
of the ob0et where the inriminating nature of the ob0et is not a!!arent from the A!lain $iewA of the ob0et#
3hus, the e.lusion of the !lasti bag ontaining mari0uana does not, howe$er, diminish, in any way, the
damaging effet of the other !iees of e$idene !resented by the !roseution to !ro$e that the a!!ellant sold
mari0uana, in $iolation of Artile 55, Setion 4 of the -angerous -rugs At of 1992# :y $irtue of the
testimonies of Sgt# Ani and 3BSgt# :elarga and the two wra!!ings of mari0uana sold by Musa to Sgt# Ani,
among other !iees of e$idene, the guilt of Musa of the rime harged has been !ro$ed beyond reasonable
doubt#
121 &a%illa vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 121912, 12 Marc, 1992]
Third Division, 3rancisco (J): 4 concur
Facs! At about =H88 !#m# of 2/ Otober 1992, ?nri4ue Manarang and his om!adre -anny 'ere% were inside
the Manu&an sa 7ighway (estaurant in Sto# Jristo, Angeles +ity where they too& shelter from the hea$y
down!our that had interru!ted their ride on motoryles along Ma Arthur 7ighway# 1hile inside the
restaurant, Manarang notied a $ehile, a Mitsubishi 'a0ero, running fast down the highway !rom!ting him to
remar& that the $ehile might get into an aident onsidering the inlement weather# 5mmediately after the
$ehile had !assed the restaurant, Manarang and 'ere% heard a sreehing sound !rodued by the sudden and
hard bra&ing of a $ehile running $ery fast, followed by a si&ening sound of the $ehile hitting something#
Manarang and +ru% went out to in$estigate and immediately saw the $ehile ou!ying the edge or shoulder
of the highway gi$ing it a slight tilt to its side# Manarang, being a member of both the S!etrum, a i$i grou!
and the :arangay -isaster +oordinating +ounil, deided to re!ort the inident to the 'hili!!ine Dational
'olie ;'D'< of Angeles +ity# 7e too& out his radio and alled the Fi!er, the radio ontroller of the 'D' of
Angeles +ity# :y the time Manarang om!leted the all, the $ehile had started to lea$e the !lae of the
aident ta&ing the general diretion to the north# Manarang went to the loation of the aident and found out
that the $ehile had hit somebody# Manarang as&ed +ru% to loo& after the $itim while he went ba& to the
restaurant, rode on his motoryle and hased the $ehile# -uring the hase he was able to ma&e out the !late
number of the $ehile as 'MA 999# 7e alled the Fi!er through the radio one again re!orting that a $ehile
heading north with !late number 'MA 999 was in$ol$ed in a hit and run aident# S'O2 :or0a and S'O2
Miranda of Mobile ) were able to intere!t the $ehile by utting into the latter*s !ath foring it to sto!# S'O2
Miranda went to the $ehile with !late number 'MA 999 and instruted its dri$er to alight# 3he dri$er rolled
down the window and !ut his head out while raising both his hands# 3hey reogni%ed the dri$er as (obin +#
'adilla# S'O2 Miranda told 'adilla to alight to whih 'adilla om!lied# 'adilla was wearing a short leather
0a&et suh that when he alighted with both his hands raised, a gun tu&ed on the left side of his waist was
re$ealed, its butt !rotruding# S'O2 :or0a made the mo$e to onfisate the gun but 'adilla held the former*s
hand alleging that the gun was o$ered by legal !a!ers# S'O2 :or0a disarmed 'adilla and told the latter about
the hit and run inident# 'adilla, howe$er, arrogantly denied his misdeed and, instead, !layed with the rowd
by holding their hands with one hand and !ointing to S'O2 :or0a with his right hand saying Aiyan, &inuha
ang baril &o#A :eause 'adilla*s 0a&et was short, his gesture e.!osed a long maga%ine of an armalite rifle
tu&ed in his ba& right !o&et# S'O Merado saw this and so when 'adilla turned around as he was tal&ing
and !roeeding to his $ehile, Merado onfisated the maga%ine from 'adilla# Sus!eting that 'adilla ould
also be arrying a rifle inside the $ehile sine he had a maga%ine, S'O2 Merado !re$ented 'adilla from
going ba& to his $ehile by o!ening himself the door of 'adilla*s $ehile# 7e saw a baby armalite rifle lying
hori%ontally at the front by the dri$er*s seat# 5t had a long maga%ine filled with li$e bullets in a semi>automati
mode# 7e as&ed 'adilla for the !a!ers o$ering the rifle and 'adilla answered angrily that they were at his
home# S'O Merado modified the arrest of 'adilla by inluding as its ground illegal !ossession of firearms#
S'O Merado then read to a!!ellant his onstitutional rights# 3he !olie offiers brought 'adilla to the 3raffi
-i$ision at Ca&e "on%ales :oule$ard where 'adilla $oluntarily surrendered a third firearm, a !ietro berreta
!istol with a single round in its hamber and a maga%ine loaded with 9 other li$e bullets# 'adilla also
$oluntarily surrendered a bla& bag ontaining two additional long maga%ines and one short maga%ine# 'adilla
was orres!ondingly harged on ) -eember 1992, before the (egional 3rial +ourt ;(3+< of Angeles +ity
with illegal !ossession of firearms and ammunitions ;L1M One #)59 +aliber re$ol$er, Smith and 1esson, SD>
)2919 with / li$e ammunitions, L2M one M>1/ :aby Armalite rifle, SD>(' 1)1128 with 4 long and 1 short
maga%ine with ammunitions, L)M one #)=8 'ietro :eretta, SD>A )592) S with li! and = ammunitions, and
L4M Si. additional li$e double ation ammunitions of #)= aliber re$ol$er#A < under '- 1=//# 3he lower ourt
then ordered the arrest of 'adilla, but granted his a!!liation for bail# -uring the arraignment on 28 Canuary
199), a !lea of not guilty was entered for 'adilla after he refused, u!on ad$ie of ounsel, to ma&e any !lea#
'adilla wai$ed in writing his right to be !resent in any and all stages of the ase# After trial, Angeles +ity (3+
Cudge -a$id (osete rendered 0udgment dated 25 A!ril 1994 on$iting 'adilla of the rime harged and
sentened him to an Aindeterminate !enalty from 19 years, 4 months and 1 day of relusion tem!oral as
minimum, to 21 years of relusion !er!etua, as ma.imumA# 'adilla filed his notie of a!!eal on 2= A!ril
1994# 'ending the a!!eal in the +ourt of A!!eals, the Soliitor>"eneral, on$ined that the on$ition shows
strong e$idene of guilt, filed on 2 -eember 1994 a motion to anel 'adilla*s bail bond# 3he resolution of
this motion was inor!orated in the a!!ellate ourt*s deision sustaining 'adilla*s on$ition# 'adilla reei$ed
a o!y of this deision on 2/ Culy 1995# On 9 August 1995 he filed a Amotion for reonsideration ;and to
reall the warrant of arrest<A but the same was denied by the a!!ellate ourt in its 28 Se!tember 1995
(esolution# On 2= Se!tember 1995, 'adilla filed the !etition for re$iew on ertiorari with a!!liation for bail
followed by two Asu!!lemental !etitionsA filed by different ounsels, a Aseond su!!lemental !etitionA and an
urgent motion for the se!arate resolution of his a!!liation for bail#
"ss#e! 1hether the firearms and ammunition onfisated during a warrantless searh and sei%ure, es!eially
the baby armalite, are admissible as e$idene against (obin 'adilla#
$el%! 3he 5 well>settled instanes when a warrantless searh and sei%ure of !ro!erty is $alid, are as followsH
;1< warrantless searh inidental to a lawful arrest reogni%ed under Setion 12, (ule 12/ of the (ules of
+ourt and by !re$ailing 0uris!rudene, ;2< Sei%ure of e$idene in A!lain $iewA, the elements of whih areH ;a<
a !rior $alid intrusion based on the $alid warrantless arrest in whih the !olie are legally !resent in the
!ursuit of their offiial duties, ;b< the e$idene was inad$ertently diso$ered by the !olie who had the right
to be where they are, ;< the e$idene must be immediately a!!arent, and ;d< A!lain $iewA 0ustified mere
sei%ure of e$idene without further searh, ;)< Searh of a mo$ing $ehile# 49 7ighly regulated by the
go$ernment, the $ehile*s inherent mobility redues e.!etation of !ri$ay es!eially when its transit in
!ubli thoroughfares furnishes a highly reasonable sus!iion amounting to !robable ause that the ou!ant
ommitted a riminal ati$ity, ;4< onsented warrantless searh, and ;5< ustoms searh# 5n onformity with
the trial ourt*s obser$ation, it indeed a!!ears that the authorities stumbled u!on 'adilla*s firearms and
ammunitions without e$en underta&ing any ati$e searh whih, as it is ommonly understood, is a !rying
into hidden !laes for that whih is onealed# 3he sei%ure of the Smith G 1esson re$ol$er and an M>1/ rifle
maga%ine was 0ustified for they ame within A!lain $iewA of the !oliemen who inad$ertently diso$ered the
re$ol$er and maga%ine tu&ed in 'adilla*s waist and ba& !o&et res!eti$ely, when he raised his hands after
alighting from his 'a0ero# 3he same 0ustifiation a!!lies to the onfisation of the M>1/ armalite rifle whih
was immediately a!!arent to the !oliemen as they too& a asual glane at the 'a0ero and saw said rifle lying
hori%ontally near the dri$er*s seat# 3hus it has been held that A1hen in !ursuing an illegal ation or in the
ommission of a riminal offense, the !olie offiers should ha!!en to diso$er a riminal offense being
ommitted by any !erson, they are not !reluded from !erforming their duties as !olie offiers for the
a!!rehension of the guilty !erson and the ta&ing of the or!us deliti# Ob0ets whose !ossession are
!rohibited by law inad$ertently found in !lain $iew are sub0et to sei%ure e$en without a warrant#A 1ith
res!et to the :erreta !istol and a bla& bag ontaining assorted maga%ines, 'adilla $oluntarily surrendered
them to the !olie# 3his latter gesture of 'adilla indiated a wai$er of his right against the alleged searh and
sei%ure, and that his failure to 4uash the information esto!!ed him from assailing any !ur!orted defet# ?$en
assuming that the firearms and ammunitions were !roduts of an ati$e searh done by the authorities on the
!erson and $ehile of 'adilla, their sei%ure without a searh warrant nonetheless an still be 0ustified under a
searh inidental to a lawful arrest ;first instane<# One the lawful arrest was effeted, the !olie may
underta&e a !roteti$e searh of the !assenger om!artment and ontainers in the $ehile whih are within
'adilla*s grabbing distane regardless of the nature of the offense# 3his satisfied the two>tiered test of an
inidental searhH ;i< the item to be searhed ;$ehile< was within the arrestee*s ustody or area of immediate
ontrol and ;ii< the searh was ontem!oraneous with the arrest# 3he !roduts of that searh are admissible
e$idene not e.luded by the e.lusionary rule# Another 0ustifiation is a searh of a mo$ing $ehile ;third
instane<# 5n onnetion therewith, a warrantless searh is onstitutionally !ermissible when, as in this ase,
the offiers onduting the searh ha$e reasonable or !robable ause to belie$e, before the searh, that either
the motorist is a law>offender ;li&e 'adilla with res!et to the hit and run< or the ontents or argo of the
$ehile are or ha$e been instruments or the sub0et matter or the !roeeds of some riminal offense#
122 &eo'le vs. ?al%ez [GR 129296, 2) 4e'e;3er 2111]
En Banc, <uisum/ing (J): !3 concur, ! on leave
Facs! At around 18H15 a#m# of 24 Se!tember 199/, S'O) Marelo 3i!ay, a member of the !olie fore of
Filla$erde, Due$a Fi%aya, reei$ed a ti! from an unnamed informer about the !resene of a mari0uana
!lantation, allegedly owned by Abe Falde% y -ela +ru% at Sitio :ulan, 5bung, Filla$erde, Due$a Fi%aya# 3he
!rohibited !lants were allegedly !lanted lose to Falde%*s hut# 'olie 5ns!etor Ale0andro (# 'arungao, +hief
of 'olie of Filla$erde, Due$a Fi%aya then formed a reation team from his o!erati$es to $erify the re!ort#
3he team was om!osed of S'O) Marelo M# 3i!ay, S'O2 Doel F# 6ibunao, S'O2 'edro S# Morales, S'O1
(omulo "# 3obias and 'O2 Alfelmer 5# :alut# 5ns!etor 'arungao ga$e them s!eifi instrutions to Au!root
said mari0uana !lants and arrest the ulti$ator of same#A At a!!ro.imately 5H88 a#m# the following day, said
!olie team, aom!anied by their informer, left for the site where the mari0uana !lants were allegedly being
grown# After a three>hour, u!hill tre& from the nearest barangay road, the !olie o!erati$es arri$ed at the !lae
!in!ointed by their informant# 3he !olie found Falde% alone in his ni!a hut# 3hey, then, !roeeded to loo&
around the area where Falde% had his &aingin and saw 9 fi$e>foot high, flowering mari0uana !lants in two
rows, a!!ro.imately 25 meters from Falde%*s hut# 'O2 :alut as&ed Falde% who owned the !rohibited !lants
and, aording to :alut, the latter admitted that they were his# 3he !olie u!rooted the 9 mari0uana !lants,
whih weighed 2#194 &ilograms# 3he !olie too& !hotos of Falde% standing beside the annabis !lants# Falde%
was then arrested# One of the !lants, weighing 1#898 &ilograms, was sent to the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie
+rime 6aboratory in :ayombong, Due$a Fi%aya for analysis# 5ns!etor 're$y Fabros 6uwis, the +rime
6aboratory forensi analyst, testified that u!on miroso!i e.amination of said !lant, she found ystoliti
hairs ontaining alium arbonate, a !ositi$e indiation for mari0uana# She ne.t onduted a hemial
e.amination, the results of whih onfirmed her initial im!ressions# Falde% alleged otherwise# 7e laims that
at around 18H88 a#m#, 25 Se!tember 199/, he was weeding his $egetable farm in Sitio :ulan when he was
alled by a !erson whose identity he does not &now# 7e was as&ed to go with the latter to Asee something#A
3his un&nown !erson then brought Falde% to the !lae where the mari0uana !lants were found, a!!ro.imately
188 meters away from his ni!a hut# 5 armed !oliemen were !resent and they made him stand in front of the
hem! !lants# 7e was then as&ed if he &new anything about the mari0uana growing there# 1hen he denied any
&nowledge thereof, S'O2 6ibunao !o&ed a fist at him and told him to admit ownershi! of the !lants# Falde%
was so ner$ous and afraid that he admitted owning the mari0uana# 3he !olie then too& a !hoto of him
standing in front of one of the mari0uana !lants# 7e was then made to u!root 5 of the annabis !lants, and
bring them to his hut, where another !hoto was ta&en of him standing ne.t to a bundle of u!rooted mari0uana
!lants# 3he !olie team then brought him to the !olie station at Filla$erde# On the way, a ertain Ji&o
'asua, a barangay !eae offier of :arangay Sawmill, aom!anied the !olie offiers# 'asua, who bore a
grudge against him, beause of his refusal to !artii!ate in the former*s illegal logging ati$ities, threatened
him to admit owning the mari0uana, otherwise be would Abe !ut in a bad situation#A At the !olie
head4uarters, Falde% reiterated that he &new nothing about the mari0uana !lants sei%ed by the !olie# Still, on
2/ Se!tember 199/, Falde% was harged for the ulti$ation and ulture of the 9 fully grown mari0uana !lants#
On 15 Do$ember 199/, Falde% was arraigned and, with assistane of ounsel, !leaded not guilty to the
harge# 3rial on the merits then ensued# On 1= February 1999, the (egional 3rial +ourt of :ayombong, Due$a
Fi%aya, :ranh 29, in +riminal +ase )185, found Falde% guilty beyond reasonable doubt for $iolating
Setion 9 of the -angerous -rugs At of 1992 ;(A /425, as amended by (A 9/59<, and sentened him to
suffer the !enalty of death by lethal in0etion# 7ene, the automati re$iew by the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the sei%ure of the mari0uana !lants was made !ursuant to warrantless searh and sei%ure,
based on the R!lain $iewO dotrine#
$el%! 3he +onstitution lays down the general rule that a searh and sei%ure must be arried on the strength of
a 0udiial warrant# Otherwise, the searh and sei%ure is deemed Aunreasonable#A ?$idene !roured on the
oasion of an unreasonable searh and sei%ure is deemed tainted for being the !ro$erbial fruit of a !oisonous
tree and should be e.luded# Suh e$idene shall be inadmissible in e$idene for any !ur!ose in any
!roeeding# 7erein, there was no searh warrant issued by a 0udge after !ersonal determination of the
e.istene of !robable ause# From the delarations of the !olie offiers themsel$es, it is lear that they had at
least 1 day to obtain a warrant to searh Falde%*s farm# 3heir informant had re$ealed his name to them# 3he
!lae where the annabis !lants were !lanted was !in!ointed# From the information in their !ossession, they
ould ha$e on$ined a 0udge that there was !robable ause to 0ustify the issuane of a warrant# :ut they did
not# 5nstead, they u!rooted the !lants and a!!rehended the aused on the e.use that the tri! was a good si.
hours and inon$enient to them# 1e need not undersore that the !rotetion against illegal searh and sei%ure
is onstitutionally mandated and only under s!eifi instanes are searhes allowed without warrants# 3he
mantle of !rotetion e.tended by the :ill of (ights o$ers both innoent and guilty ali&e against any form of
high>handedness of law enforers, regardless of the !raiseworthiness of their intentions# 3he +ourt finds no
reason to subsribe to Soliitor "eneral*s ontention that it should a!!ly the A!lain $iewA dotrine# For the
dotrine to a!!ly, the following elements must be !resentH ;a< a !rior $alid intrusion based on the $alid
warrantless arrest in whih the !olie are legally !resent in the !ursuit of their offiial duties, ;b< the e$idene
was inad$ertently diso$ered by the !olie who ha$e the right to be where they are, and ;< the e$idene must
be immediately a!!arent, and ;d< !lain $iew 0ustified mere sei%ure of e$idene without further searh# 7erein,
the !olie offiers first loated the mari0uana !lants before Falde% was arrested without a warrant# 7ene,
there was no $alid warrantless arrest whih !reeded the searh of Falde%*s !remises# 3he !olie team was
dis!athed to Falde%*s &aingin !reisely to searh for and u!root the !rohibited flora# 3he sei%ure of e$idene
in A!lain $iewA a!!lies only where the !olie offier is not searhing for e$idene against the aused, but
inad$ertently omes aross an inriminating ob0et# +learly, their diso$ery of the annabis !lants was not
inad$ertent# Also, u!on arri$ing at the area, they first had to Aloo& around the areaA before they ould s!ot the
illegal !lants# 'atently, the sei%ed mari0uana !lants were not Aimmediately a!!arentA and a Afurther searhA
was needed# 5n sum, the mari0uana !lants in 4uestion were not in A!lain $iewA or Ao!en to eye and hand#A 3he
A!lain $iewA dotrine, thus, annot be made to a!!ly#
123 Arizona v. $ic5s [4(1 84 321, 3 Marc, 19(2]
2calia (J): 4 concur, ! "iled a se#arate concurring o#inion, ( "iled se#arate dissenting o#inions to $hich !
concurs*
Facs! On 1= A!ril 19=4, a bullet was fired through the floor of 7i&s* a!artment, stri&ing and in0uring a man
in the a!artment below# 'olie offiers arri$ed and entered 7i&s* a!artment to searh for the shooter, for
other $itims, and for wea!ons# 3hey found and sei%ed three wea!ons, inluding a sawed>off rifle, and in the
ourse of their searh also diso$ered a sto&ing>a! mas&# One of the !oliemen, Offier Delson, notied
two sets of e.!ensi$e stereo om!onents, whih seemed out of !lae in the s4ualid and otherwise ill>
a!!ointed four>room a!artment# Sus!eting that they were stolen, he read and reorded their serial numbers >
mo$ing some of the om!onents, inluding a :ang and Olufsen turntable, in order to do so > whih he then
re!orted by !hone to his head4uarters# On being ad$ised that the turntable had been ta&en in an armed
robbery, he sei%ed it immediately# 5t was later determined that some of the other serial numbers mathed those
on other stereo e4ui!ment ta&en in the same armed robbery, and a warrant was obtained and e.euted to sei%e
that e4ui!ment as well# 7i&s was subse4uently indited for the robbery# 3he state trial ourt granted 7i&s*
motion to su!!ress the e$idene that had been sei%ed# 3he +ourt of A!!eals of Ari%ona affirmed# 5t was
oneded that the initial entry and searh, although warrantless, were 0ustified by the e.igent irumstane of
the shooting# 3he +ourt of A!!eals $iewed the obtaining of the serial numbers, howe$er, as an additional
searh, unrelated to that e.igeny# :oth ourts > the trial ourt e.!liitly and the +ourt of A!!eals by
neessary im!liation > re0eted the State*s ontention that Offier Delson*s ations were 0ustified under the
A!lain $iewA dotrine of +oolidge $# Dew 7am!shire# 3he Ari%ona Su!reme +ourt denied re$iew, and the
State filed this !etition#
"ss#e! 1hether the !olieman2s ations ome within the !ur$iew of the Fourth Amendment#
$el%! 3he !olieman*s ations ome within the !ur$iew of the Fourth Amendment# 3he mere reording of the
serial numbers did not onstitute a Asei%ureA sine it did not meaningfully interfere with 7i&s2 !ossessory
interest in either the numbers or the stereo e4ui!ment# 7owe$er, the mo$ing of the e4ui!ment was a AsearhA
se!arate and a!art from the searh that was the lawful ob0eti$e of entering the a!artment# 3he fat that the
searh uno$ered nothing of great !ersonal $alue to 7i&s is irrele$ant# 3he A!lain $iewA dotrine does not
render the searh AreasonableA under the Fourth Amendment# 3he !olieman*s ation direted to the stereo
e4ui!ment was not i!so fato unreasonable sim!ly beause it was unrelated to the 0ustifiation for enteringthe
a!artment# 3hat la& of relationshi! always e.ists when the A!lain $iewA dotrine a!!lies# 5n saying that a
warrantless searh must be Astritly irumsribed by the e.igenies whih 0ustify its initiation,A Miney was
sim!ly addressing the so!e of the !rimary searh itself, and was not o$erruling the A!lain $iewA dotrine by
im!liation# 7owe$er, the searh was in$alid beause, as the State onedes, the !olieman had only a
Areasonable sus!iionA > i# e#, less than !robable ause to belie$e > that the stereo e4ui!ment was stolen#
'robable ause is re4uired to in$o&e the A!lain $iewA dotrine as it a!!lies to sei%ures# 5t would be illogial to
hold that an ob0et is sei%able on lesser grounds, during an unrelated searh and sei%ure, than would ha$e been
needed to obtain a warrant for it if it had been &nown to be on the !remises# 'robable ause to belie$e the
e4ui!ment was stolen was also neessary to su!!ort the searh here, whether legal authority to mo$e the
e4ui!ment ould be found only as the ine$itable onomitant of the authority to sei%e it, or also as a
onse4uene of some inde!endent !ower to searh ob0ets in !lain $iew# 3he !olieman*s ation annot be
u!held on the ground that it was not a Afull>blown searhA but was only a Aursory ins!etionA that ould be
0ustified by reasonable sus!iion instead of !robable ause# A truly ursory ins!etion > one that in$ol$es
merely loo&ing at what is already e.!osed to $iew, without disturbing it > is not a AsearhA for Fourth
Amendment !ur!oses, and therefore does not e$en re4uire reasonable sus!iion# 3his +ourt is unwilling to
reate a subategory of AursoryA searhes under the Fourth Amendment#
124 &eo'le vs. .o;'acion [GR 124442, 21 *#ly 2111]
3irst Division, 4a#unan (J): 4 concur
Facs! Ating on a onfidential ti! su!!lied by a !olie informant that Armando +om!aio y Sur!osa was
growing and ulti$ating mari0uana !lants, S'O1 "ilbert 6# 6inda and S'O2 :asilio Sarong of the /th
Daroti (egional Field Unit of the Darotis +ommand ;DA(+OM< of the :aolod +ity -etahment
onduted a sur$eillane of the residene of +om!aion who was then the barangay a!tain of barangay
:agonbon, San +arlos +ity, Degros Oidental on 9 Culy 1995# -uring the said sur$eillane, they saw 2 tall
!lants in the ba&yard of +om!aion whih they sus!eted to be mari0uana !lants# S'O1 6inda and S'O2
Sarong re!orted the result of their sur$eillane to S'O4 (anulfo 3# Fillamor, Cr#, +hief of DA(+OM, :aolod
+ity, who immediately formed a team om!osed of the members of the 5ntelligene -i$ision 'ro$inial
+ommand, the +riminal 5n$estigation +ommand and the S!eial Ation Fore# 3wo members of the media,
one from -S1F (adio and another from -S(6 (adio, were also inluded in the om!osite team# On 12 Culy
1995, the team a!!lied for a searh warrant with the offie of ?.euti$e Cudge :ernardo 'onferrada in
:aolod +ity# 7owe$er, Cudge 'onferrada informed them that he did not ha$e territorial 0urisdition o$er the
matter# 3he team then left :aolod +ity for San +arlos +ity# 3hey arri$ed there around /H)8 !#m#, then went to
the house of ?.euti$e Cudge (oberto S# Ca$ellana to seure a searh warrant# 3hey were not able to do so
beause it was nighttime and offie hours were ob$iously o$er# 3hey were told by the 0udge to go ba& in the
morning# Donetheless, the team !roeeded to barangay :agonbon and arri$ed at the residene of +om!aion
in the early morning of 1) Culy 1995# S'O4 Fillamor &no&ed at the gate and alled out for +om!aion# 1hat
ha!!ened thereafter is sub0et to onfliting aounts# 3he !roseution ontends that +om!aion o!ened the
gate and !ermitted them to ome in# 7e was immediately as&ed by S'O4 Fillamor about the sus!eted
mari0uana !lants and he admitted that he !lanted and ulti$ated the same for the use of his wife who was
suffering from migraine# S'O4 Fillamor then told him that he would be harged for $iolation of Setion 9 of
(A /425 and informed him of his onstitutional rights# 3he o!erati$es then u!rooted the sus!eted mari0uana
!lants# S'O1 6inda onduted an initial field test of the !lants by using the Darotis -rug 5dentifiation Jit#
3he test yielded a !ositi$e result# On 15 Culy 1995, the !lants were turned o$er to the 'hili!!ine Dational
'olie ;'D'< +rime 6aboratory, :aolod +ity 'olie +ommand, !artiularly to Senior 5ns!etor (eah
Abastillas Filla$ienio# Senior 5ns!etor Filla$ienio weighed and measured the !lants, one was 125 inhes
and weighed 988 grams while the other was 1)8 inhes and weighed 988 grams# 3hree ;)< 4ualitati$e
e.aminations were onduted, namelyH the miroso!i test, the hemial test, and the thin layer
hromatogra!hi test# All yielded !ositi$e results# On his !art, +om!aion maintains that around 1H)8 a#m# on
1) Culy 1995 while he and his family were slee!ing, he heard somebody &no&ing outside his house# 7e went
down bringing with him a flashlight# After he o!ened the gate, 4 !ersons who he thought were members of the
military, entered the !remises then went inside the house# 5t was dar& so he ould not ount the others who
entered the house as the same was lit only by a &erosene lam!# One of the four men told him to sit in the
li$ing room# Some of the men went u!stairs while the others went around the house# Done of them as&ed for
his !ermission to searh his house and the !remises# After about 28 minutes of searhing, the men alled him
outside and brought him to the ba&yard# One of the military men saidH A+a!tain, you ha$e a ;si< mari0uana
here at your ba&yardA to whih +om!aion re!liedH A5 do not &now that they were ;si< mari0uana !lants but
what 5 &now is that they are mediinal !lants for my wifeA who was suffering from migraine# After he was
informed that the !lants in his ba&yard were mari0uana, the men too& !itures of him and themsel$es#
3hereafter, he was brought inside the house where he and the military men s!ent the night# At around 18H88
a#m#, they brought him with them to the ity hall# +om!aion saw that one of the 2 ser$ie $ehiles they
brought was fully loaded with !lants# 7e was later told by the military men that said !lants were mari0uana#
U!on arri$al at the ity hall, the men met with the mayor and then unloaded the alleged mari0uana !lants# A
!iture of him together with the arresting team was ta&en with the alleged mari0uana as ba& dro!# Soon
thereafter, he was ta&en to 7da# Soorro at the SAF 7ead4uarters# A riminal om!laint for $iolation of
Setion 9 of (A /425, as amended by (A 9/59 was filed against +om!aion# On 2 Canuary 199/, the trial
ourt on$ited +om!aion of the rime harged, and sentened him to relusion !er!etua and to !ay a fine of
'588,888#88#
"ss#e! 1hether +om!aion*s right against unreasonable searh and sei%ure was $iolated#
$el%! Setions 2 and ) L2M, Artile 555 of the 19=9 +onstitution are safeguards against re&less, maliious and
unreasonable in$asion of !ri$ay and liberty# A searh and sei%ure, therefore, must be arried out through or
with a 0udiial warrant, otherwise, suh searh and sei%ure beomes AunreasonableA within the meaning of the
onstitutional !ro$ision# ?$idene seured thereby, i#e#, the AfruitsA of the searh and sei%ure, will be
inadmissible in e$idene for any !ur!ose in any !roeeding#A 3he re4uirement that a warrant must be
obtained from the !ro!er 0udiial authority !rior to the ondut of a searh and sei%ure is, howe$er, not
absolute# 3here are se$eral instanes when the law reogni%es e.e!tions, suh as when the owner of the
!remises onsents or $oluntarily submits to a searh, when the owner of the !remises wai$es his right against
suh inursion, when the searh is inidental to a lawful arrest, when it is made on $essels and airraft for
$iolation of ustoms laws, when it is made on automobiles for the !ur!ose of !re$enting $iolations of
smuggling or immigration laws, when it in$ol$es !rohibited artiles in !lain $iew, when it in$ol$es a Asto!
and fris&A situation, when the searh is under e.igent and emergeny irumstanes, or in ases of ins!etion
of buildings and other !remises for the enforement of fire, sanitary and building regulations# 5n these
instanes, a searh may be $alidly made e$en without a warrant# 7erein, the searh and sei%ure onduted by
the om!osite team in the house of aused>a!!ellant was not authori%ed by a searh warrant, 5t does not
a!!ear either that the situation falls under any of the abo$e mentioned ases# +onse4uently, +om!aion*s right
against unreasonable searh and sei%ure was learly $iolated# As a general rule, ob0ets in the A!lain $iewA of
an offier who has the right to be in the !osition to ha$e that $iew are sub0et to sei%ure without a warrant# 5t
is usually a!!lied where a !olie offier is not searhing for e$idene against the aused, but nonetheless
inad$ertently omes aross an inriminating ob0et# 3hus, the following elements must be !resent before the
dotrine may be a!!liedH ;a< a !rior $alid intention based on the $alid warrantless arrest in whih the !olie
are legally !resent in the !ursuit of their offiial duties, ;b< the e$idene was inad$ertently diso$ered by the
!olie who ha$e the right to be where they are, ;< the e$idene must be immediately a!!arent, and ;d< A!lain
$iewA 0ustified were sei%ure of e$idene without further searh# 7ere, there was no $alid warrantless arrest#
3hey fored their way into +om!aion*s !remises without the latter*s onsent# 5t is undis!uted that the
DA(+OM agents onduted a sur$eillane of the residene of +om!aion on 9 Culy 1995 on the sus!iion
that he was growing and ulti$ating mari0uana when they allegedly ame in A!lain $iewA of the mari0uana
!lants# 1hen the agents entered his !remises on 1) Culy 1995, their intention was to sei%e the e$idene
against him# 5n fat, they initially wanted to seure a searh warrant but ould not sim!ly wait for one to be
issued# 3he DA(+OM agents, therefore, did not ome aross the mari0uana !lants inad$ertently when they
onduted a sur$eillane and barged into +om!aion*s residene# As held in 'eo!le $# Musa, the A!lain $iewA
dotrine may not be used to launh unbridled searhes and indisriminate sei%ures nor to e.tend a general
e.!loratory searh made solely to find e$idene of defendant*s guilt# 3he A!lain $iewA dotrine is usually
a!!lied where a !olie offier is not searhing for e$idene against the aused, but nonetheless inad$ertently
omes aross an inriminating ob0et# 7ene, +om!aion is a4uitted of the rime to whih he was harged#
12) Rol%an vs. Arca [GR L-2)434, 2) *#ly 192)]
3irst Division, 5a)asiar (J): 4 concur, ! too) no #art
Facs! On ) A!ril 19/4, Morabe, -e "u%man G +om!any filed with the +ourt of First 5nstane ;+F5< of
Manila a i$il ase ;5/981< against Fisheries +ommissioner Arsenio D# (oldan, Cr#, for the reo$ery of fishing
$essel 3ony 6e. F5 whih had been sei%ed and im!ounded by the Fisheries +ommissioner through the
'hili!!ine Da$y# On 18 A!ril 19/4, the om!any !rayed for a writ of !reliminary mandatory in0untion with
the +F5, but said !rayer was denied# On 2= A!ril 19/4, the +F5 set aside its order of 18 A!ril 19/4 and
granted the om!any*s motion for reonsideration !raying for !reliminary mandatory in0untion# 3hus, the
om!any too& !ossession of the $essel 3ony 6e. F5 from the 'hili!!ine Fisheries +ommission adn the
'hili!!ine Da$y by $irtue of the said writ# On 18 -eember 19/4, the +F5 dismissed +i$il +ase 5/981 for
failure of the om!any to !roseute as well as for failure of the +ommission and the Da$y to a!!ear on the
sheduled date of hearing# 3he $essel, 3ony 6e. F5 or Srta# 1innie howe$er, remained in the !ossession of
the om!any#
On 28 Culy 19/5, the Fisheries +ommissioner re4uested the 'hili!!ine Da$y to a!!rehend $essels 3ony 6e.
F5 and 3ony 6e. 555, also res!eti$ely alled Srta# 1innie and Srta# Agnes, for alleged $iolations of some
!ro$isions of the Fisheries At and the rules and regulations !romulgated thereunder# On August 5 or /, 19/5,
the two fishing boats were atually sei%ed for illegal fishing with dynamite# Fish aught with dynamite and
sti&s of dynamite were then found aboard the two $essels# On 1= August 19/5, the Fisheries +ommissioner
re4uested the 'alawan 'ro$inial Fisal to file riminal harges against the rew members of the fishing
$essels# On )8 Se!tember 19/5, there were filed in the +F5 of 'alawan a ou!le of informations, one against
the rew members of 3ony 6e. 555, and another against the rew members of 3ony 6e. F5 K both for
$iolations of At 488), as amended by +ommonwealth Ats 4/2, /59 and 18==, i#e#, for illegal fishing with
the use of dynamite# On the same day, the Fisal filed an e. !arte motion to hold the boats in ustody as
instruments and therefore e$idene of the rime, and abled the Fisheries +ommissioner to detain the $essels#
On Otober 2 and 4, li&ewise, the +F5 of 'alawan ordered the 'hili!!ine Da$y to ta&e the boats in ustody#
On 2 Otober 19/5, the om!any filed a om!laint with a!!liation for !reliminary mandatory in0untion
;+i$il +ase /2999< with the +F5 of Manila against the +ommission and the Da$y# Among others, it was
alleged that at the time of the sei%ure of the fishing boats in issue, the same were engaged in legitimate fishing
o!erations off the oast of 'alawan, that by $irtue of the offer of om!romise dated 1) Se!tember 19/5 by the
om!any to the Seretary of Agriulture and Datural (esoures, the numerous $iolations of the Fishery 6aws,
if any, by the rew members of the $essels were settled# On 1= Otober 19/5, Cudge Franiso Ara issued an
order granting the issuane of the writ of !reliminary mandatory in0untion and issued the !reliminary writ
u!on the filing by the om!any of a bond of '5,888#88 for the release of the two $essels# On 19 Otober
19/5, the +ommission and the Da$y filed a motion for reonsideration of the order issuing the !reliminary
writ on 1= Otober 19/5 on the ground, among others, that on 1= Otober 19/5 the 'hili!!ine Da$y reei$ed
from the 'alawan +F5 two orders dated Otober 2 and 4, 19/5 re4uiring the 'hili!!ine Da$y to hold the
fishing boats in ustody and direting that the said $essels should not be released until further orders from the
+ourt, and that the bond of '5,888#88 is grossly insuffiient to o$er the "o$ernment*s losses in ase the two
$essels, whih are worth '495,888#88, are !laed beyond the reah of the "o$ernment, thus frustrating their
forfeiture as instruments of the rime# On 2) Do$ember 19/5, Cudge Ara denied the said motion for
reonsideration# 3he +ommission and the Da$y filed a !etition for ertiorari and !rohibition with !reliminary
in0untion to restrain Cudge Ara from enforing his order dated 1= Otober 19/5, and the writ of !reliminary
mandatory in0untion thereunder issued#
"ss#e! 1hether the Fisheries +ommissioner and the Da$y an $alidly diret andBor effet the sei%ure of the
$essels of the om!any for illegal fishing by the use of dynamite and without the re4uisite lienses#
$el%! Setion 4 of (e!ubli At )512 a!!ro$ed on 28 Marh 19/) em!owers the Fisheries +ommissioner to
arry out the !ro$isions of the Fisheries At, as amended, and all rules and regulations !romulgated
thereunder, to ma&e searhes and sei%ures !ersonally or through his duly authori%ed re!resentati$es in
aordane with the (ules of +ourt, of Ae.!losi$es suh as dynamites and the li&e, inluding fishery !roduts,
fishing e4ui!ment, ta&le and other things that are sub0et to sei%ure under e.isting fishery lawsA, and Ato
effeti$ely im!lement the enforement of e.isting fishery laws on illegal fishing#A 'aragra!h 5 of Setion 4 of
the same (e!ubli At )512 li&ewise transferred to and $ested in the 'hili!!ine Fisheries +ommission Aall the
!owers, funtions and duties heretofore e.erised by the :ureau of +ustoms, 'hili!!ine Da$y and 'hili!!ine
+onstabulary o$er fishing $essels and fishery matters#A Setion 12 of the Fisheries At, otherwise &nown as
(e!ubli At 488), as amended, !rohibits fishing with dynamites or other e.!losi$es whih is !enali%ed by
Setion 9/ thereof Aby a fine of not less than '1,588#88 nor more than '5,888#88, and by im!risonment for
not less than one ;1< year and si. ;/< months nor more than fi$e ;5< years, aside from the onfisation and
forfeiture of all e.!losi$es, boats, ta&les, a!!arel, furniture, and other a!!aratus used in fishing in $iolation
of said Setion 12 of this At#A Setion 9= of the same Fisheries 6aw !ro$ides that Ain ase of a seond
offense, the $essel, together with its ta&le, a!!arel, furniture and stores shall be forfeited to the "o$ernment#A
3he seond !aragra!h of Setion 12 also !ro$ides that Athe !ossession andBor finding, of dynamite, blasting
a!s and other e.!losi$es in any fishing boat shall onstitute a !resum!tion that the said dynamite andBor
blasting a!s and e.!losi$es are being used for fishing !ur!oses in $iolation of this Setion, and that the
!ossession or diso$er in any fishing boat or fish aught or &illed by the use of dynamite or other e.!losi$es,
under e.!ert testimony, shall onstitute a !resum!tion that the owner, if !resent in the fishing boat, or the
fishing rew ha$e been fishing with dynamite or other e.!losi$es#A Under Setion 9= of the Fisheries At, as
amended, any !erson, assoiation or or!oration fishing in dee! sea fishery without the orres!onding liense
!resribed in Setions 19 to 22 Artile F of the Fisheries At or any other order or regulation deri$ing fore
from its !ro$isions, Ashall be !unished for eah offense by a fine of not more than '5,888#88, or
im!risonment, for not more than one year, or both, in the disretion of the +ourt, 'ro$ided, 3hat in ase of an
assoiation or or!oration, the 'resident or manager shall be diretly res!onsible for the ats of his em!loyees
or laborers if it is !ro$en that the latter ated with his &nowledge, otherwise the res!onsibility shall e.tend
only as far as fine is onernedH 'ro$ided, further, 3hat in the absene of a &nown owner of the $essel, the
master, !atron or !erson in harge of suh $essel shall be res!onsible for any $iolation of this AtH and
'ro$ided, further, 3hat in ase of a seond offense, the $essel together with its ta&le, a!!arel, furniture and
stores shall be forfeited to the "o$ernment#A Under Setion 1) of ?.euti$e Order )=9 of 2) -eember 1958,
reorgani%ing the Armed Fores of the 'hili!!ines, the 'hili!!ine Da$y has the funtion, among others, Ato
assist the !ro!er go$ernmental agenies in the enforement of laws and regulations !ertaining to Fishing#
Setion 2218 of the 3ariff and +ustoms +ode, as amended by '- )4 of 29 Otober 1992, authori%ed any
offiial or !erson e.erising !olie authority under the !ro$isions of the +ode, to searh and sei%e any $essel
or air raft as well as any trun&, !a&age, bag or en$elo!e on board and to searh any !erson on board for any
breah or $iolation of the ustoms and tariff laws# 7erein, when the 'hili!!ine Da$y, u!on re4uest of the
Fisheries +ommissioner, a!!rehended on August 5 or /, 19/5 the fishing boats 3ony 6e. 555 and 3ony 6e. F5,
otherwise &nown res!eti$ely as Srta# Agnes and Srta# 1innie, these $essels were found to be without the
neessary liense in $iolation of Setion 98) of the 3ariff and +ustoms +ode and therefore sub0et to sei%ure
under Setion 2218 of the same +ode, and illegally fishing with e.!losi$es and without fishing liense
re4uired by Setions 19 and 1= of the Fisheries 6aw# Searh and sei%ure without searh warrant of $essels and
air rafts for $iolations of the ustoms laws ha$e been the traditional e.e!tion to the onstitutional
re4uirement of a searh warrant, beause the $essel an be 4ui&ly mo$ed out of the loality or 0urisdition in
whih the searh warrant must be sought before suh warrant ould be seured, hene it is not !ratiable to
re4uire a searh warrant before suh searh or sei%ure an be onstitutionally effeted# 3he same e.e!tion
should a!!ly to sei%ures of fishing $essels breahing our fishery lawsH 3hey are usually e4ui!!ed with
!owerful motors that enable them to elude !ursuing shi!s of the 'hili!!ine Da$y or +oast "uard#
126 $izon vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 119619, 13 Dece;3er 1996]
2econd Division, 7uno (J): 4 concur
Facs! 5n Se!tember 1992, the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;'D'< Maritime +ommand of 'uerto 'rinesa +ity,
'alawan reei$ed re!orts of illegal fishing o!erations in the oastal waters of the ity# 5n res!onse to these
re!orts, the ity mayor organi%ed 3as& Fore :antay -agat to assist the !olie in the detetion and
a!!rehension of $iolators of the laws on fishing# On )8 Se!tember 1992 at about 2H88 !#m#, the 3as& Fore
:antay -agat re!orted to the 'D' Maritime +ommand that a boat and se$eral small rafts were fishing by
Amuro amiA within the shoreline of :arangay San (afael of 'uerto 'rinesa# 3he !olie, headed by S'O)
(omulo ?nri4ue%, and members of the 3as& Fore :antay -agat, headed by :enito Marelo, Cr#, immediately
!roeeded to the area and found se$eral men fishing in motori%ed sam!ans and a big fishing boat identified as
FB: (obinson within the se$en>&ilometer shoreline of the ity# 3hey boarded the FB: (obinson and ins!eted
the boat with the a4uiesene of the boat a!tain, Sil$erio "argar# 5n the ourse of their ins!etion, the !olie
saw two foreigners in the a!tain*s de&# S'O) ?nri4ue% e.amined their !ass!orts and found them to be mere
!hotoo!ies# 3he !olie also diso$ered a large a4uarium full of li$e la!u>la!u and assorted fish weighing
a!!ro.imately one ton at the bottom of the boat# 3hey he&ed the liense of the boat and its fishermen and
found them to be in order# Donetheless, S'O) ?nri4ue% brought the boat a!tain, the rew and the fishermen
to 'uerto 'rinesa for further in$estigation# At the ity harbor, members of the Maritime +ommand were
ordered by S'O) ?nri4ue% to guard the FB: (obinson# 3he boat a!tain and the two foreigners were again
interrogated at the 'D' Maritime +ommand offie# 3hereafter, an 5ns!etionBA!!rehension (e!ort was
!re!ared and the boat, its rew and fishermen were harged with the following $iolationsH ;1< +onduting
fishing o!erations within 'uerto 'rinesa oastal waters without mayor*s !ermit, ;2< ?m!loying e.ess
fishermen on board ;Authori%ed K 2/, On board K )/<, and ;)< 3wo ;2< 7ong&ong nationals on board
without original !ass!orts#A 3he following day, 1 Otober 1992, S'O) ?nri4ue% direted the boat a!tain to
get random sam!les of fish from the fish age of FB: (obinson for laboratory e.amination# On 9 Otober
1992, D:5 Forensi +hemist ?milia (osaldes onduted two tests on the fish sam!les and found that they
ontained sodium yanide# 5n light of these findings, the 'D' Maritime +ommand of 'uerto 'rinesa +ity
filed the om!laint against the owner and o!erator of the FB: (obinson, the First Fishermen Fishing
5ndustries, 5n#, re!resented by (ihard 7i%on, the boat a!tain Sil$erio "argar, the boat engineer ?rnesto
Andaya, two other rew members, the two 7ong&ong nationals and 2= fishermen of the said boat for the
offense of illegal fishing with the use of obno.ious or !oisonous substane !enali%ed under 'residential
-eree ;'-< 984, the Fisheries -eree of 1995# 5n an 5nformation dated 15 Otober 1992, 7i%on, et# al# were
harged with a $iolation of '- 984# 7i%on, et# al# were arraigned and they !led not guilty to the harge# On 2)
Do$ember 1992, howe$er, Salud (osales, another forensi hemist of the D:5 in Manila onduted three ;)<
tests on the s!eimens and found the fish negati$e for the !resene of sodium yanide# On 9 Culy 199), the
trial ourt found 7i%on, et# al# guilty and sentened them to im!risonment for a minimum of = years and 1 day
to a ma.imum of 9 years and 4 months# 3he ourt also ordered the onfisation and forfeiture of the FB:
(obinson, the 2= sam!ans and the ton of assorted li$e fishes as instruments and !roeeds of the offense# 3he
+ourt of A!!eals affirmed the deision of the trial ourt# 7i%on, et# al# filed a !etition for re$iew on ertiorari
with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh and sei%ure onduted in 7i%on2s boat is $alid#
$el%! Our +onstitution !rosribes searh and sei%ure and the arrest of !ersons without a 0udiial warrant# As a
general rule, any e$idene obtained without a 0udiial warrant is inadmissible for any !ur!ose in any
!roeeding# 3he rule is, howe$er, sub0et to ertain e.e!tions# Some of these areH ;1< a searh inident to a
lawful arrest, ;2< sei%ure of e$idene in !lain $iew, ;)< searh of a mo$ing motor $ehile, and ;4< searh in
$iolation of ustoms laws# Searh and sei%ure without searh warrant of $essels and airrafts for $iolations of
ustoms laws ha$e been the traditional e.e!tion to the onstitutional re4uirement of a searh warrant# 5t is
rooted on the reognition that a $essel and an airraft, li&e motor $ehiles, an be 4ui&ly mo$ed out of the
loality or 0urisdition in whih the searh warrant must be sought and seured# Sielding to this reality,
0udiial authorities ha$e not re4uired a searh warrant of $essels and airrafts before their searh and sei%ure
an be onstitutionally effeted# 3he same e.e!tion ought to a!!ly to sei%ures of fishing $essels and boats
breahing our fishery laws# 3hese $essels are normally !owered by high>s!eed motors that enable them to
elude arresting shi!s of the 'hili!!ine Da$y, the +oast "uard and other go$ernment authorities enforing our
fishery laws# 3he warrantless searh on the FB: (obinson, a fishing boat sus!eted of ha$ing engaged in
illegal fishing, thus is $alid# 3he fish and other e$idene sei%ed in the ourse of the searh were !ro!erly
admitted by the trial ourt# Moreo$er, 7i%on failed to raise the issue during trial and hene, wai$ed their right
to 4uestion any irregularity that may ha$e attended the said searh and sei%ure# 7owe$er, 7i%on et# al# are not
guilty of the offense of illegal fishing with the use of !oisonous substanes# 3he !roseution failed to e.!lain
the ontraditory findings on the fish sam!les and this omission raises a reasonable doubt that the one ton of
fishes in the age were aught with the use of sodium yanide# 3he absene of yanide in the seond set of
fish s!eimens su!!orts 7i%on, et# al#*s laim that they did not use the !oison in fishing# Aording to them,
they aught the fishes by the ordinary and legal way, i#e#, by hoo& and line on board their sam!ans# 3his laim
is buttressed by the !roseution e$idene itself# 3he authorities found nothing on the boat that would ha$e
indiated any form of illegal fishing# All the douments of the boat and the fishermen were in order# 5t was
only after the fish s!eimens were tested, albeit under sus!iious irumstanes, that 7i%on, et# al# were
harged with illegal fishing with the use of !oisonous substanes# 7ene, 7i%on, et# al# are a4uitted of the
rime of illegal fishing with the use of !oisonous substanes defined under Setion )) of (e!ubli At 984,
the Fisheries -eree of 1995#
122 &eo'le vs. GaCar% [GRs 119222-23, 2 Fe3r#ary 1992]
Facs! At about )H)8 !#m# of )8 August 1994, U Aung 1in, a 'assenger of 3" Flight /28 of the 3hai Airways
whih had 0ust arri$ed from :ang&o&, 3hailand, !resented his luggage, a tra$elling bag for e.amination to
+ustoms ?.aminer :usran 3awano, who was assigned at the Arri$al Area of the Dinoy A4uino 5nternational
Air!ort ;DA5A< in 'asay +ity# U Aung 1in also handed to 3awano his +ustoms -elaration 12=419 stating
that he had no artiles to delare# 1hen 3awano was about to ins!et his luggage, U Aung 1in suddenly left,
!roeeding towards the diretion of +arousel 1, the on$eyor for the !iees of luggage of the !assengers of
Flight /28, as if to retrie$e another baggage from it# After ha$ing ins!eted the luggages of the other
inoming !assengers, 3awano beame alarmed by the failure of U Aung 1in to return and sus!eted that the
bag of U Aung 1in ontained illegal artiles# 3he +ustoms ?.aminer re!orted the matter to his su!eriors#
U!on their instrutions, the bag was turned o$er to the offie of the +ustoms 'olie in the DA5A for .>ray
e.amination where it was deteted that it ontained some !owdery substane# 1hen o!ened, the bag re$ealed
two !a&ages ontaining the substane neatly hidden in between its !artitions# (e!resentati$e sam!les of the
substane were e.amined by ?li%abeth Ayonon, a hemist of the +rime 6aboratory Ser$ie of the 'hili!!ine
Dational 'olie ;'D'< assigned at the Arri$al Area of the DA5A, and by 3ita Ad$inula, another hemist of
the 'D' +rime 6aboratory Ser$ie at +am! +rame, and found to be !ositi$e for heroin# 3he two hemists
onluded that the entire substane, with a total weight of 5,599#=8 grams, ontained in the two !a&ages
found in the bag of U Aung 1in, is heroin# A manhunt was onduted to loate U Aung 1in# At about 9H45
!#m# of the same date, (ey ?s!inosa, an em!loyee of the 6ufthansa Airlines, notified the ommander of the
DA5A +ustoms 'olie -istrit +ommand that a ertain :urmese national by the name of U Aung 1in
a!!eared at the he&>in ounter of the airline as a de!arting !assenger# 5mmediately, a team of law enforers
!roeeded to the -e!arture Area and a!!rehended the aused after he had been identified through his
signatures in his +ustoms -elaration and in his :ureau of 5mmigration and -e!ortation Arri$al +ard#
+ustoms ?.aminer 3awano also !ositi$ely identified U Aung 1in as the !erson who left his bag with him at
the Arri$al Area of the DA5A# -uring the in$estigation of U Aung 1in, the agents of the +ustoms 'olie and
the Darotis +ommand ;DA(+OM< gathered the information that U Aung 1in had a ontat in :ang&o&
and that there were other drug ouriers in the 'hili!!ines# Following the lead, a team of lawmen, together
with U Aung 1in, was dis!athed to the +ity "arden 7otel in Mabini St#, ?rmita, Manila, to enable U Aung
1in to ommuniate with his ontat in :ang&o& for further instrutions# 1hile the !olie offiers were
standing by, they notied two !ersons, a +auasian and an oriental, alight from a ar and enter the hotel# U
Aung 1in whis!ered to +ustoms 'olie S!eial Agent ?dgar IuiNones that he reogni%ed the two as drug
ouriers whom he saw tal&ing with his ontat in :ang&o& named Mau Mau# 3he members of the team were
able to establish the identity of the two !ersons as Digel (ihard "atward and one @aw 1in Daing, a
3hailander, from the dri$er of the hotel ser$ie ar used by the two when they arri$ed in the hotel# 5t was
gathered by the law enforers that "atward and @aw 1in Daing were sheduled to lea$e for :ang&o& on
board a J6M flight# On )1 August 1994, o!erati$es of the DA5A +ustoms 'olie mounted a sur$eillane
o!eration at the -e!arture Area for "atward and @aw 1in Daing who might be lea$ing the ountry# At about
9H45 !#m#, S!eial Agent "ino Minguillan of the +ustoms 'olie made a $erifiation on the !assenger
manifest of J6M (oyal -uth Airlines Flight =8/, bound for Amsterdam $ia :ang&o&, whih was sheduled
to de!art at about 9H55 !#m# 7e found the name A"A31A(-BD(M(A listed therein as a !assenger for
Amsterdam and aordingly informed his teammates who res!onded immediately +ustoms 'olie +a!tain
Cuanito Algenio re4uested Fitorio ?ree, manager of the J6M airline at the DA5A, to let !assenger "atward
disembar& from the airraft and to ha$e his he&ed>in luggage, if any, unloaded# 3he manager aeded to the
re4uest to off>load "atward but not to the unloading of his he&>in bag as the !lane was about to de!art and
to do so would unduly delay the flight# 7owe$er, ?ree made an assurane that the bag would be returned
immediately to the 'hili!!ines on the first a$ailable flight from :ang&o&# U!on his disembar&ment# "atward
was in$ited by the !olie offiers for in$estigation# At about )H88 !#m# of 1 Se!tember 1994, "atward*s
luggage, was brought ba& to the DA5A from :ang&o& through the 3hai airways, !ursuant to the re4uest of
?ree# U!on its retrie$al, the law enforers sub0eted the bag to .>ray e.aminations in the !resene of
"atward and some +ustoms offiials# 5t was obser$ed to ontain some !owdery substane# 5nside the bag
were two im!ro$ised en$elo!es made of ardboard eah ontaining the !owdery substane, together with
many lothes# 3he en$elo!es were hidden inside the bag, one at the side in between a double>wall, the other
inside a !artition in the middle# U!on its e.amination by +hemists Ayonon and Ad$inula !ursuant to the
re4uest of 'olie Senior 5ns!etor Cohn +am!os of the DA(+OM, the !owdery substane ontained in the
two ardboard en$elo!es, with a net weight of 5,2)9#98 grams, was found to be heroin# Digel (ihard
"atward was harged with $iolating Setion 4 of (e!ubli At /425, the -angerous -rugs At of 1992
;trans!orting<, while U Aung 1in was harged for transgressing Setion ) of the -angerous -rugs At of
1992 ;im!orting<# "atward !leaded not guilty of the harge when arraigned, while U Aung 1in !leaded guilty
of the rime harged u!on his arraignment# On ) Marh 1995, the trial ourt found both guilty of the rime
harged#
"ss#e! 1hether "atward2s and U Aung 1in2s suitases may be searhed without warrant#
$el%! 1hile no searh warrant had been obtained for that !ur!ose, when "atward he&ed in his bag as his
!ersonal luggage as a !assenger of J6M Flight =8/ he thereby agreed to the ins!etion thereof in aordane
with ustoms rules and regulations, an international !ratie of strit obser$ane, and wai$ed any ob0etion to
a warrantless searh# 7is subse4uent arrest, although li&ewise without a warrant, was 0ustified sine it was
effeted u!on the diso$ery and reo$ery of the heroin in his bag, or in flagrante delito# 3he on$ition of U
Aung 1in is li&ewise unassailable# 7is ul!ability was not based only u!on his !lea of guilty but also u!on
the e$idene of the !roseution, the !resentation of whih was re4uired by the lower ourt des!ite said !lea#
3he e$idene thus !resented on$iningly !ro$ed his ha$ing im!orted into this ountry the heroin found in
his luggage whih he !resented for ustoms e.amination u!on his arri$al at the international air!ort# 3here
was, of ourse, no showing that he was authori%ed by law to im!ort suh dangerous drug, nor did he laim or
!resent any authority to do so#
12( &eo'le vs. *o,nson [GR 13(((1, 1( Dece;3er 2111]
Facs! 6eila (eyes Cohnson was, at the time of the inident, 5= years old, a widow, and a resident of Oean
Side, +alifornia, U#S#A# She is a former Fili!ino iti%en who was naturali%ed as an Amerian on 1/ Cune 19/=
and had sine been wor&ing as a registered nurse, ta&ing are of geriatri !atients and those with Al%heimer*s
disease, in on$alesent homes in the United States# On 1/ Cune 199=, she arri$ed in the 'hili!!ines to $isit
her son*s family in +alamba, 6aguna# She was due to fly ba& to the United States on Culy 2/# On Culy 25, she
he&ed in at the 'hili!!ine Fillage 7otel to a$oid the traffi on the way to the Dinoy A4uino 5nternational
Air!ort ;DA5A< and he&ed out at 5H)8 !#m# the ne.t day, 2/ Cune 199=# At around 9H)8 !#m# of that day,
Oli$ia (amire% was on duty as a lady fris&er at "ate 1/ of the DA5A de!arture area# 7er duty was to fris&
de!arting !assengers, em!loyees, and rew and he& for wea!ons, bombs, !rohibited drugs, ontraband
goods, and e.!losi$es# 1hen she fris&ed Cohnson, a de!arting !assenger bound for the United States $ia
+ontinental Airlines +S>912, she felt something hard on the latter*s abdominal area# U!on in4uiry, Mrs#
Cohnson e.!lained she needed to wear two !anty girdles as she had 0ust undergone an o!eration as a result of
an eto!i !regnany# Dot satisfied with the e.!lanation, (amire% re!orted the matter to her su!erior, S'O4
(eynaldo ?mbile, saying ASir, hindi !o a&o naniniwalang !anty lang !o iyon#A She was direted to ta&e
Cohnson to the nearest women*s room for ins!etion# (amire% too& Cohnson to the rest room, aom!anied by
S'O1 (i%alina :ernal# ?mbile stayed outside# 5nside the women*s room, Cohnson was as&ed again by (amire%
what the hard ob0et on her stomah was and Cohnson ga$e the same answer she had !re$iously gi$en#
(amire% then as&ed her Ato bring out the thing under her girdle#A Cohnson brought out three !lasti !a&s,
whih (amire% then turned o$er to ?mbile, outside the women*s room# 3he onfisated !a&s ontained a
total of 5=8#2 grams of a substane whih was fount by D:5 +hemist "eorge de 6ara to be metham!hetamine
hydrohloride or Ashabu#A ?mbile too& Cohnson and the !lasti !a&s to the 1st (egional A$iation and
Seurity Offie ;1st (ASO< at the arri$al area of the DA5A, where Cohnson*s !ass!ort and ti&et were ta&en
and her luggage o!ened# 'itures were ta&en and her !ersonal belongings were itemi%ed# Cohnson was
harged for the !ossession of ) !lasti bages of metham!hetamine hydrohloride, a regulated drug, weighing
a total of 5=8#2 grams, a $iolation of P1/ of (A /425 ;-angerous -rugs At<, as amended by (A 9/59# On 14
May 1999, the (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh 118, 'asay +ity, found Cohnson guilty and sentened her to suffer
the !enalty of relusion !er!etua and to !ay a fine of '588,888#88 and the osts of the suit# Cohnson a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the e.tensi$e searh made on Cohnson at the air!ort $iolates her right against unreasonable
searh and sei%ure#
$el%! 3he onstitutional right of the aused was not $iolated as she was ne$er !laed under ustodial
in$estigation but was $alidly arrested without warrant !ursuant to the !ro$isions of Setion 5, (ule 11) of tie
19=5 (ules of +riminal 'roedure whih !ro$ides that AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a
warrant, arrest a !ersonH ;a< when in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually
ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< when an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted and
!erson to be arrested has ommitted it, and ...#A 3he irumstanes surrounding the arrest of the aused
falls in either !aragra!h ;a< or ;b< of the (ule abo$e ited, hene the allegation that she has been sub0eted to
ustodial in$estigation is far from being aurate# 3he metham!hetamine hydrohloride sei%ed from her
during the routine fris& at the air!ort was a4uired legitimately !ursuant to air!ort seurity !roedures#
'ersons may lose the !rotetion of the searh and sei%ure lause by e.!osure of their !ersons or !ro!erty to
the !ubli in a manner refleting a la& of sub0eti$e e.!etation of !ri$ay, whih e.!etation soiety is
!re!ared to reogni%e as reasonable# Suh reognition is im!liit in air!ort seurity !roedures# 1ith
inreased onern o$er air!lane hi0a&ing and terrorism has ome inreased seurity at the nation*s air!orts#
'assengers attem!ting to board an airraft routinely !ass through metal detetors, their arry>on baggage as
well as he&ed luggage are routinely sub0eted to .>ray sans# Should these !roedures suggest the !resene
of sus!iious ob0ets, !hysial searhes are onduted to determine what the ob0ets are# 3here is little
4uestion that suh searhes are reasonable, gi$en their minimal intrusi$eness, the gra$ity of the safety
interests in$ol$ed, and the redued !ri$ay e.!etations assoiated with airline tra$el# 5ndeed, tra$elers are
often notified through air!ort !ubli address systems, signs, and noties in their airline ti&ets that they are
sub0et to searh and, if any !rohibited materials or substanes are found, suh would be sub0et to sei%ure#
3hese announements !lae !assengers on notie that ordinary onstitutional !rotetions against warrantless
searhes and sei%ures do not a!!ly to routine air!ort !roedures# 3he !a&s of metham!hetamine
hydrohloride ha$ing thus been obtained through a $alid warrantless searh, they are admissible in e$idene
against Cohnson# +orollarily, her subse4uent arrest, although li&ewise without warrant, was 0ustified sine it
was effeted u!on the diso$ery and reo$ery of AshabuA in her !erson in flagrante delito#
129 &eo'le vs. 4#z#5i [GR 121621, 23 >co3er 2113]
En Banc, 2andoval1.utierre6 (J): !3 concur
Facs! Sometime in Do$ember 199), the 'D' Darotis +ommand issued a direti$e to all +hiefs of
Darotis (egional Field Units to o$er all domesti air!ort terminals within their res!eti$e areas of
res!onsibility, following re!orts that drug traffi&ing is !re$alent in domesti air!orts, and to oordinate with
loal air!ort authorities and the 'AS+OM# 5n the morning of 12 A!ril 1994, 7edishi Su%u&i and 3a&eshi
Jo&etsu, both Ca!anese nationals, entered the !re>de!arture area of the :aolod Air!ort 3erminal# Su%u&i
was bound for Manila $ia flight 1)2 of the 'hili!!ine Airlines and was arrying a small tra$eling bag and a
bo. mar&ed R:ongbong2s !iaya#O At the !re>de!arture area, u!on the ad$ie of +ora%on Sinosa, a i$ilian
!ersonnel of the 'AS+OM, Su%u&i !roeeded to the Rwal&>through metal detetor,O a mahine whih
!rodues a red light and an alarm one it detets the !resene of metalli substane or ob0et# 3hereu!on, the
red light swithed on and the alarm sounded, signifying the !resene of metalli substane either in his !erson
or in the bo. he was arrying# 3his !rom!ted 'O) (hodelin 'oyugao of the 'olie A$iation Seurity
+ommand ;'AS+OM< to fris& him bodily# Finding no metalli ob0et in his body, 'O) 'oyugao !i&ed u!
the bo. of !iaya and !assed it through the mahine# Again, the mahine was ati$ated# 'O) 'oyugao then
ordered Su%u&i to go to the hand>arried luggage ins!etion ounter where se$eral 'AS+OM and DA(+OM
!ersonnel were !resent# S'O1 Arturo +asugod, Sr# re4uested Su%u&i to o!en the bo.# 7e a!!eared tense and
relutant and started to lea$e, but S'O1 +asugod alled him# ?$entually he onsented, saying in faltering
?nglish, Ro!en, o!en#O S'O1 +asugod o!ened the bo. and found therein 1= small !a&s, 19 of whih were
wra!!ed in aluminum foil# S'O1 +asugod o!ened one !a&# 5nside were dried fruiting to!s whih loo&ed
li&e mari0uana# U!on seeing this, Su%u&i ran outside the !re>de!arture area but he was hased by 'O)
'oyugao, S'O1 "ilbert 6inda of the Darotis +ommand ;DA(+OM< and -onato :arne%o of the 'AS+OM#
3hey a!!rehended Su%u&i near the entrane of the terminal and brought him to the 'AS+OM offie# 3hey
also brought 3a&eshi and his wife, 6ourdes 6insangan, to the offie, being sus!ets as ons!irators with
Su%u&i in drug traffi&ing# 6ourdes as&ed !ermission to all Atty# Sil$estre 3ayson# 1hen he arri$ed, the
!olie a!!rised Su%u&i of his onstitutional rights# Meanwhile, S'O1 +asugod weighed the ontents of the
bo. and in$entoried the same# 3he total weight of the sus!eted mari0uana fruiting to!s was 1#9 &ilograms or
1,988 grams# 7e then drafted a Ronfisation reei!tO whih Su%u&i, u!on the ad$ie of Atty# 3ayson, refused
to a&nowledge# S'O1 +asugod turned o$er Su%u&i to S'O1 6inda for in$estigation# Subse4uently, Su%u&i
and his om!anions were brought to the !roseutor2s offie for in4uest and !laed under the ustody of
+B5ns!etor ?rnesto Alantara at the DA(+OM offie# 3he bo. with its ontents was brought to the 'D'
+rime 6aboratory# 'B5ns!etor (ea Abastillas Filla$ienio, the forensi hemist of the 'hili!!ine Dational
'olie ;'D'< +rime 6aboratory, onduted three tests on the s!eimen sam!les whih !ro$ed !ositi$e for
mari0uana# Su%u&i was harged with unlawful !ossession of mari0uana, a !rohibited drug, in $iolation of the
-angerous -rug At# Su%u&i entered a !lea of not guilty, and trial followed thereafter# 3he (egional 3rial
+ourt, :ranh 45, :aolod +ity in +riminal +ase 94>1/188 on$ited 7edishi Su%u&i of illegal !ossession of
mari0uana, defined and !enali%ed under Setion =, Artile 55 of (A /525, as amended, and sentened him to
suffer the !enalty of death and to !ay a fine of '18,888,888#88# 7ene, the automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether the 'AS+OM has the authority to ins!et luggages or hand>arried bags#
$el%! 3he 'olie A$iation Seurity +ommand ;'AS+OM< is the im!lementing arm of the Dational Ation
+ommittee on Anti>7i0a&ing ;DA+A7<, whih is a reation of 'residential 6etter of 5nstrution ;6O5< )99,
dated 2= A!ril 199/# On 1= February 199=, a Memorandum of Understanding among the Seretary of
Dational -efense, the Seretary of 'ubli 1or&s, 3rans!ortation and +ommuniation, the Seretary of
Custie, the -iretor "eneral, Dational 5ntelligene and Seurity Authority and the Seretary of Finane was
signed# Under the said Memorandum of Understanding the then AFS?+OM ;now 'AS+OM< shall ha$e the
following funtions and res!onsibilitiesH ;1< Seure all air!orts against offensi$e and terroristi ats that
threaten i$il a$iation, ;2< Underta&e airraft anti>hi0a&ing o!erations, ;)< ?.erise o!erational ontrol and
su!er$ision o$er all agenies in$ol$ed in air!ort seurity o!erations, ;4< 3a&e all neessary !re$enti$e
measures to maintain !eae and order, and !ro$ide other !ertinent !ubli safety ser$ies within the air!orts,
...# :ased u!on the Memorandum of Understanding, !ursuant to 'resident 6O5 )99, in relation to (A /2)5,
the 'AS+OM had the legal authority to be at the :aolod Air!ort, :aolod +ity and to ins!et luggages or
hand>arried bags# 3his is not the first time that the +ourt reogni%e a searh onduted !ursuant to routine
air!ort seurity !roedure as an e.e!tion to the !rosri!tion against warrantless searhes# 5n 'eo!le $s#
+anton, and 'eo!le $s# Cohnson, the +ourt $alidated the searh onduted on the de!arting !assengers and the
onse4uent sei%ure of the shabu found in their !ersons# +learly, the 'AS+OM agents ha$e the right under the
law to ondut searh of !rohibited materials or substanes# 3o sim!ly refuse !assengers arrying sus!eted
illegal items to enter the !re>de!arture area is to de!ri$e the authorities of their duty to ondut searh, thus
santioning im!otene and ineffeti$ity of the law enforers, to the detriment of soiety# 5t should be stressed,
howe$er, that whene$er the right against unreasonable searh and sei%ure is hallenged, an indi$idual may
hoose between in$o&ing the onstitutional !rotetion or wai$ing his right by gi$ing onsent to the searh or
sei%ure# 7ere, Su%u&i $oluntarily ga$e his onsent to the searh onduted by the 'AS+OM agents#
1(1 +#rea# o7 .#so;s vs. >:ario [GR 13(1(1, 31 Marc, 2111]
Facs! On 9 -eember 199=, Feli!e A# :artolome, -istrit +olletor of +ustoms of +ebu, issued a 1arrant of
Sei%ure and -etention of 25,888 bags of rie, bearing the name of ASDO1MAD, Milled in 'alawanA shi!!ed
on board the MBF AAlberto,A whih was then do&ed at 'ier / in +ebu +ity# 3he warrant was issued on the
basis of the re!ort of the ?onomi 5ntelligene and 5n$estigation :ureau ;?55:<, (egion F55 that the rie had
been illegally im!orted# 3he re!ort stated that the rie was landed in 'alawan by a foreign $essel and then
!laed in sa&s mar&ed ASDO1MAD, Milled in 'alawan#A 5t was then shi!!ed to +ebu +ity on board the
$essel MBF AAlberto#A Forfeiture !roeedings were started in the ustoms offie in +ebu ;+ebu Sei%ure
5dentifiation +ase 19>9=<# On 18 -eember 199=, Mar& Montelibano, the onsignee of the sa&s of rie, and
his buyer, Delson Ogario, filed a om!laint for in0untion ;+i$il +ase +?:>2)899< in the (egional 3rial
+ourt ;(3+< of +ebu +ity# 5n se!arate motions, the :ureau of +ustoms ;:O+<, 'ort of +ebu and the ?55:, as
well as the 'hili!!ine Da$y and +oast "uard, sought the dismissal of the om!laint on the ground that the
(3+ had no 0urisdition, but their motions were denied in a resolution dated 11 Canuary 1999# :O+ and ?55:
mo$ed for a reonsideration, but their motion was denied by the (3+ in its order dated 25 Canuary 1999# 5n
the same order, the (3+ also inreased the amount of Ogario and Montelibano2s bond to '22,588,888#88# On
ertiorari to the +ourt of A!!eals, the resolution and order of the (3+ were sustained on 15 A!ril 1999#
Aordingly, on 2/ A!ril 1999, u!on motion of Ogario, et# al#, the (3+ ordered the sheriff to !lae in their
!ossession the 25,888 bags of rie# Meanwhile, in the forfeiture !roeedings before the +olletor of +ustoms
of +ebu, a deision was rendered forfeiting the $essel MBF AAlbertoA, the 25,888 bags of rie brand
ASnowmanA, and the two ;2< tru&s bearing 'lates "++ =44 and "7@ )== in fa$or of the go$ernment to be
dis!osed of in the manner !resribed by law while releasing the 9 tru&s bearing 'lates "FE 559, "FE 249,
3'F 92/, ":S =94, "F? 9=9, and "-F 54= in fa$or of their res!eti$e owners u!on !ro!er identifiation
and om!liane with !ertinent laws, rules and regulations# Montelibano did not ta&e !art in the !roeedings
before the -istrit +olletor of +ustoms des!ite due notie sent to his ounsel beause he refused to reogni%e
the $alidity of the forfeiture !roeedings On )8 A!ril 1999, Ogario and Montelibano filed the !etition for
re$iew on ertiorari of the deision of the +ourt of A!!eals#
"ss#e! 1hether the (egional 3rial +ourts are om!etent to !ass u!on the $alidity or regularity of the sei%ure
and forfeiture !roeedings onduted by the :ureau of +ustoms#
$el%! (egional 3rial +ourts are de$oid of any om!etene to !ass u!on the $alidity or regularity of sei%ure
and forfeiture !roeedings onduted by the :ureau of +ustoms and to en0oin or otherwise interfere with
these !roeedings# 3he +olletor of +ustoms sitting in sei%ure and forfeiture !roeedings has e.lusi$e
0urisdition to hear and determine all 4uestions touhing on the sei%ure and forfeiture of dutiable goods# 3he
(egional 3rial +ourts are !reluded from assuming ogni%ane o$er suh matters e$en through !etitions of
ertiorari, !rohibition or mandamus# Under the law, the 4uestion of whether !robable ause e.ists for the
sei%ure of the sub0et sa&s of rie is not for the (egional 3rial +ourt to determine# 3he ustoms authorities do
not ha$e to !ro$e to the satisfation of the ourt that the artiles on board a $essel were im!orted from abroad
or are intended to be shi!!ed abroad before they may e.erise the !ower to effet ustoms2 searhes, sei%ures,
or arrests !ro$ided by law and ontinue with the administrati$e hearings#
1(1 <erry vs. >,io [392 84 1, 11 *#ne 196(]
'arren (J)
Facs! Martin MFadden, a +le$eland !olie deteti$e, on a downtown beat whih he had been !atrolling for
many years, obser$ed two strangers ;3erry and (ihard +hilton< on a street orner# 7e saw them !roeed
alternately ba& and forth along an idential route, strolling down 7uron (oad, !ausing to stare in the same
store window, whih they did for a total of about 24 times# ?ah om!letion of the route was followed by a
onferene between the two on a orner, at one of whih they were 0oined by a third man ;Jat%< who left
swiftly# Sus!eting the two men of Aasing a 0ob, a sti&>u!,A the offier followed them and saw them re0oin
the third man a ou!le of blo&s away in front of a store# 3he offier a!!roahed the three, identified himself
as a !olieman, and as&ed their names# 3he men Amumbled something,A whereu!on MFadden s!un 3erry
around, !atted down his outside lothing, and found in his o$eroat !o&et, but was unable to remo$e, a
!istol# 3he offier ordered the three into the store# 7e remo$ed 3erry*s o$eroat, too& out a re$ol$er, and
ordered the three to fae the wall with their hands raised# 7e !atted down the outer lothing of +hilton and
Jat% and sei%ed a re$ol$er from +hilton*s outside o$eroat !o&et# 7e did not !ut his hands under the outer
garments of Jat% ;sine he diso$ered nothing in his !at>down whih might ha$e been a wea!on<, or under
3erry*s or +hilton*s outer garments until he felt the guns# 3he three were ta&en to the !olie station# 3erry and
+hilton were harged with arrying onealed wea!ons# 3he defense mo$ed to su!!ress the wea!ons# 3hough
the trial ourt re0eted the !roseution theory that the guns had been sei%ed during a searh inident to a
lawful arrest, the ourt denied the motion to su!!ress and admitted the wea!ons into e$idene on the ground
that the offier had ause to belie$e that 3erry and +hilton were ating sus!iiously, that their interrogation
was warranted, and that the offier for his own !rotetion had the right to !at down their outer lothing ha$ing
reasonable ause to belie$e that they might be armed# 3he ourt distinguished between an in$estigatory Asto!A
and an arrest, and between a Afris&A of the outer lothing for wea!ons and a full>blown searh for e$idene of
rime# 3erry and +hilton were found guilty, an intermediate a!!ellate ourt affirmed, and the State Su!reme
+ourt dismissed the a!!eal on the ground that Ano substantial onstitutional 4uestionA was in$ol$ed#
"ss#e! 1hether it is always unreasonable for a !olieman to sei%e a !erson and sub0et him to a limited searh
for wea!ons unless there is !robable ause for an arrest#
$el%! 3he Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures, made a!!liable to the States
by the Fourteenth Amendment, A!rotets !eo!le, not !laes,A and therefore a!!lies as muh to the iti%en on
the streets as well as at home or elsewhere# 3he issue in this ase is not the abstrat !ro!riety of the !olie
ondut but the admissibility against !etitioner of the e$idene uno$ered by the searh and sei%ure# 3he
e.lusionary rule annot !ro!erly be in$o&ed to e.lude the !roduts of legitimate and restrained !olie
in$estigati$e tehni4ues, and this +ourt*s a!!ro$al of suh tehni4ues should not disourage remedies other
than the e.lusionary rule to urtail !olie abuses for whih that is not an effeti$e santion# 3he Fourth
Amendment a!!lies to Asto! and fris&A !roedures suh as those followed here# 1hene$er a !olie offier
aosts an indi$idual and restrains his freedom to wal& away, he has Asei%edA that !erson within the meaning
of the Fourth Amendment# A areful e.!loration of the outer surfaes of a !erson*s lothing in an attem!t to
find wea!ons is a AsearhA under that Amendment# 1here a reasonably !rudent offier is warranted in the
irumstanes of a gi$en ase in belie$ing that his safety or that of others is endangered, he may ma&e a
reasonable searh for wea!ons of the !erson belie$ed by him to be armed and dangerous regardless of
whether he has !robable ause to arrest that indi$idual for rime or the absolute ertainty that the indi$idual is
armed# 3hough the !olie must whene$er !ratiable seure a warrant to ma&e a searh and sei%ure, that
!roedure annot be followed where swift ation based u!on on>the>s!ot obser$ations of the offier on the
beat is re4uired# 3he reasonableness of any !artiular searh and sei%ure must be assessed in light of the
!artiular irumstanes against the standard of whether a man of reasonable aution is warranted in belie$ing
that the ation ta&en was a!!ro!riate# 3he offier here was !erforming a legitimate funtion of in$estigating
sus!iious ondut when he deided to a!!roah 3erry and his om!anions# An offier 0ustified in belie$ing
that an indi$idual whose sus!iious beha$ior he is in$estigating at lose range is armed may, to neutrali%e the
threat of !hysial harm, ta&e neessary measures to determine whether that !erson is arrying a wea!on# A
searh for wea!ons in the absene of !robable ause to arrest must be stritly irumsribed by the e.igenies
of the situation# An offier may ma&e an intrusion short of arrest where he has reasonable a!!rehension of
danger before being !ossessed of information 0ustifying arrest# 3he offier*s !roteti$e sei%ure of 3erry and
his om!anions and the limited searh whih he made were reasonable, both at their ine!tion and as
onduted# 3he ations of 3erry and his om!anions were onsistent with the offier*s hy!othesis that they
were ontem!lating a daylight robbery and were armed# 3he offier*s searh was onfined to what was
minimally neessary to determine whether the men were armed, and the intrusion, whih was made for the
sole !ur!ose of !roteting himself and others nearby, was onfined to asertaining the !resene of wea!ons#
7erein, Offier MFadden !atted down the outer lothing of 3erry and his two om!anions# 7e did not !lae
his hands in their !o&ets or under the outer surfae of their garments until he had felt wea!ons, and then he
merely reahed for and remo$ed the guns# 7e did not ondut a general e.!loratory searh for whate$er
e$idene of riminal ati$ity he might find# 3hus, the re$ol$er sei%ed from 3erry was !ro!erly admitted in
e$idene against him# At the time MFadden sei%ed 3erry and searhed him for wea!ons, Offier MFadden
had reasonable grounds to belie$e that 3erry was armed and dangerous, and it was neessary for the
!rotetion of himself and others to ta&e swift measures to diso$er the true fats and neutrali%e the threat of
harm if it materiali%ed# 3he !olieman arefully restrited his searh to what was a!!ro!riate to the diso$ery
of the !artiular items whih he sought# ?ah ase of this sort will, of ourse, ha$e to be deided on its own
fats# 1here a !olie offier obser$es unusual ondut whih leads him reasonably to onlude in light of his
e.!eriene that riminal ati$ity may be afoot and that the !ersons with whom he is dealing may be armed
and !resently dangerous, where in the ourse of in$estigating this beha$ior he identifies himself as a
!olieman and ma&es reasonable in4uiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the enounter ser$es to
dis!el his reasonable fear for his own or others* safety, he is entitled for the !rotetion of himself and others in
the area to ondut a arefully limited searh of the outer lothing of suh !ersons in an attem!t to diso$er
wea!ons whih might be used to assault him# Suh a searh is a reasonable searh under the Fourth
Amendment, and any wea!ons sei%ed may !ro!erly be introdued in e$idene against the !erson from whom
they were ta&en#
1(2 &eo'le v. 4olayao [GR 119221, 21 4e'e;3er 1996]
2econd Division, +omero (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 9 Cune 1992, +AF"U members, headed by S'O) Dino, were onduting an intelligene !atrol to
$erify re!orts on the !resene of armed !ersons roaming around the barangays of +aibiran# 5n :aragay Onion,
they met the 5>man grou! of aused Dilo Solayao, who was also wearing a amouflage uniform# 7is
om!anions, u!on seeing the go$ernment agents, fled# S'O) DiNo told Salayao not to run away and
introdued himself as A'+,A after whih he sei%ed the dried oonut lea$es whih the latter was arrying and
found wra!!ed in it a 49>inh long homemade firearm loally &nown as Alatong#A 1hen he as&ed Salayao
who issued him a liense to arry said firearm or whether he was onneted with the military or any
intelligene grou!, the latter answered that he had no !ermission to !ossess the same# 3hereu!on, S'O) DiNo
onfisated the firearm and turned him o$er to the ustody of the !oliemen of +aibiran who subse4uently
in$estigated him and harged him with illegal !ossession of firearm# Salayao did not ontest the onfisation
of the shotgun but a$erred that this was only gi$en to him by one of his om!anions, 7ermogenes +enining,
when it was still wra!!ed in oonut lea$es, whih they were using the oonut lea$es as a torh# Salayao2s
laim was orroborated by one 'edro :alano# On 15 August 1994, the (3+ of Da$al :iliran ;:ranh 1/<
found Salayao guilty of illegal !ossession of firearm under Setion 1 of '- 1=// and im!osed u!on him the
!enalty of im!risonment ranging from relusion tem!oral ma.imum to relusion !er!etua# 3he trial ourt,
ha$ing found no mitigating but one aggra$ating irumstane of nighttime, sentened aused>a!!ellant to
suffer the !rison term of relusion !er!etua with the aessory !enalties !ro$ided by law# Salayao a!!ealed to
the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh u!on Solayao, yielding the firearm wra!!ed in oonut lea$es, is $alid#
$el%! Dilo Solayao and his om!anions* drun&en atuations aroused the sus!iion of S'O) DiNo*s grou!, as
well as the fat that he himself was attired in a amouflage uniform or a 0ungle suit and that u!on es!ying the
!eae offiers, his om!anions fled# 5t should be noted that the !eae offiers were !reisely on an
intelligene mission to $erify re!orts that armed !ersons were roaming around the barangays of +aibiran# 3he
irumstanes are similar to those obtaining in 'osadas $# +ourt of A!!eals where this +ourt held that Aat the
time the !eae offiers identified themsel$es and a!!rehended the !etitioner as he attem!ted to flee, they did
not &now that he had ommitted, or was atually ommitting the offense of illegal !ossession of firearm and
ammunitions# 3hey 0ust sus!eted that he was hiding something in the buri bag# 3hey did not &now what its
ontents were# 3he said irumstanes did not 0ustify an arrest without a warrant#A As with 'osadas, the ase
herein onstitutes an instane where a searh and sei%ure may be effeted without first ma&ing an arrest#
3here was 0ustifiable ause to Asto! and fris&A Solayao when his om!anions fled u!on seeing the go$ernment
agents# Under the irumstanes, the go$ernment agents ould not !ossibly ha$e !roured a searh warrant
first# 3hus, there was no $iolation of the onstitutional guarantee against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures#
Dor was there error on the !art of the trial ourt when it admitted the homemade firearm as e$idene#
1(3 Manalili v. .A [GR 113442, 9 >co3er 1992]
Third Division, 7angani/an (J): 4 concur
Facs! At about 2H18 !#m# of 11 A!ril 19==, !oliemen from the Anti>Darotis Unit of the Jaloo&an +ity
'olie Station were onduting a sur$eillane along A# Mabini street, Jaloo&an +ity, in front of the Jaloo&an
+ity +emetery# 3he !oliemen were 'at# (omeo ?s!iritu and 'at# Anger 6umabas and a dri$er named Arnold
?nri4ue% was dri$ing a 3amaraw $ehile whih was the offiial ar of the 'olie Station of Jaloo&an +ity#
3he sur$eillane was being made beause of information that drug addits were roaming the area in front of
the Jaloo&an +ity +emetery# U!on reahing the Jaloo&an +ity +emetery, the !oliemen alighted from their
$ehile# 3hey then haned u!on a male !erson in front of the emetery who a!!eared high on drugs# 3he
male !erson was obser$ed to ha$e reddish eyes and to be wal&ing in a swaying manner# 1hen this male
!erson tried to a$oid the !oliemen, the latter a!!roahed him and introdued themsel$es as !olie offiers#
3he !oliemen then as&ed the male !erson what he was holding in his hands# 3he male !erson tried to resist#
'at# (omeo ?s!iritu as&ed the male !erson if he ould see what said male !erson had in his hands# 3he latter
showed the wallet and allowed 'at# (omeo ?s!iritu to e.amine the same# 'at# ?s!iritu too& the wallet and
e.amined it# 7e found sus!eted rushed mari0uana residue inside# 7e &e!t the wallet and its mari0uana
ontents# 3he male !erson was then brought to the Anti>Darotis Unit of the Jaloo&an +ity 'olie
7ead4uarters and was turned o$er to +!l# 1ilfredo 3amondong for in$estigation# 'at# ?s!iritu also turned
o$er to +!l# 3amondong the onfisated wallet and its sus!eted mari0uana ontents# 3he man turned out to be
Alain Manalili y -i%on# On 11 A!ril 19==, Manalili was harged by Assistant +alooan +ity Fisal ?# Cuan (#
:autista with $iolation of Setion =, Artile 55 of (e!ubli At /425# U!on his arraignment on 21 A!ril 19==,
Manalili !leaded Anot guiltyA to the harge# 1ith the agreement of the !ubli !roseutor, Manalili was
released after filing a '18,888#88 bail bond# After trial in due ourse, the (egional 3rial +ourt of +alooan
+ity, :ranh 124, ating as a S!eial +riminal +ourt, rendered on 19 May 19=9 a deision on$iting
a!!ellant of illegal !ossession of mari0uana residue# Manalili remained on !ro$isional liberty# Atty# :en0amin
(a%on, ounsel for the defense, filed a Dotie of A!!eal dated )1 May 19=9# On 19 A!ril 199), the +ourt of
A!!eals denied the a!!eal and affirmed the trial ourt# 3he a!!ellate ourt denied reonsideration $ia its
(esolution dated 28 Canuary 1994# Manalili filed a !etition for re$iew on ertiorari before the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether a searh and sei%ure ould be effeted without neessarily being !reeded by an arrest#
$el%! 5n the landmar& ase of 3erry $s# Ohio, a sto!>and>fris& was defined as the $ernaular designation of
the right of a !olie offier to sto! a iti%en on the street, interrogate him, and !at him for wea!on;s<# 5n
allowing suh a searh, the interest of effeti$e rime !re$ention and detetion allows a !olie offier to
a!!roah a !erson, in a!!ro!riate irumstanes and manner, for !ur!oses of in$estigating !ossible riminal
beha$ior e$en though there is insuffiient !robable ause to ma&e an atual arrest# 1hat 0ustified the limited
searh was the more immediate interest of the !olie offier in ta&ing ste!s to assure himself that the !erson
with whom he was dealing was not armed with a wea!on that ould une.!etedly and fatally be used against
him# 5t did not, howe$er, abandon the rule that the !olie must, whene$er !ratiable, obtain ad$ane 0udiial
a!!ro$al of searhes and sei%ures through the warrant !roedure, e.used only by e.igent irumstanes# 5n
'hili!!ine 0uris!rudene, the general rule is that a searh and sei%ure must be $alidated by a !re$iously
seured 0udiial warrant, otherwise, suh searh and sei%ure is unonstitutional and sub0et to hallenge#
Setion 2, Artile 555 of the 19=9 +onstitution, gi$es this guarantee# 3his right, howe$er, is not absolute# 3he
reent ase of 'eo!le $s# 6aerna enumerated fi$e reogni%ed e.e!tions to the rule against warrantless
searh and sei%ure, $i%#H A;1< searh inidental to a lawful arrest, ;2< searh of mo$ing $ehiles, ;)< sei%ure in
!lain $iew, ;4< ustoms searh, and ;5< wai$er by the aused themsel$es of their right against unreasonable
searh and sei%ure#A 5n 'eo!le $s# ?ninada, the +ourt further e.!lained that in these ases, the searh and
sei%ure may be made only with !robable ause as the essential re4uirement# Sto!>and>fris& has already been
ado!ted as another e.e!tion to the general rule against a searh without a warrant# 5n 'osadas $s# +ourt of
A!!eals, the +ourt held that there were many instanes where a searh and sei%ure ould be effeted without
neessarily being !reeded by an arrest, one of whih was sto!>and>fris&# 3o re4uire the !olie offiers to
searh the bag only after they had obtained a searh warrant might !ro$e to be useless, futile and muh too
late under the irumstanes# 5n suh a situation, it was reasonable for a !olie offier to sto! a sus!iious
indi$idual briefly in order to determine his identity or to maintain the status 4uo while obtaining more
information, rather than to sim!ly shrug his shoulders and allow a rime to our# 7erein, 'atrolman ?s!iritu
and his om!anions obser$ed during their sur$eillane that Manalili had red eyes and was wobbling li&e a
drun& along the +alooan +ity +emetery, whih aording to !olie information was a !o!ular hangout of
drug addits# From his e.!eriene as a member of the Anti>Darotis Unit of the +alooan +ity 'olie, suh
sus!iious beha$ior was harateristi of drug addits who were Ahigh#A 3he !oliemen therefore had
suffiient reason to sto! Manalili to in$estigate if he was atually high on drugs# -uring suh in$estigation,
they found mari0uana in his !ossession# 3he searh was $alid, being a&in to a sto!>and>fris&#
1(4 Malaca vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 123)9), 12 Dece;3er 1992]
En Banc, Davide Jr* (J): !! concur
Facs! On 29 August 1998, at about /H)8 !#m#, allegedly in res!onse to bomb threats re!orted se$en days
earlier, (odolfo Su of the 1estern 'olie -istrit, Metro!olitan 'olie Fore of the 5ntegrated Dational
'olie, 'olie Station Do# ), Iuia!o, Manila, was on foot !atrol with three other !olie offiers ;all of them in
uniform< along Iue%on :oule$ard, Iuia!o, Manila, near the Merury -rug store at 'la%a Miranda# 3hey
haned u!on two grou!s of Muslim>loo&ing men, with eah grou!, om!rised of three to four men, !osted at
o!!osite sides of the orner of Iue%on :oule$ard near the Merury -rug Store# 3hese men were ating
sus!iiously with Atheir eyes mo$ing $ery fast#A Su and his om!anions !ositioned themsel$es at strategi
!oints and obser$ed both grou!s for about )8 minutes# 3he !olie offiers then a!!roahed one grou! of men,
who then fled in different diretions# As the !oliemen ga$e hase, Su aught u! with and a!!rehended
Sammy Malaat y Mandar ;who Su reogni%ed, inasmuh as allegedly the !re$ious Saturday, 25 August
1998, li&ewise at 'la%a Miranda, Su saw Malaat and 2 others attem!t to detonate a grenade<# U!on searhing
Malaat, Su found a fragmentation grenade tu&ed inside the latter*s Afront waist line#A Su*s om!anion, !olie
offier (ogelio Malibiran, a!!rehended Abdul +asan from whom a #)= aliber re$ol$er was reo$ered#
Malaat and +asan were then brought to 'olie Station ) where Su !laed an AEA mar& at the bottom of the
grenade and thereafter ga$e it to his ommander# Su did not issue any reei!t for the grenade he allegedly
reo$ered from Malaat# On )8 August 1998, Malaat was harged with $iolating Setion ) of 'residential
-eree 1=//# At arraignment on 9 Otober 1998, !etitioner, assisted by ounsel de offiio, entered a !lea of
not guilty# Malaat denied the harges and e.!lained that he only reently arri$ed in Manila# 7owe$er, se$eral
other !olie offiers mauled him, hitting him with benhes and guns# 'etitioner was one again searhed, but
nothing was found on him# 7e saw the grenade only in ourt when it was !resented# 5n its deision dated 18
February 1994 but !romulgated on 15 February 1994, the trial ourt ruled that the warrantless searh and
sei%ure of Malaat was a&in to a Asto! and fris&,A where a Awarrant and sei%ure an be effeted without
neessarily being !reeded by an arrestA and Awhose ob0et is either to maintain the status 4uo momentarily
while the !olie offier see&s to obtain more informationA, and that the sei%ure of the grenade from Malaat
was inidental to a lawful arrest# 3he trial ourt thus found Malaat guilty of the rime of illegal !ossession
of e.!losi$es under Setion ) of '- 1=//, and sentened him to suffer the !enalty of not less than 19 years, 4
months and 1 day of (elusion 3em!oral, as minimum, and not more than )8 years of (elusion 'er!etua, as
ma.imum# On 1= February 1994, Malaat filed a notie of a!!eal indiating that he was a!!ealing to the
Su!reme +ourt# 7owe$er, the reord of the ase was forwarded to the +ourt of A!!eals ;+A>"( +( 159==<#
5n its deision of 24 Canuary 199/, the +ourt of A!!eals affirmed the trial ourt# Manalili filed a !etition for
re$iew with the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh made on Malaat is $alid, !ursuant to the e.e!tion of Rsto! and fris&#O
$el%! 3he general rule as regards arrests, searhes and sei%ures is that a warrant is needed in order to $alidly
effet the same# 3he +onstitutional !rohibition against unreasonable arrests, searhes and sei%ures refers to
those effeted without a $alidly issued warrant, sub0et to ertain e.e!tions# As regards $alid warrantless
arrests, these are found in Setion 5, (ule 11) of the (ules of +ourt# A warrantless arrest under the
irumstanes ontem!lated under Setion 5;a< has been denominated as one Ain flagrante delito,A while that
under Setion 5;b< has been desribed as a Ahot !ursuitA arrest# 3urning to $alid warrantless searhes, they are
limited to the followingH ;1< ustoms searhes, ;2< searh of mo$ing $ehiles, ;)< sei%ure of e$idene in !lain
$iew, ;4< onsent searhes, ;5< a searh inidental to a lawful arrest, and ;/< a Asto! and fris&#A 3he one!ts
of a Asto!>and>fris&A and of a searh inidental to a lawful arrest must not be onfused# 3hese two ty!es of
warrantless searhes differ in terms of the re4uisite 4uantum of !roof before they may be $alidly effeted and
in their allowable so!e# 5n a searh inidental to a lawful arrest, as the !reedent arrest determines the
$alidity of the inidental searh# 7ere, there ould ha$e been no $alid in flagrante delito or hot !ursuit arrest
!reeding the searh in light of the la& of !ersonal &nowledge on the !art of Su, the arresting offier, or an
o$ert !hysial at, on the !art of Malaat, indiating that a rime had 0ust been ommitted, was being
ommitted or was going to be ommitted# 'lainly, the searh onduted on Malaat ould not ha$e been one
inidental to a lawful arrest# On the other hand, while !robable ause is not re4uired to ondut a Asto! and
fris&,A it ne$ertheless holds that mere sus!iion or a hunh will not $alidate a Asto! and fris&#A A genuine
reason must e.ist, in light of the !olie offier*s e.!eriene and surrounding onditions, to warrant the belief
that the !erson detained has wea!ons onealed about him# Finally, a Asto!>and>fris&A ser$es a two>fold
interestH ;1< the general interest of effeti$e rime !re$ention and detetion, whih underlies the reognition
that a !olie offier may, under a!!ro!riate irumstanes and in an a!!ro!riate manner, a!!roah a !erson
for !ur!oses of in$estigating !ossible riminal beha$ior e$en without !robable ause, and ;2< the more
!ressing interest of safety and self>!reser$ation whih !ermit the !olie offier to ta&e ste!s to assure himself
that the !erson with whom he deals is not armed with a deadly wea!on that ould une.!etedly and fatally be
used against the !olie offier# 7ere, there are at least three ;)< reasons why the Asto!>and>fris&A was in$alidH
First, there is gra$e doubts as to Su*s laim that Malaat was a member of the grou! whih attem!ted to bomb
'la%a Miranda 2 days earlier# 3his laim is neither su!!orted by any !olie re!ort or reord nor orroborated
by any other !olie offier who allegedly hased that grou!# Seond, there was nothing in Malaat*s beha$ior
or ondut whih ould ha$e reasonably eliited e$en mere sus!iion other than that his eyes were Amo$ing
$ery fastA K an obser$ation whih lea$es us inredulous sine Su and his teammates were nowhere near
Malaat and it was already /H)8 !#m#, thus !resumably dus&# Malaat and his om!anions were merely
standing at the orner and were not reating any ommotion or trouble# 3hird, there was at all no ground,
!robable or otherwise, to belie$e that Malaat was armed with a deadly wea!on# Done was $isible to Su, for
as he admitted, the alleged grenade was Adiso$eredA Ainside the front waistlineA of Malaat, and from all
indiations as to the distane between Su and Malaat, any telltale bulge, assuming that Malaat was indeed
hiding a grenade, ould not ha$e been $isible to Su# 1hat is une4ui$oal then are blatant $iolations of
Malaat*s rights solemnly guaranteed in Setions 2 and 12;1< of Artile 555 of the +onstitution#
1() Flori%a vs. *.L. [111 84 9(-1993, 2( Marc, 2111]
.ins/urg (J)
Facs! On 1) Otober 1995, an anonymous aller re!orted to the Miami>-ade 'olie that a young bla& male
standing at a !artiular bus sto! and wearing a !laid shirt was arrying a gun# 3here is no audio reording of
the ti!, and nothing is &nown about the informant# Sometime after the !olie reei$ed the ti!, two offiers
were instruted to res!ond# 3hey arri$ed at the bus sto! about / minutes later and saw ) bla& males A0ust
hanging out LthereM#A One of the three, C# 6#, was wearing a !laid shirt# A!art from the ti!, the offiers had no
reason to sus!et any of the three of illegal ondut# 3he offiers did not see a firearm, and C# 6# made no
threatening or otherwise unusual mo$ements# One of the offiers a!!roahed C# 6#, told him to !ut his hands
u! on the bus sto!, fris&ed him, and sei%ed a gun from C# 6#*s !o&et# 3he seond offier fris&ed the other two
indi$iduals, against whom no allegations had been made, and found nothing# C# 6#, who was at the time of the
fris& A18 days shy of his 1/th birthLdayM,A was harged under state law with arrying a onealed firearm
without a liense and !ossessing a firearm while under the age of 1=# 7e mo$ed to su!!ress the gun as the
fruit of an unlawful searh, and the trial ourt granted his motion# 3he intermediate a!!ellate ourt re$ersed,
but the Su!reme +ourt of Florida 4uashed that deision and held the searh in$alid under the Fourth
Amendment#
"ss#e! 1hether the anonymous ti! is suffiient basis to ondut Rsto! adn fris&O u!on the !erson of C#6#
$el%! 5n 3erry $# Ohio ;)92 US 1 L19/=M<, it was held that Awhere a !olie offier obser$es unusual ondut
whih leads him reasonably to onlude in light of his e.!eriene that riminal ati$ity may be afoot and that
the !ersons with whom he is dealing may be armed and !resently dangerous, where in the ourse of
in$estigating this beha$ior he identifies himself as a !olieman and ma&es reasonable in4uiries, and where
nothing in the initial stages of the enounter ser$es to dis!el his reasonable fear for his own or others* safety,
he is entitled for the !rotetion of himself and others in the area to ondut a arefully limited searh of the
outer lothing of suh !ersons in an attem!t to diso$er wea!ons whih might be used to assault him#A
7erein, the offiers* sus!iion that C# 6# was arrying a wea!on arose not from any obser$ations of their own
but solely from a all made from an un&nown loation by an un&nown aller# Unli&e a ti! from a &nown
informant whose re!utation an be assessed and who an be held res!onsible if her allegations turn out to be
fabriated, Aan anonymous ti! alone seldom demonstrates the informant*s basis of &nowledge or $eraity#A
3he ti! herein la&ed the moderate indiia of reliability# 3he anonymous all onerning C# 6# !ro$ided no
!rediti$e information and therefore left the !olie without means to test the informant*s &nowledge or
redibility# 3hat the allegation about the gun turned out to be orret does not suggest that the offiers, !rior to
the fris&s, had a reasonable basis for sus!eting C# 6# of engaging in unlawful ondutH 3he reasonableness of
offiial sus!iion must be measured by what the offiers &new before they onduted their searh# All the
!olie had to go on in this ase was the bare re!ort of an un&nown, unaountable informant who neither
e.!lained how he &new about the gun nor su!!lied any basis for belie$ing he had inside information about C#
6# 3he re4uirement that an anonymous ti! bear standard indiia of reliability in order to 0ustify a sto! in no
way diminishes a !olie offier*s !rerogati$e, in aord with 3erry, to ondut a !roteti$e searh of a !erson
who has already been legitimately sto!!ed# On the other hand, an anonymous ti! la&ing indiia of reliability
of the &ind ontem!lated in Adams (:dams v* 'illiams, 4- @2 !43 A!?(B) and 1hite (:la/ama v* 'hite,
4?& @2 3(C) does not 0ustify a sto! and fris& whene$er and howe$er it alleges the illegal !ossession of a
firearm#
1(6 &eo'le vs. +alin:an [GR 11)(34, 13 Fe3r#ary 199)]
2econd Division, 7uno (J): 4 concur
Facs! On )1 August 19==, the Darotis 5ntelligene -i$ision of the :aguio +ity 'olie Station reei$ed a
tele!hone all from an unnamed male informant# 7e !assed the information that Cean :alingan y :obbonan
was going to Manila with a bag filled with mari0uana# Ating on the information, then 'B6t# Manuel Obrera
formed a sur$eillane team to monitor :alingan*s mo$ements# 3he team as de!loyed at different !laes in
:aguio +ity, inluding :alingan*s house on :roo&side and bus stations# +!l# "aria soon re!orted seeing
:alingan mo$e out from her residene at :roo&side and board a ta.iab whih !roeeded to the diretion of
:onifaio Street# :alingan was wearing a !in& dress and arrying a gray luggage with orange or yellow belts#
She also re!orted the ma&e and !late number of the ta.iab whih :alingan boarded# U!on reei$ing the
re!ort, 6t# Obrera ordered +!l# "aria to !roeed to the 'hili!!ine (abbit 3erminal in ase :alingan would go
there# 'at# Jimay, who must ha$e intere!ted +!l# "aria*s message, also re!orted that the ta.iab desribed
by the latter !assed along :onifaio (otunda# 6t# Obrera instruted him to mo$e out and !roeed to the 'olie
+he&!oint at Jennon (oad going to the 'hili!!ine Military Aademy# From his !ost at the -angwa :us
Station, 'at# :ueno informed 6t# Obrera that :alingan boarded a -angwa :us with !late number D3U>15)
bound for Manila# 6t# Obrera !rom!tly !roeeded to the bus station to $erify the re!ort# 3here, he went u! the
bus desribed by 'at# :ueno, and he saw :alingan on the third or fourth seat behind the dri$er*s seat# 5n the
luggage arrier abo$e her head was the gray luggage earlier desribed by +!l# "aria# 7e then left and
!ositioned himself with Ong at the 6a&andula burned area to wait for the bus to de!art# At about 11H88 a#m#,
the bus mo$ed out ;on its way< to Manila $ia Jennon (oad# 6t# Obrera instruted 'at# Jimay, who was at the
Jennon (oad +he&!oint, to sto! the bus when it reahes the !lae# Meanwhile, 6t# Obrera and 6t# Ong
tailed the bus at about 15 to 28 meters behind# As instruted, 'at# Jimay sto!!ed the bus at the Jennon (oad
+he&!oint# 3hat was already at 11H)8 a#m# 6t# Obrera and 'at# Ong arri$ed at the +he&!oint less than a
minute after the bus did and immediately boarded it# 6t# Obrera announed a routinary he&>u!# 'at# Ong
identified himself as a !olieman to :alingan and as&ed her !ermission to he& her luggage, she did not
res!ond and 0ust loo&ed outside the window# 7e o!ened the luggage in the luggage arrier o$erhead and
abo$e :alingan and found sus!eted mari0uana in it# 7e !ulled out the luggage and turned it o$er to 6t#
Obrera# 3hereu!on, 6t# Obrera tried to arrest :alingan but the latter resisted and tried to bite his hand and
furthermore held tightly onto the window !ane# 6t# Obrera as&ed 'at# Ong to feth +!l# "aria from the
'hili!!ine (abbit 3erminal in the +ity !ro!er, so that she would be the one to bring out :alingan from the
bus# 5n the meantime, he remained inside the bus holding the onfisated luggage while the other !assengers
alighted from the bus# After some )8 minutes, "aria arri$ed and !ulled :alingan out of the bus and brought
her to the :aguio +ity 'olie Station and there lo&ed her u! in 0ail# On 24 Otober 19==, :alingan was
harged with Fiolation of Se# 4, Art# 55 of (e!ubli At /425, otherwise &nown as A3he -angerous -rugs
At# On 4 A!ril 19=9, :alingan was arraigned and !leaded not guilty# After trial, :alingan was on$ited by
the (egional 3rial +ourt of :aguio +ity, :ranh 4, and was sentened to suffer the !enalty of life
im!risonment, to !ay a fine of '28,888#88 without subsidiary im!risonment in ase of insol$eny, and to !ay
the osts# :alingan a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh onduted in the -angwa bus, subse4uent to !olie sur$eillane !ursuant to an
informant2s ti!, is $alid#
$el%! 3he searh and sei%ure herein ha!!ened in a mo$ing, !ubli $ehile# 3he rules go$erning searh and
sei%ure ha$e o$er the years been steadily liberali%ed whene$er a mo$ing $ehile is the ob0et of the searh on
the basis of !ratiality# 3his is so onsidering that before a warrant ould be obtained, the !lae, things and
!ersons to be searhed must be desribed to the satisfation of the issuing 0udge K a re4uirement whih
borders on the im!ossible in the ase of smuggling effeted by the use of a mo$ing $ehile that an trans!ort
ontraband from one !lae to another with im!unity# A warrantless searh of a mo$ing $ehile is 0ustified on
the ground that Ait is not !ratiable to seure a warrant beause the $ehile an be 4ui&ly mo$ed out of the
loality or 0urisdition in whih the warrant must be sought#A Un4uestionably, the warrantless searh herein is
not bereft of a !robable ause# 3he :aguio 5D' Darotis 5ntelligene -i$ision reei$ed an information that
:alingan was going to trans!ort mari0uana in a bag to Manila# 3heir sur$eillane o!erations re$ealed that
:alingan, whose mo$ements had been !re$iously monitored by the Darotis -i$ision, boarded a -angwa
bus bound for Manila arrying a sus!iious>loo&ing gray luggage bag# 1hen the mo$ing, !ubli bus was
sto!!ed, her bag, u!on ins!etion, yielded mari0uana# Under those irumstanes, the warrantless searh of
:alingan*s bag was not illegal#
1(2 As#ncion vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 12)9)9, 1 Fe3r#ary 1999]
+esolution o" 3irst Division, 5artine6 (J): 4 concur
Facs! On / -eember 199), in om!liane with the order of the Malabon Munii!al Mayor to intensify
am!aign against illegal drugs !artiularly at :arangay 3aNong, the +hief of the Malabon 'olie Anti>
Darotis Unit ordered his men to ondut !atrol on the area with s!eifi instrution to loo& for a ertain
$ehile with a ertain !late number and wath out for a ertain drug !usher named Fi Fargas# 'ursuant
thereto, S'O1 Ad$inula, 'O) 'aron, 'O) 'ila!il and a !olie aide were dis!athed at around 11H45 !#m##
3he team !roeeded to :arangay 3aNong where they were 0oined by their onfidential informant and the latter
informed them that a gray Dissan ar is always !ar&ed therein for the !ur!ose of selling shabu# 1hile
!atrolling along 6eoNo Street, the onfidential informant !ointed the gray Dissan ar to the !oliemen and
told them that the ou!ant thereof has shabu in his !ossession# 3he !oliemen immediately flagged down the
said ar along First Street and a!!roahed the dri$er, who turned out to be Cose Maria Asunion y Marfori, a
mo$ie ator using the sreen name Fi Fargas and who is also &nown as :inggoy# Ad$inula then as&ed
Asunion if they an ins!et the $ehile# As Asunion aeded thereto, Ad$inula onduted a searh on the
$ehile and he found a !lasti !a&et ontaining white substane sus!eted to be metham!hetamine
hydrohloride beneath the dri$er*s seat# Asunion told the !oliemen that he 0ust borrowed the said ar and he
is not the owner thereof# Asunion was thereafter ta&en at the !olie head4uarters for the !ur!ose of ta&ing his
identifiation# 7owe$er, when he was fris&ed by Ad$inula at the head4uarters, the latter gro!ed something
!rotruding from his underwear, whih when $oluntarily ta&en out by the aused turned out to be a !lasti
!a&et ontaining white substane sus!eted to be metham!hetamine hydrohloride# A !ress onferene was
onduted the following day !resided by Dorthern 'olie -istrit -iretor 'ure%a during whih Asunion
admitted that the metham!hetamine hydrohloride were for his !ersonal use in his shooting# On the other
hand, Asunion denied the harges against him# 7e laimed that on that day, Abetween =H88 and 9H88 !#m#, he
was abduted at gun !oint in front of the house where his son li$es by men who turned out to be members of
the Malabon 'olie Anti>Darotis Unit, that he was told to board at the ba& seat by the !oliemen who too&
o$er the wheels, that he aeded to be brought at the 'agamutang :ayan ng Malabon for drug test but only his
blood !ressure was he&ed in the said hos!ital, that he was thereafter brought at the Offie of the Malabon
'olie Anti>Darotis Unit, and that he is not aware of what ha!!ened at 11H45 !#m# as he was then slee!ing at
the said offie#A On 14 Cune 1994, a deision was rendered by the trial ourt finding Asunion guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the offense harged, adn sentened him to suffer an indeterminate !enalty of 1 year =
months and 28 days as minimum, to ) years / months and 28 days, as ma.imum, and to !ay a fine of
'),888#88# On 29 Cune 1994, a Dotie of A!!eal was filed and the reords of the ase were transmitted by the
trial ourt to the +ourt of A!!eals# On )8 A!ril 199/ a deision was rendered by the a!!ellate ourt,
modifying the !enalty im!osed ;reduing the sentene to / months of arresto mayor in its ma.imum !eriod as
minimum to 4 years and 2 months of !rision orreional in its medium !eriod as ma.imum and deleting the
fine of '),888#88 im!osed on Asunion<# On / August 199/, the +ourt of A!!eals denied the motion for
reonsideration filed by Asunion# Asunion filed a !etition for re$iew on ertiorari Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh u!on Asunion2s $ehile is $alid#
$el%! 1ell>entrenhed in this ountry is the rule that no arrest, searh and sei%ure an be made without a
$alid warrant issued by om!etent 0udiial authority# So sared is this right that no less than the fundamental
law of the land ordains it# 7owe$er, the rule that searh and sei%ure must be su!!orted by a $alid warrant is
not absolute# 3he searh of a mo$ing $ehile is one of the dotrinally ae!ted e.e!tions to the
+onstitutional mandate that no searh or sei%ure shall be made e.e!t by $irtue of a warrant issued by a 0udge
after !ersonally determining the e.istene of !robable ause# 3he !re$alent irumstanes of the ase
undoubtedly bear out the fat that the searh in 4uestion was made as regards a mo$ing $ehile K Asunion*s
$ehile was Aflagged downA by the a!!rehending offiers u!on identifiation# 3herefore, the !olie authorities
were 0ustified in searhing Asunion*s automobile without a warrant sine the situation demanded immediate
ation# 3he a!!rehending offiers e$en sought the !ermission of !etitioner to searh the ar, to whih the
latter agreed# As suh, sine the shabu was diso$ered by $irtue of a $alid warrantless searh and Asunion
himself freely ga$e his onsent to said searh, the !rohibited drugs found as a result were admissible in
e$idene#
1(( &a'a vs. Ma:o [GR L-22361, 2( Fe3r#ary 196(]
En Banc, Daldivar (J): ? concur
Facs! Martin Alagao, head of the ounter>intelligene unit of the Manila 'olie -e!artment, ating u!on a
reliable information reei$ed on ) Do$ember 19// to the effet that a ertain shi!ment of !ersonal effets,
allegedly misdelared and under$alued, would be released the following day from the ustoms %one of the
!ort of Manila and loaded on two tru&s, and u!on orders of (iardo 'a!a, +hief of 'olie of Manila and a
duly de!uti%ed agent of the :ureau of +ustoms, onduted sur$eillane at gate 1 of the ustoms %one# 1hen
the tru&s left gate 1 at about 4H)8 !#m# of 4 Do$ember 19//, elements of the ounter>intelligene unit went
after the tru&s and intere!ted them at the Agrifina +irle, ?rmita, Manila# 3he load of the two tru&s,
onsisting of nine bales of goods, and the two tru&s, were sei%ed on instrutions of the +hief of 'olie# U!on
in$estigation, a !erson laimed ownershi! of the goods and showed to the !oliemen a AStatement and
(eei!ts of -uties +olleted on 5nformal ?ntry Do# 149>5581A, issued by the :ureau of +ustoms in the name
of a ertain :ien$enido Daguit# +laiming to ha$e been !re0udied by the sei%ure and detention of the two
tru&s and their argo, (emedios Mago and Falentin :# 6ano!a filed with the +ourt of First 5nstane ;+F5< of
Manila a !etition Afor mandamus with restraining order or !reliminary in0untion ;+i$il +ase /949/<, !raying
for the issuane of a restraining order, e. !arte, en0oining the !olie and ustoms authorities, or their agents,
from o!ening the bales and e.amining the goods, and a writ of mandamus for the return of the goods and the
tru&s, as well as a 0udgment for atual, moral and e.em!lary damages in their fa$or# On 18 Do$ember 19//,
Cudge 7ilarion Carenio issued an order e. !arte restraining (iardo 'a!a ;as +hief of 'olie of Manila< and
Cuan 'one ?nrile ;as +ommissioner of +ustoms< in +i$il +ase /949/# 7owe$er, when the restraining order
was reei$ed by 'a!a# et# al#, some bales had already been o!ened by the e.aminers of the :ureau of +ustoms
in the !resene of offiials of the Manila 'olie -e!artment, an assistant ity fisal and a re!resentati$e of
(emedios Mago# Under date of 15 Do$ember 19//, Mago filed an amended !etition, inluding as !arty
defendants +olletor of +ustoms 'edro 'ais of the 'ort of Manila and 6t# Martin Alagao of the Manila
'olie -e!artment# At the hearing on 9 -eember 19//, the lower ourt, with the onformity of the !arties,
ordered that an in$entory of the goods be made by its ler& of ourt in the !resene of the re!resentati$es of
the laimant of the goods, the :ureau of +ustoms, and the Anti> Smuggling +enter of the Manila 'olie
-e!artment# On 2) -eember 19//, Mago filed an e. !arte motion to release the goods, alleging that sine
the in$entory of the goods sei%ed did not show any artile of !rohibited im!ortation, the same should be
released as !er agreement of the !arties u!on her !osting of the a!!ro!riate bond that may be determined by
the ourt# On 9 Marh 19/9, the Cudge issued an order releasing the goods to Mago u!on her filing of a bond
in the amount of '48,888#88# On 1) Marh 19/9, 'a!a, on his own behalf, filed a motion for reonsideration
of the order of the ourt releasing the goods under bond, u!on the ground that the Manila 'olie -e!artment
had been direted by the +olletor of +ustoms of the 'ort of Manila to hold the goods !ending termination of
the sei%ure !roeedings# 1ithout waiting for the ourt*s ation on the motion for reonsideration, and alleging
that they had no !lain, s!eedy and ade4uate remedy in the ordinary ourse of law, 'a!a, et# al# filed the ation
for !rohibition and ertiorari with !reliminary in0untion before the Su!reme +ourt#
$el%! 3he +hief of the Manila 'olie -e!artment, (iardo "# 'a!a, ha$ing been de!uti%ed in writing by the
+ommissioner of +ustoms, ould, for the !ur!oses of the enforement of the ustoms and tariff laws, effet
searhes, sei%ures, and arrests, and it was his duty to ma&e sei%ure, among others, of any argo, artiles or
other mo$able !ro!erty when the same may be sub0et to forfeiture or liable for any fine im!osed under
ustoms and tariff laws# 7e ould lawfully o!en and e.amine any bo., trun&, en$elo!e or other ontainer
where$er found when he had reasonable ause to sus!et the !resene therein of dutiable artiles introdued
into the 'hili!!ines ontrary to law, and li&ewise to sto!, searh and e.amine any $ehile, beast or !erson
reasonably sus!eted of holding or on$eying suh artile as aforesaid# 5t annot be doubted, therefore, that
'a!a, +hief of 'olie of Manila, ould lawfully effet the searh and sei%ure of the goods in 4uestion# 3he
3ariff and +ustoms +ode authori%es him to demand assistane of any !olie offier to effet said searh and
sei%ure, and the latter has the legal duty to render said assistane# 3his was what ha!!ened !reisely in the
ase of 6t# Martin Alagao who, with his unit, made the searh and sei%ure of the two tru&s loaded with the
nine bales of goods in 4uestion at the Agrifina +irle# 7e was gi$en authority by the +hief of 'olie to ma&e
the intere!tion of the argo# Martin Alagao and his om!anion !oliemen had authority to effet the sei%ure
without any searh warrant issued by a om!etent ourt# 3he 3ariff and +ustoms +ode does not re4uire said
warrant herein# 3he +ode authori%es !ersons ha$ing !olie authority under Setion 228) of the 3ariff and
+ustoms +ode to enter, !ass through or searh any land, inlosure, warehouse, store or building, not being a
dwelling house, and also to ins!et, searh and e.amine any $essel or airraft and any trun&, !a&age, bo. or
en$elo!e or any !erson on board, or sto! and searh and e.amine any $ehile, beast or !erson sus!eted of
holding or on$eying any dutiable or !rohibited artile introdued into the 'hili!!ines ontrary to law,
without mentioning the need of a searh warrant in said ases# :ut in the searh of a dwelling house, the +ode
!ro$ides that said Adwelling house may be entered and searhed only u!on warrant issued by a 0udge or
0ustie of the !eae#A ?.e!t in the ase of the searh of a dwelling house, !ersons e.erising !olie authority
under the ustoms law may effet searh and sei%ure without a searh warrant in the enforement of ustoms
laws# 7erein, Martin Alagao and his om!anion !oliemen did not ha$e to ma&e any searh before they
sei%ed the two tru&s and their argo# :ut e$en if there was a searh, there is still authority to the effet that no
searh warrant would be needed under the irumstanes obtaining herein# 3he guaranty of freedom from
unreasonable searhes and sei%ures is onstrued as reogni%ing a neessary differene between a searh of a
dwelling house or other struture in res!et of whih a searh warrant may readily be obtained and a searh of
a shi!, motorboat, wagon, or automobile for ontraband goods, where it is not !ratiable to seure a warrant,
beause the $ehile an be 4ui&ly mo$ed out of the loality or 0urisdition in whih the warrant must be
sought# 7a$ing delared that the sei%ure by the members of the Manila 'olie -e!artment of the goods in
4uestion was in aordane with law and by that sei%ure the :ureau of +ustoms had a4uired 0urisdition o$er
the goods for the !ur!oses of the enforement of the ustoms and tariff laws, to the e.lusion of the +ourt of
First 5nstane of Manila#
1(9 &eo'le vs. .F" Rizal, +ranc, "F, G#ezon .iy [GR L-416(6, 12 =ove;3er 19(1]
3irst Division, .uerrero (J): 4 concur
Facs! One wee& before 9 February 1994, the (egional Anti>Smuggling Ation +enter ;(ASA+< was
informed by an undislosed 5nformer that a shi!ment of highly dutiable goods would be trans!orted to Manila
from Angeles +ity on a blue -odge ar# S!urred by suh lead, (ASA+ Agents Arthur Manuel and Maario
Sabado, on said date and u!on order of the +hief of 5ntelligene and O!erations :ranh, (ASA+>M:A, +ol#
Antonio Abad, Cr#, stationed themsel$es in the $iinity of the toll gate of the Dorth -i$ersion (oad at
:alintawa&, Iue%on +ity# At about /H45 a#m# of the same day, a light blue -odge ar with 'late 21>=9>9),
dri$en by Sgt# Cessie 7o!e who was aom!anied by Monina Medina a!!roahed the e.it gate and after
gi$ing the toll reei!t s!ed away towards Manila# 3he (ASA+ agents ga$e a hase and o$ertoo& Sgt# 7o!e*s
ar# Agent Sabado blew his whistle and signaled Sgt# 7o!e to sto! but the latter instead of heeding, made a U>
turn ba& to the Dorth -i$ersion (oad, but he ould not go through beause of the buses in front of his ar# At
this !oint, the agents sueeded in blo&ing Sgt# 7o!e*s ar and the latter sto!!ed# Manuel and Sabado who
were in i$ilian lothes showed their identifiation ards to 7o!e and Medina and introdued themsel$es as
(ASA+ agents# 3he Agents saw 4 bo.es on the ba& seat of the -odge and u!on in4uiry as to what those
bo.es were, Sgt# 7o!e answered A5 do not &now#A Further, 7o!e and Medina were as&ed where they were
bringing the bo.es, to whih Medina re!lied that they were bringing them ;bo.es< to the 3ro!ial 7ut at
?!ifanio de los Santos# Agent Sabado boarded the -odge ar with 7o!e and Medina while Agent Manuel
too& their own ar and both ars dro$e towards 3ro!ial 7ut ma&ing a brief sto! at the :onan%a where Agent
Manuel alled u! +ol# Abad by tele!hone# Arri$ing at the 3ro!ial 7ut, the !arty, together with +ol# Abad
who had 0oined them waited for the man who aording to Monina Medina was su!!osed to reei$e the
bo.es# As the man did not a!!ear, +ol# Abad Aalled off the missionA and brought res!ondents and their ar to
+am! Aguinaldo arri$ing there at about 9H88 a#m# An ins!etion of Sgt# 7o!e*s ar at +am! Aguinaldo
yielded 11 sealed bo.es, 4 on the rear seat and 9 more in the baggage om!artment whih was o!ened on
orders of +ol# Abad# On the same order of the intelligene offier, the bo.es were o!ened before the !resene
of 7o!e and Medina, re!resentati$es of the :ureau of 5nternal (e$enue, :ureau of +ustoms, '#+#, +OSA+
and !hotogra!hers of the -e!artment of Dational -efense# 3he ontents of the bo%es re$ealed some A4,441
more or less wrist wathes of assorted brands, 1,895 more or less wath braelets of assorted brands,A
su!!osedly unta.ed# As onse4uene, thereof, ASA+ +hairman "eneral 'elagio +ru% re4uested the :ureau of
+ustoms to issue a 1arrant of Sei%ure and -etention against the artiles inluding the -odge ar# 3he
+olletor of +ustoms did issue the same on 12 February 1994# 5t was admitted, howe$er, that when the
a!!rehending agents arrested res!ondents and brought them together with the sei%ed artiles to the ASA+
Offie in +am! Aguinaldo, the former were not armed with a warrant of arrest and sei%ure# 5n on0untion
with the 1arrant of Sei%ure and -etention issued by the +olletor of +ustoms, sei%ure !roeedings were
instituted and do&eted as Sei%ure 5dentifiation 142=1 against the wrist wathes and wath braelets !ursuant
to Setion 25)8 ;m< K 1 of the 3ariff and +ustoms +ode, and Sei%ure 5dentifiation Do# 142=1>A against the
-odge ar !ursuant to Setion 25)8;&< of the same +ode# On the other hand, 7o!e and Medina dislaimed
ownershi! of the sei%ed artiles# Ownershi! was instead laimed by one Antonio del (osario who inter$ened
in the !roeedings# 7o!e laimed that at the time of a!!rehension, he had no &nowledge of the ontents of the
bo.es, and granting that he had suh &nowledge, he ne$er &new that these are unta.ed ommodities, that he
onsented to trans!ort said bo.es from Angeles +ity to Manila in his ar u!on re4uest of his girl friend
Monina as a !ersonal fa$or, that he was not !resent when the bo.es were loaded in his ar nor was he e$er
told of their ontents on the way# On the !art of Monina Medina, she testified that what she did was only in
om!liane with the agreement with Mr# -el (osario to trans!ort the bo.es and deli$er them to a ertain Mr#
'eter at the 3ro!ial 7ut who will in turn gi$e her the ontrated !rie, that Mr# -el (osario did not re$eal the
ontents of the bo.es whih she ame to &now of only when the bo.es were o!ened at +am! Aguinaldo# As
there was not enough e$idene to ontro$ert the testimonies of res!ondents and the narration of laimant
Antonio del (osario, the +olletor of +ustoms issued his deision in the sei%ure ases on 1 A!ril 1995
delaring that the sei%ed artiles inluding the ar are not sub0et of forfeiture# Meanwhile, on 14 Marh
1994, after the re4uisite !reliminary in$estigation, the +ity Fisal of Iue%on +ity, finding the e.istene of a
!rima faie ase against 7o!e and Medina, filed +riminal +ase I>)9=1 in the +ourt of First 5nstane of (i%al
;Iue%on +ity<# U!on arraignment on 2) A!ril 1994, res!ondents !leaded not guilty# 3rial ommened on 2=
Canuary 1995 and while the !roseution through its first witness, Agent Maario Sabado, was adduing as
e$idene the !itures of the 11 bo.es ontaining the assorted wathes and wath braelets, the defense
ounsel ob0eted to the !resentation of the !itures and the sub0et artiles on the ground that they were sei%ed
without the benefit of warrant, and therefore inadmissible in e$idene under Setion 4;2<, Artile 5F of the
Dew +onstitution# After the !arties ha$e argued their grounds in their res!eti$e memoranda, the trial ourt
issued the order of 28 August 1995 delaring that the alleged smuggled artiles and the !itures ta&en of said
items as inadmissible in e$idene# 3he !roseution*s motion for reonsideration was denied on )8 Se!tember
1995# 3he !roseution filed a !etition for ertiorari whih was treated as a s!eial i$il ation in the Su!reme
+ourt*s (esolution of 5 May 199/#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh and sei%ure made on the bo.es in the blue -odge ar was $alid, e$en after the
+olletor of +ustoms delared the sei%ed artiles not sub0et to forfeiture#
$el%! 5t is not aurate to say that the +olletor of +ustoms made no findings that the artiles were smuggled#
5n fat, what the +olletor stated was that the !roseution failed to !resent the 4uantum of e$idene suffiient
to warrant the forfeiture of the sub0et artiles# 5n a general sense, this does not neessarily e.lude the
!ossibility of smuggling# 3he deision of the +olletor of +ustoms, as in other sei%ure !roeedings, onerns
the res rather than the !ersona# 3he !roeeding is a !robe on ontraband or illegally im!orted goods# 3he
im!orter or !ossessor is treated differently# 3he fat that the administrati$e !enalty befalls on him is an
inonse4uential inidene to riminal liability# :y the same to&en, the !robable guilt annot be negated
sim!ly beause he was not held administrati$ely liable# 3he +olletor*s final delaration that the artiles are
not sub0et to forfeiture does not detrat his findings that unta.ed goods were trans!orted in 7o!e and
Medina*s ar and sei%ed from their !ossession by agents of the law# 1hether riminal liability lur&s on the
strength of the !ro$ision of the 3ariff and +ustoms +ode addued in the information an only be determined
in a se!arate riminal ation# 7o!e and Medina*s e.oneration in the administrati$e ases annot de!ri$e the
State of its right to !roseute# :ut under our !enal laws, riminal res!onsibility, if any, must be !ro$en not by
!re!onderane of e$idene but by !roof beyond reasonable doubt# As enuniated in the leading ase of 'a!a
$s# Mago, in the e.erise of the s!eifi funtions, the +ode does not mention the need of a searh warrant
unli&e Setion 2289 whih e.!liitly !ro$ides that a Adwelling house may be entered and searhed only u!on
warrant issued by a 0udge ;or 0ustie of the !eae<, u!on sworn a!!liation showing !robable ause and
!artiularly desribing the !lae to be searhed and !erson or thing to be sei%ed#A Aware of this delineation,
the +ourt in that ase e.!ressed the onsidered $iew that Ae.e!t in the ase of the searh of a dwelling house,
!ersons e.erising !olie authority under the ustoms law may effet searh and sei%ure without a searh
warrant in the enforement of ustoms laws#A 3he rationale of the Mago ruling was nurtured by the traditional
dotrine in +arroll $# United States / wherein an im!rimatur against, onstitutional infirmity was stam!ed in
fa$or of a warrantless searh and sei%ure of suh nature as herein# On this stable foundation, the warrantless
sei%ure did not $iolate Artile 5F, Setion ) of the 199) +onstitution, whih finds origin in the Fourth
Amendment of the Amerian +onstitution#
191 9,ren v. 8nie% 4aes [ )12 84 (16 /=o. 9)-)(410, 11 *#ne 1996]
2calia (J)
Facs! On the e$ening of 18 Cune 199), !lainlothes $ie>s4uad offiers of the -istrit of +olumbia
Metro!olitan 'olie -e!artment were !atrolling a Ahigh drug areaA of the ity in an unmar&ed ar# 3heir
sus!iions were aroused when they !assed a dar& 'athfinder tru& with tem!orary liense !lates and youthful
ou!ants waiting at a sto! sign, the dri$er loo&ing down into the la! of the !assenger at his right# 3he tru&
remained sto!!ed at the intersetion for what seemed an unusually long time>>more than 28 seonds# 1hen
the !olie ar e.euted a U>turn in order to head ba& toward the tru&, the 'athfinder turned suddenly to its
right, without signalling, and s!ed off at an AunreasonableA s!eed# 3he !oliemen followed, and in a short
while o$ertoo& the 'athfinder when it sto!!ed behind other traffi at a red light# 3hey !ulled u! alongside,
and Offier ?!hraim Soto ste!!ed out and a!!roahed the dri$er*s door, identifying himself as a !olie offier
and direting the dri$er, Cames 6# :rown, to !ut the $ehile in !ar&# 1hen Soto drew u! to the dri$er*s
window, he immediately obser$ed two large !lasti bags of what a!!eared to be ra& oaine in Mihael A#
1hren*s hands# 1hren and :rown were arrested, and 4uantities of se$eral ty!es of illegal drugs were
retrie$ed from the $ehile# 3hey were harged in a four>ount inditment with $iolating $arious federal drug
laws, inluding 21 U# S# +# Setion;s< =44;a< and =/8;a<# At a !retrial su!!ression hearing, they hallenged
the legality of the sto! and the resulting sei%ure of the drugs# 3hey argued that the sto! had not been 0ustified
by !robable ause to belie$e, or e$en reasonable sus!iion, that they were engaged in illegal drug>dealing
ati$ity, and that Offier Soto*s asserted ground for a!!roahing the $ehile>>to gi$e the dri$er a warning
onerning traffi $iolations>>was !rete.tual# 3he -istrit +ourt denied the su!!ression motion, onluding
that Athe fats of the sto! were not ontro$erted,A and ALtMhere was nothing to really demonstrate that the
ations of the offiers were ontrary to a normal traffi sto!#A 1hren and :rown were on$ited of the ounts
at issue here# 3he +ourt of A!!eals affirmed the on$itions, holding with res!et to the su!!ression issue
that, Aregardless of whether a !olie offier sub0eti$ely belie$es that the ou!ants of an automobile may be
engaging in some other illegal beha$ior, a traffi sto! is !ermissible as long as a reasonable offier in the
same irumstanes ould ha$e sto!!ed the ar for the sus!eted traffi $iolation#A
"ss#e! 1hether the sei%ure in$ol$ing !ossession of drugs $alid, when the $ehile was sto!!ed due to a
$iolation of the traffi ode#
$el%! 3he Fourth Amendment guarantees ALtMhe right of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons, houses,
!a!ers, and effets, against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures#A 3em!orary detention of indi$iduals during
the sto! of an automobile by the !olie, e$en if only for a brief !eriod and for a limited !ur!ose, onstitutes a
Asei%ureA of A!ersonsA within the meaning of this !ro$ision# An automobile sto! is thus sub0et to the
onstitutional im!erati$e that it not be AunreasonableA under the irumstanes# As a general matter, the
deision to sto! an automobile is reasonable where the !olie ha$e !robable ause to belie$e that a traffi
$iolation has ourred# 5t is of ourse true that in !rini!le e$ery Fourth Amendment ase, sine it turns u!on
a AreasonablenessA determination, in$ol$es a balaning of all rele$ant fators# 1ith rare e.e!tions not
a!!liable here, howe$er, the result of that balaning is not in doubt where the searh or sei%ure is based u!on
!robable ause# analysis in$ol$ed searhes or sei%ures onduted in an e.traordinary manner, unusually
harmful to an indi$idual*s !ri$ay or e$en !hysial interests>>suh as, for e.am!le, sei%ure by means of deadly
fore, unannouned entry into a home, entry into a home without a warrant, or !hysial !enetration of the
body# 3he ma&ing of a traffi sto! out>of>uniform does not remotely 4ualify as suh an e.treme !ratie, and
so is go$erned by the usual rule that !robable ause to belie$e the law has been bro&en AoutbalanesA !ri$ate
interest in a$oiding !olie ontat# 7erein, the offiers had !robable ause to belie$e that 1hren and :rown
had $iolated the traffi ode# 3hat rendered the sto! reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, the e$idene
thereby diso$ered admissible#
191 Ar5ansas vs. 4#llivan [111 84 11-262, 29 May 2111]
7er %uriam*
Facs! 5n Do$ember 199=, Offier Coe 3aylor of the +onway, Ar&ansas, 'olie -e!artment sto!!ed Jenneth
Andrew Sulli$an for s!eeding and for ha$ing an im!ro!erly tinted windshield# 3aylor a!!roahed Sulli$an2s
$ehile, e.!lained the reason for the sto!, and re4uested Sulli$an2s liense, registration, and insurane
doumentation# U!on seeing Sulli$an2s liense, 3aylor reali%ed that he was aware of Rintelligene on Sulli$an
regarding narotis#O 1hen Sulli$an o!ened his ar door in an unsuessful attem!t to loate his registration
and insurane !a!ers, 3aylor notied a rusted roofing hathet on the ar2s floorboard# 3aylor then arrested
Sulli$an for s!eeding, dri$ing without his registration and insurane doumentation, arrying a wea!on ;the
roofing hathet<, and im!ro!er window tinting# After another offier arri$ed and !laed Sulli$an in his s4uad
ar, Offier 3aylor onduted an in$entory searh of Sulli$an2s $ehile !ursuant to the +onway 'olie
-e!artment2s Fehile 5n$entory 'oliy# Under the $ehile2s armrest, 3aylor diso$ered a bag ontaining a
substane that a!!eared to him to be metham!hetamine as well as numerous items of sus!eted drug
!ara!hernalia# As a result of the detention and searh, Sulli$an was harged with $arious state>law drug
offenses, unlawful !ossession of a wea!on, and s!eeding# Sulli$an mo$ed to su!!ress the e$idene sei%ed
from his $ehile on the basis that his arrest was merely a R!rete.t and sham to searhO him and, therefore,
$iolated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States +onstitution# 3he trial ourt granted the
su!!ression motion and, on the State2s interloutory a!!eal, the Ar&ansas Su!reme +ourt affirmed# 3he State
!etitioned for rehearing, ontending that the ourt had erred by ta&ing into aount Offier 3aylor2s sub0eti$e
moti$ation, in disregard of the US Su!reme +ourt2s o!inion in 1hren $# United States ;519 US =8/ L199/M<#
O$er the dissent of three 0usties, the ourt re0eted the State2s argument that 1hren ma&es Rthe ulterior
moti$es of !olie offiers irrele$ant so long as there is !robable ause for the traffi sto!O and denied the
State2s rehearing !etition# 3he Ar&ansas Su!reme +ourt delined to follow 1hren on the ground that Rmuh
of it is dita#O 3he ourt reiterated the trial 0udge2s onlusion that Rthe arrest was !rete.tual and made for the
!ur!ose of searhing Sulli$an2s $ehile for e$idene of a rime,O and obser$ed that Rwe do not belie$e that
1hren disallowsO su!!ression on suh a basis# Finally, the ourt asserted that, e$en if it were to onlude that
1hren !reludes in4uiry into an arresting offier2s sub0eti$e moti$ation, Rthere is nothing that !re$ents this
ourt from inter!reting the U# S# +onstitution more broadly than the United States Su!reme +ourt, whih has
the effet of !ro$iding more rights#O 7ene, the State2s !etition for a writ of ertiorari and re$erse#
"ss#e! 1hether sub0eti$e intentions !lay a role in ordinary, !robable>ause Fourth Amendment analysis#
$el%! 3he Ar&ansas Su!reme +ourt ne$er 4uestioned Offier 3aylor*s authority to arrest Sulli$an for a fine>
only traffi $iolation ;s!eeding<# (ather, the ourt affirmed the trial 0udge*s su!!ression of the drug>related
e$idene on the theory that Offier 3aylor*s arrest of Sulli$an, although su!!orted by !robable ause,
nonetheless $iolated the Fourth Amendment beause 3aylor had an im!ro!er sub0eti$e moti$ation for
ma&ing the sto!# 3he Ar&ansas Su!reme +ourt*s holding to that effet annot be s4uared with the US Su!reme
+ourt deision in 1hren, in whih the +ourt noted its Aunwillingness to entertain Fourth Amendment
hallenges based on the atual moti$ations of indi$idual offiers,A and held unanimously that Asub0eti$e
intentions !lay no role in ordinary, !robable>ause Fourth Amendment analysis#A 3hat 1hren in$ol$ed a
traffi sto!, rather than a ustodial arrest, is of no !artiular moment, indeed, 1hren itself relied on United
States $# (obinson (4!4 @2 (!= A!?3B), for the !ro!osition that Aa traffi>$iolation arrest will not be
rendered in$alid by the fat that it was *a mere !rete.t for a narotis searh#*A 3he Ar&ansas Su!reme +ourt*s
alternati$e holding, that it may inter!ret the United States +onstitution to !ro$ide greater !rotetion than this
+ourt*s own federal onstitutional !reedents !ro$ide, is forelosed by Oregon $# 7ass (4(- @2 !4 A!?CB)*
1hile Aa State is free as a matter of its own law to im!ose greater restritions on !olie ati$ity than those this
+ourt holds to be neessary u!on federal onstitutional standards,A it Amay not im!ose suh greater
restritions as a matter of federal onstitutional law when this +ourt s!eifially refrains from im!osing
them#A 3hus, the 0udgment of the Ar&ansas Su!reme +ourt is re$ersed, and the ase is remanded for further
!roeedings not inonsistent with the US Su!reme +ourt*s o!inion#
192 &eo'le vs. %e Gracia [GR 112119-11, 6 *#ly 1994]
2econd Division, +egalado (J): C concur
Facs! 3he inidents too& !lae at the height of the ou! d*etat staged in -eember, 19=9 by ultra>rightist
elements headed by the (eform the Armed Fores Mo$ement>Soldiers of the Fili!ino 'eo!le ;(AM>SF'<
against the "o$ernment# At that time, $arious go$ernment establishments and military am!s in Metro Manila
were being bombarded by the rightist grou! with their Atora>toraA !lanes# At around midnight of )8 Do$ember
19=9, the 4th Marine :attalion of the 'hili!!ine Marines ou!ied Fillamor Air :ase, while the Sout
(angers too& o$er the 7ead4uarters of the 'hili!!ine Army, the Army O!erations +enter, and +hannel 4, the
go$ernment tele$ision station# Also, some elements of the 'hili!!ine Army oming from Fort Magsaysay
ou!ied the "reenhills Sho!!ing +enter in San Cuan, Metro Manila# On 1 -eember 19=9, Ma0# ?fren Soria
of the 5ntelligene -i$ision, Dational +a!ital (egion -efense +ommand, was on board a brown 3oyota ar
onduting a sur$eillane of the ?uroar Sales Offie loated at ?!ifanio de los Santos A$enue ;?-SA< in
Iue%on +ity, together with his team om!osed of Sgt# +ris!in Sagario, MBSgt# (amon :riones, SBSgt# 7enry
A4uino, one SBSgt# Simon and a Sgt# (amos# 3he sur$eillane, whih atually started on the night of )8
Do$ember 19=9 at around 18H88 !#m#, was onduted !ursuant to an intelligene re!ort reei$ed by the
di$ision that said establishment was being ou!ied by elements of the (AM>SF' as a ommuniation
ommand !ost# Sgt# +ris!in Sagario, the dri$er of the ar, !ar&ed the $ehile around 18 to 15 meters away
from the ?uroar building near '# 3ua%on Street, SBSgt# 7enry A4uino had earlier alighted from the ar to
ondut his sur$eillane on foot# A rowd was then gathered near the ?uroar offie wathing the on>going
bombardment near +am! Aguinaldo# After a while a grou! of 5 men disengaged themsel$es from the rowd
and wal&ed towards the ar of the sur$eillane team# At that moment, Ma0# Soria, who was then seated in
front, saw the a!!roahing grou! and immediately ordered Sgt# Sagario to start the ar and lea$e the area# As
they !assed by the grou!, then only / meters away, the latter !ointed to them, drew their guns and fired at the
team, whih atta& resulted in the wounding of Sgt# Sagario on the right thigh# Dobody in the sur$eillane
team was able to retaliate beause they sought o$er inside the ar and they were afraid that i$ilians or
bystanders might be aught in the ross>fire# As a onse4uene, at around /H)8 a#m# of 5 -eember 19=9,
searhing them om!osed of FB6t# Firgilio :abao as team leader, MBSgt# 6adao, Sgt# Magallion, Sgt# 'atriio
'aatang, and elements of the 1/th 5nfantry :attalion under one +ol# delos Santos raided the ?uroar Sales
Offie# 3hey were able to find and onfisate / artons of M>1/ ammunition, fi$e bundles of +>4 dynamites,
M>shells of different alibers, and Amoloto$A bombs inside one of the rooms belonging to a ertain +ol#
Matillano whih is loated at the right !ortion of the building# St# Osar Obenia, the first one to enter the
?uroar building, saw (olando -e "raia inside the offie of +ol# Matillano, holding a +>4 and sus!iiously
!ee!ing through a door# -e "raia was the only !erson then !resent inside the room# A uniform with the
nametag of +ol# Matillano was also found# As a result of the raid, the team arrested de "raia, as well as
So!rieso Ferbo and (oberto Cimena who were 0anitors at the ?uroar building# 3hey were then made to sign
an in$entory, written in 3agalog, of the e.!losi$es and ammunition onfisated by the raiding team# Do searh
warrant was seured by the raiding team beause, aording to them, at that time there was so muh disorder
onsidering that the nearby +am! Aguinaldo was being mo!!ed u! by the rebel fores and there was
simultaneous firing within the $iinity of the ?uroar offie, aside from the fat that the ourts were
onse4uently losed# 3he grou! was able to onfirm later that the owner of ?uroar offie is a ertain Mr#
"utierre% and that de "raia is su!!osedly a AboyA therein# de "raia was harged in two se!arate
informations for illegal !ossession of ammunition and e.!losi$es in furtherane of rebellion, and for
attem!ted homiide ;+riminal +ases I>98>11955 and I>98>1195/, res!eti$ely<, whih were tried 0ointly by
the (egional 3rial +ourt of Iue%on +ity, :ranh 18)# -uring the arraignment, de "raia !leaded not guilty
to both harges# 7owe$er, he admitted that he is not authori%ed to !osses any firearms, ammunition andBor
e.!losi$e# 3he !arties li&ewise sti!ulated that there was a rebellion during the !eriod from Do$ember )8 u! to
9 -eember 19=9# On 22 February 1991, the trial ourt rendered 0udgment a4uitting de "raia of attem!ted
homiide, but found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of illegal !ossession of firearms in
furtherane of rebellion and sentened him to ser$e the !enalty of relusion !er!etua# -e "raia a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the military o!erati$es made a $alid searh and sei%ure during the height of the -eember
19=9 ou! d2etat#
$el%! 5t is admitted that the military o!erati$es who raided the ?uroar Sales Offie were not armed with a
searh warrant at that time# 3he raid was atually !rei!itated by intelligene re!orts that said offie was
being used as head4uarters by the (AM# 'rior to the raid, there was a sur$eillane onduted on the !remises
wherein the sur$eillane team was fired at by a grou! of men oming from the ?uroar building# 1hen the
military o!erati$es raided the !lae, the ou!ants thereof refused to o!en the door des!ite the re4uests for
them to do so, thereby om!elling the former to brea& into the offie# 3he ?uroar Sales Offie is ob$iously
not a gun store and it is definitely not an armory or arsenal whih are the usual de!ositories for e.!losi$es and
ammunition# 5t is !rimarily and solely engaged in the sale of automobiles# 3he !resene of an unusual
4uantity of high>!owered firearms and e.!losi$es ould not be 0ustifiably or e$en olorably e.!lained# 5n
addition, there was general haos and disorder at that time beause of simultaneous and intense firing within
the $iinity of the offie and in the nearby +am! Aguinaldo whih was under atta& by rebel fores# 3he
ourts in the surrounding areas were ob$iously losed and, for that matter, the building and houses therein
were deserted# Under the foregoing irumstanes, the ase falls under one of the e.e!tions to the
!rohibition against a warrantless searh# 5n the first !lae, the military o!erati$es, ta&ing into aount the fats
obtaining in this ase, had reasonable ground to belie$e that a rime was being ommitted# 3here was
onse4uently more than suffiient !robable ause to warrant their ation# Furthermore, under the situation
then !re$ailing, the raiding team had no o!!ortunity to a!!ly for and seure a searh warrant from the ourts#
3he trial 0udge himself manifested that on 5 -eember 19=9 when the raid was onduted, his ourt was
losed# Under suh urgeny and e.igeny of the moment, a searh warrant ould lawfully be dis!ensed with#
193 ?al;one vs. %e ?illa [GR (39((, 24 May 1991]
En Banc, 7adilla (J): !- concur, ! on leave
Facs! On 28 Canuary 19=9, the Dational +a!ital (egion -istrit +ommand ;D+(-+< was ati$ated !ursuant
to 6etter of 5nstrution 82B=9 of the 'hili!!ine "eneral 7ead4uarters, AF', with the mission of onduting
seurity o!erations within its area of res!onsibility and !eri!heral areas, for the !ur!ose of establishing an
effeti$e territorial defense, maintaining !eae and order, and !ro$iding an atmos!here ondui$e to the
soial, eonomi and !olitial de$elo!ment of the Dational +a!ital (egion# 1 As !art of its duty to maintain
!eae and order, the D+(-+ installed he&!oints in $arious !arts of Falen%uela, Metro Manila# (iardo +#
Falmonte and the Union of 6awyers and Ad$oates for 'eo!le*s (ight ;U6A'< filed a !etition for !rohibition
with !reliminary in0untion andBor tem!orary restraining order witht the Su!reme +ourt, see&ing the
delaration of he&!oints in Falen%uela, Metro Manila or elsewhere, as unonstitutional and the dismantling
and banning of the same or, in the alternati$e, to diret the res!ondents to formulate guidelines in the
im!lementation of he&!oints, for the !rotetion of the !eo!le# 3hey a$er that, beause of the installation of
said he&!oints, the residents of Falen%uela are worried of being harassed and of their safety being !laed at
the arbitrary, a!riious and whimsial dis!osition of the military manning the he&!oints, onsidering that
their ars and $ehiles are being sub0eted to regular searhes and he&>u!s, es!eially at night or at dawn,
without the benefit of a searh warrant andBor ourt order# 3heir alleged fear for their safety inreased when,
at dawn of 9 Culy 19==, :en0amin 'ar!on, a su!!ly offier of the Munii!ality of Falen%uela, :ulaan, was
gunned down allegedly in old blood by the members of the D+(-+ manning the he&!oint along
MArthur 7ighway at Malinta, Falen%uela, for ignoring andBor refusing to submit himself to the he&!oint
and for ontinuing to s!eed off ins!ire of warning shots fired in the air# Falmonte also laims that, on se$eral
oasions, he had gone thru these he&!oints where he was sto!!ed and his ar sub0eted to searhBhe&>u!
without a ourt order or searh warrant# 3hey further ontend that the said he&!oints gi$e "en# (enato de
Filla and the Dational +a!ital (egion -istrit +ommand a blan&et authority to ma&e searhes andBor sei%ures
without searh warrant or ourt order in $iolation of the +onstitution# 5n the Su!reme +ourt*s deision dated
29 Se!tember 19=9, Falmonte2s and U6A'2s !etition for !rohibition, see&ing the delaration of the
he&!oints as unonstitutional and their dismantling andBor banning, was dismissed# Falmonte and U6A'
filed the motion and su!!lemental motion for reonsideration of said deision#
"ss#e! 1hether he&!oints ser$e as a blan&et authority for go$ernment offiials for warrantless searh and
sei%ure and, thus, are $iolati$e of the +onstitution#
$el%! Dowhere in the Su!reme +ourt*s deision of 24 May 1998 did the +ourt legali%e all he&!oints, i#e# at
all times and under all irumstanes# 1hat the +ourt delared is, that he&!oints are not illegal !er se# 3hus,
under e.e!tional irumstanes, as where the sur$i$al of organi%ed go$ernment is on the balane, or where
the li$es and safety of the !eo!le are in gra$e !eril, he&!oints may be allowed and installed by the
go$ernment# 5m!liit in this !ro!osition is, that when the situation lears and suh gra$e !erils are remo$ed,
he&!oints will ha$e absolutely no reason to remain# (eent and on>going e$ents ha$e !ointed to the
ontinuing $alidity and need for he&!oints manned by either military or !olie fores# Although no one an
be om!elled, under our libertarian system, to share with the !resent go$ernment its ideologial beliefs and
!raties, or ommend its !olitial, soial and eonomi !oliies or !erformane, one must onede to it the
basi right to defend itself from its enemies and, while in !ower, to !ursue its !rogram of go$ernment
intended for !ubli welfare, and in the !ursuit of those ob0eti$es, the go$ernment has the e4ual right, under
its !olie !ower, to selet the reasonable means and methods for best ahie$ing them# 3he he&!oint is
e$idently one of suh means it has seleted# Admittedly, the routine he&!oint sto! does intrude, to a ertain
e.tent, on motorist*s right to Afree !assage without interru!tionA, but it annot be denied that, as a rule, it
in$ol$es only a brief detention of tra$ellers during whih the $ehile*s ou!ants are re4uired to answer a
brief 4uestion or two# For as long as the $ehile is neither searhed nor its ou!ants sub0eted to a body
searh, and the ins!etion of the $ehile is limited to a $isual searh, said routine he&s annot be regarded
as $iolati$e of an indi$idual*s right against unreasonable searh# 3hese routine he&s, when onduted in a
fi.ed area, are e$en less intrusi$e# Further, $ehiles are generally allowed to !ass these he&!oints after a
routine ins!etion and a few 4uestions# 5f $ehiles are sto!!ed and e.tensi$ely searhed, it is beause of some
!robable ause whih 0ustifies a reasonable belief of the men at the he&!oints that either the motorist is a
law>offender or the ontents of the $ehile are or ha$e been instruments of some offense# :y the same to&en,
a warrantless searh of inoming and outgoing !assengers, at the arri$al and de!arture areas of an
international air!ort, is a !ratie not onstitutionally ob0etionable beause it is founded on !ubli interest,
safety, and neessity# 6astly, the +ourt*s deision on he&!oints does not, in any way, $alidate nor ondone
abuses ommitted by the military manning the he&!oints# 3he +ourt*s deision was onerned with !ower,
i#e# whether the go$ernment em!loying the military has the !ower to install said he&!oints# One that !ower
is a&nowledged, the +ourt*s in4uiry eases# 3rue, !ower im!lies the !ossibility of its abuse# :ut whether
there is abuse in a !artiular situation is a different Aball gameA to be resol$ed in the onstitutional arena# 5n
any situation, where abuse mar&s the o!eration of a he&!oint, the iti%en is not hel!less# For the military is
not abo$e but sub0et to the law# And the ourts e.ist to see that the law is su!reme# Soldiers, inluding those
who man he&!oints, who abuse their authority at beyond the so!e of their authority and are, therefore,
liable riminally and i$illy for their abusi$e ats#
194 Ania: vs. .o;;ission on Elecions [GR 114961, 2 >co3er 1994]
En Banc, Bellosillo (J): & concur, 3 on leave
Facs! 5n !re!aration for the synhroni%ed national and loal eletions sheduled on 11 May 1992, the
+ommission on ?letions ;+OM?6?+< issued on 11 -eember 1991 (esolution 2)2) ;A"un :anA<,
!romulgating rules and regulations on bearing, arrying and trans!orting of firearms or other deadly wea!ons,
on seurity !ersonnel or bodyguards, on bearing arms by members of seurity agenies or !olie
organi%ations, and organi%ation or maintenane of reation fores during the eletion !eriod# Subse4uently,
on 2/ -eember 1991 +OM?6?+ issued (esolution 2)29 !ro$iding for the summary dis4ualifiation of
andidates engaged in gunrunning, using and trans!orting of firearms, organi%ing s!eial stri&e fores, and
establishing s!ot he&!oints# On 18 Canuary 1992, !ursuant to the A"un :an,A Mr# Sera!io '# 3aad,
Sergeant>at>Arms, 7ouse of (e!resentati$es, wrote +ongressman Franis :# Aniag Cr#, who was then
+ongressman of the 1st -istrit of :ulaan re4uesting the return of the 2 firearms issued to him by the 7ouse
of (e!resentati$es# U!on being ad$ised of the re4uest on 1) Canuary 1992 by his staff, Aniag immediately
instruted his dri$er, ?rnesto Arellano, to !i& u! the firearms from his house at Falle Ferde and return them
to +ongress# Meanwhile, at about 5H88 !,#m# of the same day, the 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;'D'< headed by
Senior Su!erintendent -anilo +ordero set u! a he&!oint outside the :atasan +om!le. some 28 meters
away from its entrane# About )8 minutes later, the !oliemen manning the out!ost flagged down the ar
dri$en by Arellano as it a!!roahed the he&!oint# 3hey searhed the ar and found the firearms neatly
!a&ed in their gun ases and !laed in a bag in the trun& of the ar# Arellano was then a!!rehended and
detained# 7e e.!lained that he was ordered by Aniag to get the firearms from the house and return them to
Sergeant>at Arms 3aad of the 7ouse of (e!resentati$es# 3hereafter, the !olie referred Arellano*s ase to
the Offie of the +ity 'roseutor for in4uest# 3he referral did not inlude Aniag as among those harged with
an eletion offense# On 15 Canuary 1992, the +ity 'roseutor ordered the release of Arellano after finding the
latter*s sworn e.!lanation meritorious# On 2= Canuary 1992, the +ity 'roseutor in$ited Aniag to shed light on
the irumstanes mentioned in Arellano*s sworn e.!lanation# Aniag not only a!!eared at the !reliminary
in$estigation to onfirm Arellano*s statement but also wrote the +ity 'roseutor urging him to e.onerate
Arellano# 7e e.!lained that Arellano did not $iolate the firearms ban as he in fat was om!lying with it when
a!!rehended by returning the firearms to +ongress, and, that he was Aniag*s dri$er, not a seurity offier nor a
bodyguard# On / Marh 1992, the Offie of the +ity 'roseutor issued a resolution whih, among other
matters, reommended that the ase against Arellano be dismissed and that the AunoffiialA harge against
Aniag be also dismissed# De$ertheless, on / A!ril 1992, u!on reommendation of its 6aw -e!artment,
+OM?6?+ issued (esolution 92>8=29 direting the filing of information against Aniag and Arellano for
$iolation of Se# 2/1, !ar# ;4<, of :' ==1 otherwise &nown as the Omnibus ?letion +ode, in relation to Se#
)2 of (A 91//, and Aniag to show ause why he should not be dis4ualified from running for an eleti$e
!osition, !ursuant to +OM?6?+ (esolution 2)29, in relation to Ses# )2, )) and )5 of (A 91//, and Se# 52,
!ar# ;<, of :' ==1# On 1) A!ril 1992, Aniag mo$ed for reonsideration and to hold in abeyane the
administrati$e !roeedings as well as the filing of the information in ourt# On 2) A!ril 1992, the +OM?6?+
denied Aniag*s motion for reonsideration# Aniag filed a !etition for delaratory relief, ertiorari and
!rohibition against the +OM?6?+#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh of Aniag2s ar that yielded the firarms whih were to be returned to the 7ouse of
(e!resentati$es within the !ur$iew of the e.e!tion as to the searh of mo$ing $ehiles#
$el%! As a rule, a $alid searh must be authori%ed by a searh warrant duly issued by an a!!ro!riate
authority# 7owe$er, this is not absolute# Aside from a searh inident to a lawful arrest, a warrantless searh
had been u!held in ases of mo$ing $ehiles and the sei%ure of e$idene in !lain $iew, as well as the searh
onduted at !olie or military he&!oints whih we delared are not illegal !er se, and stressed that the
warrantless searh is not $iolati$e of the +onstitution for as long as the $ehile is neither searhed nor its
ou!ants sub0eted to a body searh, and the ins!etion of the $ehile is merely limited to a $isual searh# As
there was no e$idene to show that the !oliemen were im!elled to do so beause of a onfidential re!ort
leading them to reasonably belie$e that ertain motorists mathing the desri!tion furnished by their
informant were engaged in gunrunning, trans!orting firearms or in organi%ing s!eial stri&e fores# Dor was
there any indiation from the !a&age or beha$ior of Arellano that ould ha$e triggered the sus!iion of the
!oliemen# Absent suh 0ustifying irumstanes s!eifially !ointing to the ul!ability of Aniag and
Arellano, the searh ould not be $alid# 3he ation then of the !oliemen unreasonably intruded into Aniag*s
!ri$ay and the seurity of his !ro!erty, in $iolation of Se# 2, Art# 555, of the +onstitution# +onse4uently, the
firearms obtained in $iolation of Aniag*s right against warrantless searh annot be admitted for any !ur!ose
in any !roeeding#
19) &eo'le vs. Escano, 8sana an% Lo'ez [GR 1292)6-)(, 2( *an#ary 2111]
3irst Division, Davide Jr* (%J): 4 concur
Facs! On 5 A!ril 1995 and during a +OM?6?+ gun ban, some law enforers of the Ma&ati 'olie, namely,
'O) ?duardo '# Suba, 'O) :ernabe Donato, S'O4 Cuan de los Santos, and 5ns!etor ?rnesto "uio, were
manning a he&!oint at the orner of Senator "il 'uyat A$e# and the South 6u%on ?.!ressway ;S6?E<# 3hey
were he&ing the ars going to 'asay +ity, sto!!ing those they found sus!iious, and im!osing merely a
running sto! on the others# At about !ast midnight, they sto!!ed a Jia 'ride ar with 'late 3:7 49)# '8)
Suba saw a long firearm on the la! of the !erson seated at the !assenger seat, who was later identified as
Firgilio Usana# 3hey as&ed the dri$er, identified as Culian -# ?saNo, to o!en the door# '8) Suba sei%ed the
long firearm, an M>1 US +arbine, from Usana# 1hen ?saNo, u!on order of the !olie, !ar&ed along Sen# "il
'uyat A$e#, the other !assengers were searhed for more wea!ons# 3heir searh yielded a #45 aliber firearm
whih they sei%ed from ?saNo# 3he three !assengers were thereafter brought to the !olie station :lo& 5 in
the Jia 'ride dri$en by 'O) Donato# U!on reahing the !reint, Donato turned o$er the &ey to the des&
offier# Sine S'O4 de los Santos was sus!iious of the $ehile, he re4uested ?saNo to o!en the trun&#
?saNo readily agreed and o!ened the trun& himself using his &ey# 3hey notied a blue bag inside it, whih
they as&ed ?saNo to o!en# 3he bag ontained a !arel wra!!ed in ta!e, whih, u!on e.amination by Dational
:ureau of 5n$estigation Forensi +hemist ?milia A# (osaldos, was found !ositi$e for hashish weighing
)#)14) &ilograms# Firgilio 3# Usana and Cerry +# 6o!e%, together with Culian -# ?saNo, were harged before
the (egional 3rial +ourt of Ma&ati +ity, :ranh /4, in +riminal +ase 95>9)/ with $iolation of Setion 4,
Artile 55 of (e!ubli At /425, as amended# ?saNo and Usana were also harged in +riminal +ases 95>9)9
and 95>9)= with illegal !ossession of firearms and ammunition in $iolation of 'residential -eree 1=//# 3he
ases were onsolidated and 0ointly tried# 5n its -eision of )8 May 1999, whih was !romulgated on 19 Cune
1999, the trial ourt on$ited ?saNo, 6o!e% and Usana in +riminal +ase 95>9)/, ?saNo in +riminal +ase
95>9)9, and Usana in +riminal +ase 95>9)=# ?saNo filed on 19 Cune 1999 a Dotie of A!!eal, but on 1/ Culy
1999, he filed a Manifestation and 1ithdrawal of A!!eal, whih was granted by the trial ourt in its Order of
19 Culy 1999# Usana and 6o!e% filed a Dotie of A!!eal on )8 Cune 1999, manifesting therein that they were
a!!ealing to the Su!reme +ourt and to the +ourt of A!!eals# +onsidering the !enalties im!osed, the deision
in +riminal +ase 95>9)/ was a!!ealed to the Su!reme +ourt, while the +ourt of A!!eals too& ogni%ane of
the a!!eal from +riminal +ase 95>9)=# 5n its Order of )8 Cune 1999, the trial ourt ga$e due ourse to the
a!!eal and ordered the transmittal of the reord in +riminal +ase 95>9)/ to the Su!reme +ourt and the reord
of +riminal +ase 95>9)= to the +ourt of A!!eals# Aordingly, it is only the a!!eal from the 0udgment in
+riminal +ase 95>9)/ that is before the Su!reme +ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether the searh onduted on ?sano2s ar is illegal, and whether the e$idene a4uired therein
would be suffiient to on$it 6o!e% and Usana for !ossession of illegal drugs#
$el%! 3he +ourt has ruled that not all he&!oints are illegal# 3hose whih are warranted by the e.igenies of
!ubli order and are onduted in a way least intrusi$e to motorists are allowed# For, admittedly, routine
he&!oints do intrude, to a ertain e.tent, on motorists* right to Afree !assage without interru!tion,A but it
annot be denied that, as a rule, it in$ol$es only a brief detention of tra$elers during whih the $ehile*s
ou!ants are re4uired to answer a brief 4uestion or two# For as long as the $ehile is neither searhed nor its
ou!ants sub0eted to a body searh, and the ins!etion of the $ehile is limited to a $isual searh, said
routine he&s annot be regarded as $iolati$e of an indi$idual*s right against unreasonable searh# 5n fat,
these routine he&s, when onduted in a fi.ed area, are e$en less intrusi$e# 3he he&!oint herein
onduted was in !ursuane of the gun ban enfored by the +OM?6?+# 3he +OM?6?+ would be hard !ut
to im!lement the ban if its de!uti%ed agents were limited to a $isual searh of !edestrians# 5t would also defeat
the !ur!ose for whih suh ban was instituted# 3hose who intend to bring a gun during said !eriod would
&now that they only need a ar to be able to easily !er!etrate their maliious designs# 3he fats addued do
not onstitute a ground for a $iolation of the onstitutional rights of the aused against illegal searh and
sei%ure# 'O) Suba admitted that they were merely sto!!ing ars they deemed sus!iious, suh as those whose
windows are hea$ily tinted 0ust to see if the !assengers thereof were arrying guns# At best they would merely
diret their flashlights inside the ars they would sto!, without o!ening the ar*s doors or sub0eting its
!assengers to a body searh# 3here is nothing disriminatory in this as this is what the situation demands#
-es!ite the $alidity of the searh, the +ourt annot affirm the on$ition of Usana and 6o!e% for $iolation of
(A /425, as amended# 3he following fats militate against a finding of on$itionH ;1< the ar belonged to
?saNo, ;2< the trun& of the ar was not o!ened soon after it was sto!!ed and after the aused were searhed
for firearms, ;)< the ar was dri$en by a !olieman from the !lae where it was sto!!ed until the !olie
station, ;4< the ar*s trun& was o!ened, with the !ermission of ?saNo, without the !resene of Usana and
6o!e%, and ;5< after arri$al at the !olie station and until the o!ening of the ar*s trun&, the ar was in the
!ossession and ontrol of the !olie authorities# Do fat was addued to lin& Usana and 6o!e% to the hashish
found in the trun& of the ar# 3heir ha$ing been with ?saNo in the latter*s ar before the AfindingA of the
hashish sometime after the la!se of an a!!reiable time and without their !resene left muh to be desired to
im!liate them to the offense of selling, distributing, or trans!orting the !rohibited drug# 5n fat, there was no
showing that Usana and 6o!e% &new of the !resene of hashish in the trun& of the ar or that they saw the
same before it was sei%ed#
196 .a;ara vs. M#nici'al .o#r o7 ,e .iy an% .o#nry o7 4an Francisco [3(2 84 )23, ) *#ne
1962]
'hite (J)
Facs! On / Do$ember 19/), an ins!etor of the -i$ision of 7ousing 5ns!etion of the San Franiso
-e!artment of 'ubli 7ealth entered an a!artment building to ma&e a routine annual ins!etion for !ossible
$iolations of the ity*s 7ousing +ode# 3he building*s manager informed the ins!etor that +amara, lessee of
the ground floor, was using the rear of his leasehold as a !ersonal residene# +laiming that the building*s
ou!any !ermit did not allow residential use of the ground floor, the ins!etor onfronted +amara and
demanded that he !ermit an ins!etion of the !remises# +amara refused to allow the ins!etion beause the
ins!etor la&ed a searh warrant# 3he ins!etor returned on Do$ember =, again without a warrant, and
+amara again refused to allow an ins!etion# A itation was then mailed ordering +amara to a!!ear at the
distrit attorney*s offie# 1hen +amara failed to a!!ear, two ins!etors returned to his a!artment on
Do$ember 22# 3hey informed +amara that he was re4uired by law to !ermit an ins!etion under 58) of the
7ousing +ode# +amara ne$ertheless refused the ins!etors aess to his a!artment without a searh warrant#
3hereafter, a om!laint was filed harging him with refusing to !ermit a lawful ins!etion in $iolation of 589
of the +ode# +amara was arrested on -eember 2nd released on bail# 1hen his demurrer to the riminal
om!laint was denied, +amara filed the !etition for a writ of !rohibition in a +alifornia Su!erior +ourt
alleging that he was awaiting trial on a riminal harge of $iolating the San Franiso 7ousing +ode by
refusing to !ermit a warrantless ins!etion of his residene, and that a writ of !rohibition should issue to the
riminal ourt beause the ordinane authori%ing suh ins!etions is unonstitutional on its fae# 3he Su!erior
+ourt denied the writ, the -istrit +ourt of A!!eal affirmed, and the Su!reme +ourt of +alifornia denied a
!etition for hearing#
"ss#e! 1hether +amara an $alidly refuse the ins!etion of his dwelling by the -i$ision of 7ousing
5ns!etion#
$el%! 3he Fourth Amendment bars !roseution of a !erson who has refused to !ermit a warrantless ode>
enforement ins!etion of his !ersonal residene# 3he basi !ur!ose of the Fourth Amendment, whih is
enforeable against the States through the Fourteenth, through its !rohibition of AunreasonableA searhes and
sei%ures is to safeguard the !ri$ay and seurity of indi$iduals against arbitrary in$asions by go$ernmental
offiials# 1ith ertain arefully defined e.e!tions, an unonsented warrantless searh of !ri$ate !ro!erty is
Aunreasonable#A Administrati$e searhes of the &ind at issue here are signifiant intrusions u!on the interests
!roteted by the Fourth Amendment, that suh searhes when authori%ed and onduted without a warrant
!roedure la& the traditional safeguards whih the Fourth Amendment guarantees to the indi$idual, and that
the reasons !ut forth in Fran& $# Maryland and in other ases for u!holding these warrantless searhes are
insuffiient to 0ustify so substantial a wea&ening of the Fourth Amendment*s !rotetions# +ontrary to the
assum!tion of Fran& $# Maryland, Fourth Amendment interests are not merely A!eri!heralA where munii!al
fire, health, and housing ins!etion !rograms are in$ol$ed whose !ur!ose is to determine the e.istene of
!hysial onditions not om!lying with loal ordinanes# 3hose !rograms, moreo$er, are enforeable by
riminal !roess, as is refusal to allow an ins!etion# 1arrantless administrati$e searhes annot be 0ustified
on the grounds that they ma&e minimal demands on ou!ants, that warrants in suh ases are unfeasible, or
that area ins!etion !rograms ould not funtion under reasonable searh>warrant re4uirements# 'robable
ause u!on the basis of whih warrants are to be issued for area ode>enforement ins!etions is not
de!endent on the ins!etor*s belief that a !artiular dwelling $iolates the ode but on the reasonableness of the
enforement ageny*s a!!raisal of onditions in the area as a whole# 3he standards to guide the magistrate in
the issuane of suh searh warrants will neessarily $ary with the munii!al !rogram being enfored#
Dothing here is intended to forelose !rom!t ins!etions, e$en without a warrant, that the law has
traditionally u!held in emergeny situations# On the other hand, in the ase of most routine area ins!etions,
there is no om!elling urgeny to ins!et at a !artiular time or on a !artiular day# Moreo$er, most iti%ens
allow ins!etions of their !ro!erty without a warrant# 3hus, as a !ratial matter and in light of the Fourth
Amendment*s re4uirement that a warrant s!eify the !ro!erty to be searhed, it seems li&ely that warrants
should normally be sought only after entry is refused unless there has been a iti%en om!laint or there is
other satisfatory reason for seuring immediate entry# Similarly, the re4uirement of a warrant !roedure does
not suggest any hange in what seems to be the !re$ailing loal !oliy, in most situations, of authori%ing
entry, but not entry by fore, to ins!et# 7erein, +amara has been harged with a rime for his refusal to
!ermit housing ins!etors to enter his leasehold without a warrant# 3here was no emergeny demanding
immediate aess, in fat, the ins!etors made three tri!s to the building in an attem!t to obtain +amara*s
onsent to searh# Set no warrant was obtained and thus a!!ellant was unable to $erify either the need for or
the a!!ro!riate limits of the ins!etion# Do doubt, the ins!etors entered the !ubli !ortion of the building
with the onsent of the landlord, through the building*s manager, but the +ityB+ounty does not ontend that
suh onsent was suffiient to authori%e ins!etion of +amara*s !remises# Assuming the fats to be as the
!arties ha$e alleged, amara had a onstitutional right to insist that the ins!etors obtain a warrant to searh
and that a!!ellant may not onstitutionally be on$ited for refusing to onsent to the ins!etion# 5t a!!ears
from the o!inion of the -istrit +ourt of A!!eal that under these irumstanes a writ of !rohibition will issue
to the riminal ourt under +alifornia law#
192 "n RE! 8;il, 8;il vs. Ra;os [GR (1)62, 9 *#ly 1991]D also RoH#e vs. %e ?illa [GR (4)(1-(2],
"n RE! Anon#evo. Anon#evo vs. Ra;os [GR (4)(3-(4], "n RE! >caya. >caya vs. A:#irre [GR
(3162], "n RE! Es'iri#. Es'iri# vs. Li; [GR ()222], an% "n RE! =azareno. =azareno vs.
4aion .o;;an%er o7 M#ninl#'a &olice 4aion [GR (6332]
En Banc, 7er %uriam: !! concur
Facs! A.+ =!C&B On 1 February 19==, the (egional 5ntelligene O!erations Unit of the +a!ital +ommand
;(5OU>+A'+OM< reei$ed onfidential information about a member of the D'A S!arrow Unit ;li4uidation
s4uad< being treated for a gunshot wound at the St# Agnes 7os!ital in (oose$elt A$enue, Iue%on +ity# U!on
$erifiation, it was found that the wounded !erson, who was listed in the hos!ital reords as (onnie Ca$elon,
is atually (olando -ural, a member of the D'A li4uidation s4uad, res!onsible for the &illing of 2 +A'+OM
soldiers the day before, or on )1 Canuary 19==, in Maanining Street, :agong :arrio, +alooan +ity# 5n $iew
of this $erifiation, -ural was transferred to the (egional Medial Ser$ies of the +A'+OM, for seurity
reasons# 1hile onfined thereat, or on 4 February 19==, -ural was !ositi$ely identified by eyewitnesses as
the gunman who went on to! of the hood of the +A'+OM mobile !atrol ar, and fired at the 2 +A'+OM
soldiers seated inside the ar identified as 3BSgt# +arlos 'abon and +5+ (enato Manligot# As a onse4uene
of this !ositi$e identifiation, -ural was referred to the +alooan +ity Fisal who onduted an in4uest and
thereafter filed with the (egional 3rial +ourt of +alooan +ity an information harging (olando -ural alias
(onnie Ca$elon with the rime of A-ouble Murder with Assault U!on Agents of 'ersons in Authority#A
;+riminal +ase +>)8112, no bail reommended<# On 15 February 19==, the information was amended to
inlude, as defendant, :ernardo 5tual, Cr# who, at the filing of the original information, was still unidentified#
Meanwhile, on / February 19==, a !etition for habeas or!us was filed with the Su!reme +ourt on behalf of
(oberto Umil, (olando -ural, and (enato Fillanue$a# 3he +ourt issued the writ of habeas or!us on 9
February 19== and Fidel F# (amos, Ma0# "en# (enato de Filla, :rig# "en# (amon Montano, and :rig# "en#
Ale.ander Aguirre filed a (eturn of the 1rit on 12 February 19==# 3hereafter, the !arties were heard on 15
February 19==# On 2/ February 19==, howe$er, Umil and Fillanue$a !osted bail before the (egional 3rial
+ourt of 'asay +ity where harges for $iolation of the Anti>Sub$ersion At had been filed against them, and
they were aordingly released#
"ss#e! 1hether -ural an be $alidly arrested without any warrant of arrest for the rime of rebellion#
$el%! -ural, it learly a!!ears that he was not arrested while in the at of shooting the 2 +A'+OM soldiers
nor was he arrested 0ust after the ommission of the said offense for his arrest ame a day after the said
shooting inident# Seemingly, his arrest without warrant is un0ustified# 7owe$er, -ural was arrested for being
a member of the Dew 'eo!les Army ;D'A<, an outlawed sub$ersi$e organi%ation# Sub$ersion being a
ontinuing offense, the arrest of (olando -ural without warrant is 0ustified as it an be said that he was
ommitting an offense when arrested# 3he rimes of rebellion, sub$ersion, ons!iray or !ro!osal to ommit
suh rimes, and rimes or offenses ommitted in furtherane thereof or in onnetion therewith onstitute
diret assaults against the State and are in the nature of ontinuing rimes# 3he arrest of !ersons in$ol$ed in
the rebellion whether as its fighting armed elements, or for ommitting non>$iolent ats but in furtherane of
the rebellion, is more an at of a!turing them in the ourse of an armed onflit, to 4uell the rebellion, than
for the !ur!ose of immediately !roseuting them in ourt for a statutory offense# 3he arrest, therefore, need
not follow the usual !roedure in the !roseution of offenses whih re4uires the determination by a 0udge of
the e.istene of !robable ause before the issuane of a 0udiial warrant of arrest and the granting of bail if
the offense is bailable# Ob$iously, the absene of a 0udiial warrant is no legal im!ediment to arresting or
a!turing !ersons ommitting o$ert ats of $iolene against go$ernment fores, or any other milder ats but
e4ually in !ursuane of the rebellious mo$ement# 3he arrest or a!ture is thus im!elled by the e.igenies of
the situation that in$ol$es the $ery sur$i$al of soiety and its go$ernment and duly onstituted authorities#
19( &eo'le vs. 4#cro [GR 93239, 1( Marc, 1991]
Third Division, .utierre6 Jr* (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 21 Marh 19=9, 'at# (oy Fulgenio, a member of the 5D', Jalibo, A&lan, was instruted by 'B6t#
Fiente Seras!i, Cr# ;Station +ommander of the 5D' Jalibo, A&lan< to monitor the ati$ities of ?dison Suro,
beause of information gathered by Seras!i that Suro was selling mari0uana# As !lanned, at about 5H88 '#M#
on said date, 'at# Fulgenio !ositioned himself under the house of a ertain Arlie (egalado at +# Iuim!o
Street# Ad0aent to the house of (egalado, about 2 meters away, was a ha!el# 3hereafter, 'at# Fulgenio saw
Suro enter the ha!el, ta&ing something whih turned out later to be mari0uana from the om!artment of a
art found inside the ha!el, and then return to the street where he handed the same to a buyer, Aldie
:orromeo# After a while Suro went ba& to the ha!el and again ame out with mari0uana whih he ga$e to a
grou! of !ersons# 5t was at this instane that 'at# Fulgenio radioed 'B6t# Seras!i and re!orted the ati$ity
going on 'B6t# Seras!i instruted 'at# Fulgenio to ontinue monitoring de$elo!ments# At about /H)8 '#M#,
'at# Fulgenio again alled u! Seras!i to re!ort that a third buyer later identified as (onnie Maabante, was
transating with Suro# At that !oint, the team of 'B6t Seras!i !roeeded to the area and while the !olie
offiers were at the South 7ostel at Maagma St#, 'at# Fulgenio told 'B6t# Seras!i to intere!t Maabante and
Suro# 'B 6t# Seras!i and his team aught u! with Maabante at the rossing of Mabini and Maagma Sts# in
front of the A&lan Medial +enter# U!on seeing the !olie, Maabante threw something to the ground whih
turned out to be a tea bag of mari0uana# 1hen onfronted, Maabante readily admitted that he bought the
same from Suro in front of the ha!el# 3he !olie team was able to o$erta&e and arrest Suro at the orner of
+# Iuim!o and Feterans Sts# 3he !olie reo$ered 19 sti&s and 4 teabags of mari0uana from the art inside
the ha!el and another teabag from Maabante# 3he teabags of mari0uana were sent to the '+>5D' +rime
6aboratory Ser$ie, at +am! -elgado, 5loilo +ity for analysis# 3he s!eimens were all found !ositi$e of
mari0uana# Suro was harged with $iolation of Setion 4, Artile 55 of the -angerous -rugs At# U!on
arraignment, Suro, assisted by ounsel, entered a !lea of Anot guiltyA to the offense harged# 3rial ensued and
a 0udgment of on$ition was rendered, finding Suro guilty of the sale of !rohibited drug and sentening him
to suffer the !enalty of life im!risonment, and !ay a fine of '28,888, and osts# Suro a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the arrest without warrant of the aused is lawful and onse4uently, whether the e$idene
resulting from suh arrest is admissible#
$el%! Setion 5, (ule 11) of the (ules on +riminal 'roedure !ro$ides for the instanes where arrest without
warrant is onsidered lawful# 3he rule states that AA !eae offier or !ri$ate !erson may, without warrant,
arrest a !ersonH ;a< 1hen in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or
is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and he has !ersonal
&nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it,A An offense is ommitted in the
!resene or within the $iew of an offier, within the meaning of the rule authori%ing an arrest without a
warrant, when the offier sees the offense, although at a distane, or hears the disturbanes reated thereby
and !roeeds at one to the sene thereof# 3he failure of the !olie offiers to seure a warrant stems from the
fat that their &nowledge a4uired from the sur$eillane was insuffiient to fulfill the re4uirements for the
issuane of a searh warrant# 1hat is !aramount is that !robable ause e.isted# Still, that searhes and
sei%ures must be su!!orted by a $alid warrant is not an absolute rule# Among the e.e!tions granted by law is
a searh inidental to a lawful arrest under Se# 12, (ule 12/ of the (ules on +riminal 'roedure, whih
!ro$ides that a !erson lawfully arrested may be searhed for dangerous wea!ons or anything whih may be
used as !roof of the ommission of an offense, without a searh warrant# 7erein, !olie offiers ha$e !ersonal
&nowledge of the atual ommission of the rime when it had earlier onduted sur$eillane ati$ities of the
aused# Under the irumstanes ;monitoring of transations< there e.isted !robable ause for the arresting
offiers, to arrest Suro who was in fat selling mari0uana and to sei%e the ontraband# 3hus, as there is
nothing unlawful about the arrest onsidering its om!liane with the re4uirements of a warrantless arrest,
ergo, the fruits obtained from suh lawful arrest are admissible in e$idene#
199 &eo'le vs. Doria [GR 12)299, 22 *an#ary 1999]
En Banc, 7uno (J): !3 concur
Facs! 5n Do$ember 1995, members of the Dorth Metro!olitan -istrit, 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie ;'D'<
Darotis +ommand ;Darom<, reei$ed information from 2 i$ilian informants ;+5< that one ACunA was
engaged in illegal drug ati$ities in Mandaluyong +ity# 3he Darom agents deided to entra! and arrest ACunA
in a buy>bust o!eration# As arranged by one of the +5*s, a meeting between the Darom agents and ACunA was
sheduled on 5 -eember 1995 at ?# Cainto Street in Mandaluyong +ity# On 5 -eember 1995, at /H88 a#m#,
the +5 went to the 'D' 7ead4uarters at ?-SA, Jamuning, Iue%on +ity to !re!are for the buy>bust o!eration#
3he Darom agents formed 3eam Al!ha om!osed of 'B5ns!# Dolaso +ortes as team leader and 'O) +elso
Manlangit, S'O1 ?dmund :adua and four ;4< other !oliemen as members# 'B5ns!# +ortes designated 'O)
Manlangit as the !oseur>buyer and S'O1 :adua as his ba&>u!, and the rest of the team as !erimeter seurity#
Su!erintendent 'edro Alantara, +hief of the Dorth Metro!olitan -istrit 'D' Darom, ga$e the team
'2,888#88 to o$er o!erational e.!enses# From this sum, 'O) Manlangit set aside '1,/88#88 K a one
thousand !eso bill and si. ;/< one hundred !eso bills K as money for the buy>bust o!eration# 3he mar&et
!rie of one &ilo of mari0uana was then '1,/88#88# 'O) Manlangit mar&ed the bills with his initials and listed
their serial numbers in the !olie blotter# 3he team rode in two ars and headed for the target area# At 9H28
a#m#, ACunA a!!eared and the +5 introdued 'O) Manlangit as interested in buying one ;1< &ilo of mari0uana#
'O) Manlangit handed ACunA the mar&ed bills worth '1,/88#88# ACunA instruted 'O) Manlangit to wait for
him at the orner of Shaw :oule$ard and Cainto Street while he got the mari0uana from his assoiate# An
hour later, ACunA a!!eared at the agreed !lae where 'O) Manlangit, the +5 and the rest of the team were
waiting# ACunA too& out from his bag an ob0et wra!!ed in !lasti and ga$e it to 'O) Manlangit# 'O)
Manlangit forthwith arrested ACunA as S'O1 :adua rushed to hel! in the arrest# 3hey fris&ed ACunA but did not
find the mar&ed bills on him# U!on in4uiry, ACunA re$ealed that he left the money at the house of his assoiate
named ADeneth#A ACunA led the !olie team to ADeneth*sA house nearby at -aang :a&al# 3he team found the
door of ADeneth*sA house o!en and at woman inside# ACunA identified the woman as his assoiate# S'O1 :adua
as&ed ADenethA about the '1,/88#88 as 'O) Manlangit loo&ed o$er ADeneth*sA house# Standing by the door,
'O) Manlangit notied a arton bo. under the dining table# 7e saw that one of the bo.*s fla!s was o!en and
inside the bo. was something wra!!ed in !lasti# 3he !lasti wra!!er and its ontents a!!eared similar to the
mari0uana earlier AsoldA to him by ACun#A 7is sus!iion aroused, 'O) Manlangit entered ADeneth*sA house and
too& hold of the bo.# 7e !ee&ed inside the bo. and found that it ontained 18 bri&s of what a!!eared to be
dried mari0uana lea$es# Simultaneous with the bo.*s diso$ery, S'O1 :adua reo$ered the mar&ed bills from
ADeneth#A 3he !oliemen arrested ADeneth#A 3hey too& ADenethA and ACun,A together with the bo., its
ontents and the mar&ed bills and turned them o$er to the in$estigator at head4uarters# 5t was only then that
the !olie learned that ACunA is Florenio -oria y :olado while ADenethA is Fioleta "addao y +atama# 3he 1
bri& of dried mari0uana lea$es reo$ered from ACunA !lus the 18 bri&s reo$ered from ADeneth*sA house
were e.amined at the 'D' +rime 6aboratory# 3he bri&s were found to be dried mari0uana fruiting to!s of
$arious weights totalling 9,/41#8= grams# On 9 -eember 1995, -oria and "adda were harged with $iolation
of Setion 4, in relation to Setion 21 of the -angerous -rugs At of 1992# After trial, the (egional 3rial
+ourt, :ranh 15/, 'asig +ity on$ited -orria and "addao# 3he trial ourt found the e.istene of an
Aorgani%edBsyndiated rime grou!A and sentened both to death and !ay a fine of '588,888#88 eah# 7ene,
the automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether the warrantless arrests of -oria and "addao are legally !ermissible#
$el%! 5t is reogni%ed that in e$ery arrest, there is a ertain amount of entra!ment used to outwit the !ersons
$iolating or about to $iolate the law# Dot e$ery dee!tion is forbidden# 3he ty!e of entra!ment the law forbids
is the induing of another to $iolate the law, the AsedutionA of an otherwise innoent !erson into a riminal
areer# 1here the riminal intent originates in the mind of the entra!!ing !erson and the aused is lured into
the ommission of the offense harged in order to !roseute him, there is entra!ment and no on$ition may
be had# 1here, howe$er, the riminal intent originates in the mind of the aused and the riminal offense is
om!leted, the fat that a !erson ating as a deoy for the state, or !ubli offiials furnished the aused an
o!!ortunity for ommission of the offense, or that the aused is aided in the ommission of the rime in
order to seure the e$idene neessary to !roseute him, there is no entra!ment and the aused must be
on$ited# 3he law tolerates the use of deoys and other artifies to ath a riminal# 3he warrantless arrest of
-oria is not unlawful# 1arrantless arrests are allowed in three instanes as !ro$ided by Setion 5 of (ule 11)
of the 19=5 (ules on +riminal 'roedure, to witH AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant,
arrest a !ersonH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or
is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and he has !ersonal
&nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it, and ;< 1hen the !erson to be
arrested is a !risoner who esa!ed from a !enal establishment or !lae where he is ser$ing final 0udgment or
tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending, or has esa!ed while being transferred from one onfinement
to another# ...A Under Setion 5 ;a<, as abo$e>4uoted, a !erson may be arrested without a warrant if he Ahas
ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense#A 7erein, -oria was aught in the
at of ommitting an offense# 1hen an aused is a!!rehended in flagrante delito as a result of a buy>bust
o!eration, the !olie are not only authori%ed but duty>bound to arrest him e$en without a warrant# 3he
warrantless arrest of "addao, the searh of her !erson and residene, and the sei%ure of the bo. of mari0uana
and mar&ed bills, howe$er, are different matters# Our +onstitution !rosribes searh and sei%ure without a
0udiial warrant and any e$idene obtained without suh warrant is inadmissible for any !ur!ose in any
!roeeding# 3he rule is, howe$er, not absolute# Searh and sei%ure may be made without a warrant and the
e$idene obtained therefrom may be admissible in the following instanesH ;1< searh inident to a lawful
arrest, ;2< searh of a mo$ing motor $ehile, ;)< searh in $iolation of ustoms laws, ;4< sei%ure of e$idene
in !lain $iew, ;5< when the aused himself wai$es his right against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures# 3o
be lawful, the warrantless arrest of a!!ellant "addao must fall under any of the three ;)< instanes enumerated
in Setion 5 of (ule 11) of the 19=5 (ules on +riminal 'roedure# "addao was not aught red>handed during
the buy>bust o!eration to gi$e ground for her arrest under Setion 5 ;a< of (ule 11)# She was not ommitting
any rime# +ontrary to the finding of the trial ourt, there was no oasion at all for "addao to flee from the
!oliemen to 0ustify her arrest in Ahot !ursuit#A 5n fat, she was going about her daily hores when the
!oliemen !ouned on her# Deither ould the arrest of "addao be 0ustified under the seond instane of (ule
11)# A'ersonal &nowledgeA of fats in arrests without warrant under Setion 5 ;b< of (ule 11) must be based
u!on A!robable auseA whih means an Aatual belief or reasonable grounds of sus!iion#A "addao was
arrested solely on the basis of the alleged identifiation made by her o>aused, -oria# Sa$e for -oria*s
word, the Darom agents had no reasonable grounds to belie$e that she was engaged in drug !ushing# 5f there
is no showing that the !erson who effeted the warrantless arrest had, in his own right, &nowledge of fats
im!liating the !erson arrested to the !er!etration of a riminal offense, the arrest is legally ob0etionable#
Sine the warrantless arrest of "addao was illegal, it follows that the searh of her !erson and home and the
subse4uent sei%ure of the mar&ed bills and mari0uana annot be deemed legal as an inident to her arrest#
211 &eo'le vs. Go [GR 116111, 14 Marc, 2111]D also Go vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 123943]
3irst Division, 0nares12antiago (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 22 Otober 1992, at around 18H88 !#m#, S'O1 Mauro 'iamonte and S'O) +andido 6i4uido,
members of the 5ntelligene and Follow>u! Unit of the +alamba 'olie, went to the !olie out!ost at
+rossing, +alamba, 6aguna, to follow u! an intelligene re!ort that metham!hetamine hydrohloride, or
shabu, a regulated drug, was being su!!lied there# 'olie i$ilian agent (onnie 'anuringan arri$ed and
re!orted to them that he saw 6uisito "o, also &nown as AJing 6ouieA, enter the Flamingo -iso 7ouse with
two women# 'anuringan said that he s!otted a gun tu&ed in "o*s waist# 3ogether, the three !oliemen
!roeeded to the Flamingo, whih was loated about a hundred meters away from the out!ost# 1hen they
arri$ed at the Flamingo, the !olie offiers informed the owner that they were onduting an AO!eration
:a&al,A whereby they searh for illegally !ossessed firearms# 3he owner allowed them in and told a waiter to
aom!any them# 3hey went u! to the seond floor of the diso# 3he waiter turned on the lights, and the
!olie offiers saw "o and his lady om!anions seated at a table# 3hey identified themsel$es and as&ed "o to
stand u!# 1hen the later did so, the !oliemen saw the gun tu&ed in his waist# S'O1 'iamonte as&ed for the
liense of the gun, but "o was unable to !rodue any# 5nstead, "o brought out the dri$er*s liense of a ertain
3an Antonio 6erios# S'O1 'iamonte onfisated the gun, whih was later identified as a 9mm 1alther '==,
Serial Dumber 88/9=4, with a maga%ine ontaining 18 rounds of li$e ammunition# "o was in$ited to the
!olie !reint for 4uestioning# On the way out of the diso, "o as&ed !ermission to bring his ar, whih was
!ar&ed outside# 3he !olie offiers aom!anied "o to his ar, a 7onda +i$i with liense !late number
3+M>9=9# 3hrough the windshield, S'O) 6i4uido notied a 'hili!!ine Dational 'olie identifiation ard
hanging from the rear$iew mirror# 7e as&ed "o if he was a member of the 'D', and he said no# 3he !olie
offiers as&ed "o for his dri$er*s liense and the registration !a!ers of the $ehile, but he was unable to
!rodue them# 1hen "o o!ened the door, S'O) 6i4uido too& the 5- ard and found that the same belonged
to S'O4 @enaida :agadiong# 3he !olie offiers saw !iees of glass tooters and tin foils on the ba&seat and
floor of the ar# 3hey as&ed "o why he had these items, but he did not say anything# 5nstead, "o suggested
that they tal& the matter o$er, and intimated that he had money# S'O) 6i4uido re!lied that they should tal& at
the !olie head4uarters# "o too& out an attahX ase from the ar and o!ened it# 3here were two bla& luth
bags inside# "o o!ened the first bag, whih ontained shiny white substane wra!!ed in ello!hane# 3he
seond bag ontained '128,888#88 in ash# 3he !olie offiers brought "o to the !olie station# 1hen they
arri$ed at the !reint, they turned o$er the attahX ase together with the two bla& luth bags to the
in$estigator# 3he in$estigator found eight ello!hane bags ontaining granules sus!eted to be shabu in one of
the luth bags# 1hen the attahX ase was o!ened, the !olie offiers found that it also ontained three glass
tooters, tin foils, an im!ro$ised burner, maga%ines and news!a!ers# +onse4uently, two 5nformations were
filed against "o before the (egional 3rial +ourt of +alamba, 6aguna, :ranh )4 ;+riminal +ase ))8=>92>+,
for $iolation of Artile 555 of (A /452 or the -angerous -rugs At, and +riminal +ase ))89>92>+, for
$iolation of '- 1=//< After a 0oint trial, the lower ourt rendered 0udgment on$iting "o in the two riminal
ases, and sentening him in +riminal +ase ))8=>92>+ to a !enalty of im!risonment of / years and 1 day to
12 years and a fine of '12,888#88, and in +riminal +ase ))89>92>+ to suffer an im!risonment of relusion
!er!etua# "o a!!ealed his on$ition in +riminal +ase ))89>92>+ diretly to the Su!reme +ourt ;"(
11/881<# On the other hand, "o brought his a!!eal of the 0udgment in +riminal +ase ))8=>92>+ before the
+ourt of A!!eals# 5n an Amended -eision dated 21 February 199/, the +ourt of A!!eals affirmed "o*s
on$ition but modified the !enalty im!osed by the trial ourt by sentening him, in addition to im!risonment
of / years and 1 day to 12 years, to !ay a fine of '/,888#88, iting Setion = of (A /425, with subsidiary
im!risonment in ase of insol$eny# "o filed the !etition for re$iew ;"( 12)94)<# 3he two ases were
subse4uently onsolidated#
"ss#e! 1hether "o was legally arrested without warrant for illegal !ossession of firearms and illegal drugs#
$el%! 3he onstitutional !rosri!tion, that no !erson shall be arrested without any warrant of arrest ha$ing
been issued !rior thereto, is not a hard>and>fast rule# 3he (ules of +ourt and 0uris!rudene reogni%e
e.e!tional ases where an arrest may be effeted without a warrant# Among these are when, in the !resene
of a !eae offier, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit
an offense, or when an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and the arresting offier has !ersonal
&nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it# 7erein, the !olie saw the gun
tu&ed in "o*s waist when he stood u!# 3he gun was !lainly $isible# Do searh was onduted as none was
neessary# "o ould not show any liense for the firearm, whether at the time of his arrest or thereafter# 3hus,
he was in effet ommitting a rime in the !resene of the !olie offiers# Do warrant of arrest was neessary
in suh a situation, it being one of the reogni%ed e.e!tions under the (ules# As a onse4uene of "o*s $alid
warrantless arrest, he may be lawfully searhed for dangerous wea!ons or anything whih may be used as
!roof of the ommission of an offense, without a searh warrant, as !ro$ided in (ule 12/, Setion 12# 3his is
a $alid searh inidental to the lawful arrest# 3he subse4uent diso$ery in his ar of drug !ara!hernalia and
the rystalline substane, whih was later identified as shabu, though in a distant !lae from where the illegal
!ossession of firearm was ommitted, annot be said to ha$e been made during an illegal searh# As suh, the
sei%ed items do not fall within the e.lusionary lause, whih states that any e$idene obtained in $iolation of
the right against warrantless arrest annot be used for any !ur!oses in any !roeeding# 7ene, not being fruits
of the !oisonous tree, so to s!ea&, the ob0ets found at the sene of the rime, suh as the firearm, the shabu
and the drug !ara!hernalia, an be used as e$idene against a!!ellant# :esides, it has been held that drugs
diso$ered as a result of a onsented searh is admissible in e$idene#
211 &eo'le vs. %e G#z;an [GR 1129)2-)3, 14 Fe3r#ary 2111]
3irst Division, 0nares12antiago (J): 4 concur
Facs! 'rior to the arrest of -anilo de "u%man, the 'olie +hief 5ns!etor of the +a$ite 'hili!!ine Dational
'olie +ommand issued an Order of :attle listing the names of the sus!eted drug !ushers in +a$ite +ity#
5nluded therein was the name of de "u%man# 5n res!onse to the said direti$e, the Do$eleta 'olie Station
assigned S'O1 Arnel +ue$as to ondut sur$eillane at the Fillamar :eah (esort# On 1= Otober 1992,
S'O1 Arnel +ue$as s!otted -anilo de "u%man at the Fillamar :eah (esort, but the latter stayed for only )8
minutes# Subse4uently, he learned that -e "u%man was engaged in a drug sale that day and re!orted the same
to head4uarters# 'ursuant to his re!ort, the +hief of 5ntelligene of their station, S'O2 (owell 3endero,
instruted him to ontinue his sur$eillane of said beah resort with the ho!e of athing de "u%man# On 2/
Otober 1992, at around 9H88 !#m#, de "u%man returned to Fillamar :eah (esort with om!anion ?dsel
Martin# 3hey rented one of the resort ottages# 15 minutes later, S'O1 +ue$as limbed the ladder whih he
!erhed on the onrete wall of the ottage# 7e, then, !ee!ed through the window of the ottage and saw
-anilo and ?dsel seated fae to fae while using shabu# 7e also saw on to! of the table ) !lasti bags of
shabu, a weighing sale and other drug related !ara!hernalia# S'O1 +ue$as hurriedly desended the ladder
and hailed a triyle and instruted the dri$er to inform S'O2 3endero to !roeed to Fillamar :eah (esort
immediately# Shortly, S'O2 3endero, along with other !olie offiers, arri$ed at the beah resort# 7owe$er,
instead of rushing to the ottage of -e "u%man and Martin, the !olie offiers deided to wait for them to
ome out of the ottage# S'O1 +ue$as e.!lained that they did this so as not to forewarn the two of their
!resene# Otherwise, the two might sim!ly flush the shabu down the toilet bowl and destroy the e$idene# 3he
!olie offiers waited the whole night for -e "u%man and Martin to ome out of the ottage# Finally, -e
"u%man ame out at around 9H48 a#m# the ne.t day# S'O2 3endero nabbed him u!on seeing that his waist was
bulging with a gun# 1hile 'olie Offier Fedar held -e "u%man, S'O2 3endero went u! the ottage to he&
on Martin# S'O2 Alfaro and S'O) :ena$ise, aom!anied by a hambermaid and a boy from the resort, also
went u! with him# 5nside the ottage, the same !ara!hernalia whih the witness saw the night before were
found, namely, ) !lasti bags of shabu, a !lasti soo!, a burner, a lighter, se$eral em!ty rolled aluminum
foils, ) !iees of tooter, rubber band, se$eral !iees of !a!er, a bla& luth bag ontaining a dis!osable
lighter, 2 fore!s, a !air of sissors, a &nife and a &ey holder with a &nife, filter, sand!a!er, eletri !lug,
!o&et eletroni weighing sale# -e "u%man was brought to the !olie station for 4uestioning and detention#
3he !olie offiers were without warrants of arrest or searh warrants at the time of the arrests and sei%ure of
e$idene# As the o!eration was onduted largely during nighttime, the !olie offiers were unable to seure
the neessary warrants for fear of lea$ing the !lae of sur$eillane# Subse4uent forensi e.amination by
Feliisima Franiso of the Dational :ureau of 5n$estigation showed that the substane sei%ed was indeed
metham!hetamine hydrohloride or shabu weighing 299#5 grams# 5n +riminal +ase )9>94, -e "u%man and
Martin, the latter is still at large, were harged with $iolation of Setion 1/, Artile 555 of (e!ubli At /425
;-angerous -rugs At of 1992<# 5n +riminal +ase 48>94, de "u%man was harged with $iolation of Setion 1,
'- 1=// ;Unlawful 'ossession of Firearms and Ammunition<# -e "u%man was arraigned on 22 February
199) with the assistane of his ounsel de offiio# 7e !leaded Anot guiltyA to both harges# On 22 August
1994, the (egional 3rial +ourt of +a$ite +ity, :ranh 19, found de "u%man guilty of $iolation of Setion 1/,
Artile 555, (e!ubli At /425 and sentened him to suffer the !enalty of life im!risonment and to !ay a fine
of '58,888#88 without subsidiary im!risonment in ase of insol$eny# Furthermore, the trial ourt found him
guilty of $iolation of Setion 1, 'residential -eree 1=// and sentened him to suffer im!risonment of 12
years and 1 day of relusion tem!oral, as minimum, to 28 years of relusion tem!oral, as ma.imum, and to
!ay the osts in both instanes# -e "u%man a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether de "u%man2s arrest and the subse4uent sei%ure of drug !ara!hernalia inside de "u%man2s
ottage were legal e$en without issued warrants for those !ur!oses#
$el%! 3he !olie offiers* manner of onduting de "u%man*s arrest was not tainted with any onstitutional
infirmity# -es!ite word from their fellow offier, S'O1 +ue$as, that he saw -e "u%man sniff AshabuA, they
resisted the first im!ulse to storm the rented ottage whih ould ha$e aused them to seriously disregard
onstitutional safeguards# 5nstead, the !olie offiers waited for the needed o!ening to $alidly arrest de
"u%man# 3o their minds, it would be the arri$al of drug buyers# As the situation would ha$e it, the arrest was
neessitated by the !resene of de "u%man with a gun ob$iously tu&ed in his !ants# (ule 11), Setion 5 ;a<
of the (ules of +ourt !ro$ides that AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant, arrest a
!ersonH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is
attem!ting to ommit an offense#A 5n this 0urisdition, the mere !ossession of a firearm, ammunition or
mahinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the manufature of any firearm or ammunition is
a riminal offense under '- 1=//# -e "u%man was aught by the !olie offiers in flagrante delito while
arrying a firearm without the neessary !ermit or liense# +learly, it was in $iolation of '- 1=//, Setion 1,
at the time of the arrest# Deessarily, the searh onduted immediately after -e "u%man*s arrest was $alid#
(ule 12/, Setion 12 of the (ules of +ourt !ro$ides that Aa !erson lawfully arrested may be searhed for
dangerous wea!ons or anything whih may be used as !roof of the ommission of an offense, without a
searh warrant# 3he legal !arameters of this rule limit its a!!liation to instanes when the searh is made
ontem!oraneous to the arrest and within a !ermissible area of searh#A 5n this ase, it was im!ossible for the
!olie offiers to obtain a searh warrant as they were merely on sur$eillane, and to do so might abort any
!ossible illegal ati$ity that was ta&ing !lae# Any attem!t at lea$ing the !lae may ause them to lose sight
of the aused>a!!ellant altogether# Seond, their !resene in the area was not !lanned as they ated !urely on
a ti! gi$en by a fellow offier# Further, there was not enough o!!ortunity to obtain a warrant of arrest or a
searh warrant as the sur$eillane was onduted from 18H88 !#m# u! to 9H88 a#m# 3he searh onduted
immediately after de "u%man was a!!rehended was made more neessary by the !resene of his om!anion
inside the ottage whih was 0ust a few ste!s away from where he stood# 3he !resene of de "u%man*s
om!anion !osed a danger to the !olie offiers* life and limb, hene, it beame neessary for them to loate
him# U!on entry at the rented ottage, the !olie offiers saw the shabu and drug> related !ara!hernalia
sattered on to! of the table# Curis!rudene allows the sei%ure of !ersonality des!ite absene of warrant under
the A!lain $iew dotrine,A so long as the area of searh is within the immediate ontrol of the arrested !erson
and that the ob0et of the searh was o!en to the eye, as in the !resent ase#
212 &eo'le vs. Gerene [GR 9)(42-4(, 11 Marc, 1993]
3irst Division, .rino1:,uino (J): 3 concur
Facs! At about 9H88 a#m# of )8 A!ril 1998, "abriel "erente, together with Fredo ?higoren and 3otoy
?higoren, allegedly started drin&ing li4uor and smo&ing mari0uana in "erente*s house whih is about /
meters away from the house of ?dna ?dwina (eyes who was in her house on that day# She o$erheard the three
men tal&ing about their intention to &ill +larito :lae# She testified that she heard Fredo ?higoren saying,
A"abriel, !a!atayin natin si +larito :lae#A Fredo and 3otoy ?higoren and "erente arried out their !lan to
&ill +larito :lae at about 2H88 !#m# of the same day# (eyes allegedly witnessed the &illing# Fredo ?higoren
stru& the first blow against +larito :lae, followed by 3otoy ?higoren and "abriel "erente who hit him
twie with a !iee of wood in the head and when he fell, 3otoy ?higoren dro!!ed a hollow blo& on the
$itim*s head# 3hereafter, the three men dragged :lae to a !lae behind the house of "erente# At about 4H88
!#m# of the same day, 'atrolman Caime Urrutia of the Falen%uela 'olie Station reei$ed a re!ort from the
'alo 'olie -etahment about a mauling inident# 7e went to the Falen%uela -istrit 7os!ital where the
$itim was brought# 7e was informed by the hos!ital offiials that the $itim died on arri$al# 3he ause of
death was massi$e frature of the s&ull aused by a hard and hea$y ob0et# (ight away, 'atrolman Urrutia,
together with 'olie +or!oral (omeo 6ima and 'atrolman Ale. Umali, !roeeded to 'aseo de :las where the
mauling inident too& !lae# 3here they found a !iee of wood with blood stains, a hollow blo& and two
roahes of mari0uana# 3hey were informed by (eyes that she saw the &illing and she !ointed to "abriel
"erente as one of the three men who &illed +larito# 3he !oliemen !roeeded to the house of "erente, who
was then slee!ing# 3hey told him to ome out of the house and they introdued themsel$es as !oliemen#
'atrolman Urrutia fris&ed "erente and found a oin !urse in his !o&et whih ontained dried lea$es wra!!ed
in igarette foil# 3he dried lea$es were sent to the Dational :ureau of 5n$estigation for e.amination# 3he
Forensi +hemist found them to be mari0uana# Only "erente was a!!rehended by the !olie# 3he other
sus!ets, Fredo and 3otoy ?higoren, are still at large# On 2 May 1998, two se!arate informations were filed
by Assistant 'ro$inial 'roseutor :en0amin +araig against him for Fiolation of Setion =, Art# 55, of (A
/425, and for Murder# 1hen arraigned on 1/ May 1998, "erente !leaded not guilty to both harges# A 0oint
trial of the two ases was held# On 24 Se!tember 1998, the (egional 3rial +ourt of Falen%uela, Metro Manila,
:ranh 192, found "erente guilty of Fiolation of Setion = of (e!ubli At /425 and sentened him to suffer
the !enalty of im!risonment for a term of 12 years and 1 day, as minimum, to 28 years, as ma.imum, and also
found him guilty of Murder for whih rime he was sentened to suffer the !enalty of relusion !er!etua# #
"erente a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the !olie offiers ha$e the !ersonal &nowledge of the &illing of :lae to allow them to arrest,
and the subse4uent searhly "erente2s !erson, without the neessary warrant#
$el%! 3he searh of "erente*s !erson and the sei%ure of the mari0uana lea$es in his !ossession were $alid
beause they were inident to a lawful warrantless arrest# 'aragra!hs ;a< and ;b<, Setion 5, (ule 11) of the
(e$ised (ules of +ourt !ro$ide that AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant, arrest a
!ersonH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is
attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and he has !ersonal
&nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it,A 3he !oliemen arrested
"erente only some ) hours after "erente and his om!anions had &illed :lae# 3hey saw :lae dead in the
hos!ital and when they ins!eted the sene of the rime, they found the instruments of deathH a !iee of wood
and a onrete hollow blo& whih the &illers had used to bludgeon him to death# 3he eye>witness, ?dna
?dwina (eyes, re!orted the ha!!ening to the !oliemen and !in!ointed her neighbor, "erente, as one of the
&illers# Under those irumstanes, sine the !oliemen had !ersonal &nowledge of the $iolent death of :lae
and of fats indiating that "erente and two others had &illed him, they ould lawfully arrest "erente without
a warrant# 5f they had !ost!oned his arrest until they ould obtain a warrant, he would ha$e fled the law as his
two om!anions did# 3he searh onduted on "erente*s !erson was li&ewise lawful beause it was made as
an inident to a $alid arrest# 3his is in aordane with Setion 12, (ule 12/ of the (e$ised (ules of +ourt
whih !ro$ides that AA !erson lawfully arrested may be searhed for dangerous wea!ons or anything whih
may be used as !roof of the ommission of an offense, without a searh warrant#A 3he fris& and searh of
"erente*s !erson u!on his arrest was a !ermissible !reautionary measure of arresting offiers to !rotet
themsel$es, for the !erson who is about to be arrested may be armed and might atta& them unless he is first
disarmed#
213 &eo'le vs. 4inoc [GR 113)11-12, 1 *#ly 1992]
Third Division, >arvasa (%J): 4 concur
Facs! On 28 Se!tember 1991, at about /H88 a#m#, 5sidoro Fiarusis, manager of 3aganito Mining
+or!oration, was motoring from the om!any om!ound ;at 3aganito, +la$er, Surigao del Dorte< to Surigao
+ity# 7e was riding on a om!any $ehile, a Mitsubishi 'a0ero ;-FE>)99<, dri$en by 3arisio "ui0a!on# As
Fiarusis and "ui0a!on were a!!roahing the !ubli emetery of +la$er, they were sto!!ed by se$eral armed
men# 3he latter, identifying themsel$es as members of the Dew 'eo!le*s Army ;D'A<, boarded the 'a0ero and
ordered "ui0a!on to !roeed# 1hen they reahed :arobo, Surigao del Dorte, the armed men ordered Fiarusis
and "ui0a!on to alight, led them, their hands bound behind their ba& to a oonut gro$e some / meters from
the road, and after ma&ing them lie fae down on the ground, shot them se$eral times# Fiarusis miraulously
sur$i$ed# 3he dri$er, "ui0a!on, was not as lu&y, he died on the s!ot# At about 9 a#m# the following day, a
seret informant ;&nown as a Ai$ilian assetA< named :oyet re!orted to the !olie Station at Mon&ayo, -a$ao
del Dorte that the stolen ;Aarna!!edA< A'a0eroA was !ar&ed behind the a!artment of a ertain 'aulino O$era
at the :liss 7ousing 'ro0et at 'oblaion, Mon&ayo# On instrutions of the Station +ommander, a !olie team
went to the !lae# 3hey saw the A'a0eroA and, their initial in4uiries ha$ing yielded the information that the
man who had brought it there would return that morning, !osted themsel$es in suh a manner as to &ee! it in
$iew# Some ) hours later, at about 18H)8 a#m#, they saw a man a!!roah the A'a0eroA who, on seeing them,
tried to run away# 3hey sto!!ed him# 3hey found out that the man, identified as -anilo Sino of Surigao del
Dorte, had the &ey of the A'a0ero,A and was ating under instrutions of ertain om!anions who were waiting
for him at the Star 6odge at 3agum, -a$ao del Dorte# (iding on the reo$ered A'a0ero,A the !olie offiers
brought Sino to the Star 6odge only to diso$er that his om!anions were no longer there# 3hey later turned
o$er Sino to the 459th Mobile Fore, together with the A'a0ero#A Sino, Fiente Salon Q A-odong,A
:en0amin ?s!inosa Q A:en0i,A Caime Cornales Q ACames,A Fitorino -elegenia Q Cun>"ren,A and one (oger
-oe Q A(amA ;at large< were harged on 2) Canuary 1992# Only Sino and Fiente Salon were arraigned, on
14 Culy 1992, the other aused being then at large# Assisted by their res!eti$e ounsel, both Sino and Salon
entered !leas of not guilty and were thereafter 0ointly tried# On 9 Otober 199), the (egional 3rial +ourt of
Surigao +ity, :ranh )8, found Sino guilty beyond reasonable doubt in two ases 0ointly triedH one, of the
s!eial om!le. rime of &idna!!ing with murder ;under Artile 2/9 in relation to Artiles 24= 2 and 4= ) of
the (e$ised 'enal +ode< K in +riminal +ase )5/4, and the other, of the om!le. rime of &idna!!ing with
frustrated murder ;under Artiles 2/9, 24=, / 4 and 4= of the same +ode< K in +riminal +ase )5/5# 5n eah
ase, the !enalty of relusion !er!etua was im!osed on him# Salon, on the other hand was a4uitted inasmuh
as ons!iray was not !ro$en# Sino a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the !olie offier had !ersonal &nowledge of the rime Sino ommitted to allow them to
arrest the latter without a warrant of arrest#
$el%! 3he law !ro$ides that an arrest without warrant may be liitly effeted by a !eae offier, inter alia#
A1hen an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and he has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the
!erson to be arrested has ommitted it#A 3here is no 4uestion that the !olie offiers in this ase were aware
that an offense had 0ust been ommitted, i#e#, that some 12 hours earlier, a A'a0eroA belonging to a !ri$ate
om!any had been stolen ;Aarna!!edA< and its dri$er and !assenger shot, the former ha$ing died and the
latter being on the $erge of death# Dor is there any doubt that an informer ;AassetA< had re!orted that the stolen
A'a0eroA was at the :liss 7ousing 'ro0et at Mon&ayo# 5t was !reisely to reo$er the A'a0eroA that a team
om!osed of S'O1 Mihael Aringo and A0oint elements of 459 'D' MF+ and Monayo 'olie Station led by
5ns!tr ?den 3# Ugale,A went to that !lae and, on ta&ing ustody of the A'a0ero,A forthwith dis!athed a radio
message to A7igher 7ead4uartersA ad$ising of that fat# 3here is no 4uestion either that when S'O1 Aringo
and his om!anions reahed the !lae where the A'a0eroA was !ar&ed, they were told by 'aulino O$era, owner
of the a!artment behind whih the $ehile was !ar&ed, that the man who had brought the A'a0eroA would be
ba& by 12H88 noon, that the !erson thus desribed did in fat show u! at about 18H88 A#M#, and was
immediately identified by O$era as Athe one who rode on that ar *'a0ero,*A 0ust as there is no 4uestion that
when the !olie offiers aosted him, Sino had the &ey to the stolen A'a0eroA and was in the at of mo$ing
toward it admittedly to ta&e !ossession of it ;after ha$ing arri$ed by bus from 3agum together with another
sus!et, A(amA<# Sino*s lin& to the stolen $ehile ;and hene to the &idna!!ing and &illing aom!anying its
as!ortation< was thus !al!able# 3he foregoing irumstanes left the !olie offiers no alternati$e sa$e to
arrest Sino and ta&e !ossession of the A'a0ero#A 7is arrest without warrant was 0ustified, indeed, it was in the
!remises the offiers* lear duty to a!!rehend him, their omission to do so would ha$e been ine.usable#
214 &eo'le vs. +a#la [GR 132621, 1) =ove;3er 2111]
Third Division, Vitug (J): 3 concur
Facs! On 1) -eember 1995, at around =H88 !#m#, Cu!iter +aburao, allegedly deided to follow his mother,
'atroinia +aburao, who had earlier left their house at :arangay Siwasiw 1est, Sual, 'angasinan, to settle her
due obligations at a store, about 1 1B2 &ilometers away, owned by a ertain :rigida 3umamang# 1hile
tra$ersing the road towards the store, Cu!iter allegedly notied a ommotion near the ree& about 18 meters
away from him# 7e allegedly foused his flashlight towards the diretion where he heard the ommotion and
Constitutional Law II, 2005 ( )
saw +risanto :aula and -anilo -auos in the at of ha&ing a !erson who was lying on the ground, while
(obert :aula and (uben :aula stood as loo&outs# 3he assault allegedly lasted for about 4minutes# 3he :aulas
and -auos allegedly fled but not before they had threatened Cu!iter with death if he were to di$ulge the
inident to anyone# Cu!iter went near the lifeless body of the $itim who turned out to be his own mother# 7er
head and fae sustained four ha&ing wounds, two of whih damaged her brain tissues# Cu!iter rushed home
and brought his niee and ne!hew to the house of a neighbor for their safety# For fear of re!risal from the
:aulas, et# al# and belie$ing that the !olie would be able to sol$e the gory &illing on their own, Cu!iter did
not re$eal the damage to either his relati$es or the !olie# About 2H88 a#m# of 14 -eember 1995, the !olie
authorities, led by S'O4 Fermin Mirande, went to the lous riminis, and too& !itures of the body of the
$itim# 3he in$estigation re$ealed that before the $itim was &illed, she had been to :rigida 3umamang*s
store, that the :aulas, et# al# were also at the store ha$ing a drin&ing s!ree, that the $itim left the store
between 9H88 !#m# and =H88 !#m#, and that, 15 minutes later, the :aulas, et# al# also left# S'O4 Mirande, with
se$eral !oliemen, re!aired to the res!eti$e houses of aused>a!!ellants# 3he !oliemen as&ed (uben :aula
and +risanto :aula for the lothing they wore on the night of the murder# (uben :aula ga$e his bloodstained
!air of short !ants, and +risanto :aula turned o$er his bloodstained !olo shirt# 3he !oliemen ne.t went to
the hut of -anilo -auos# 5nside the hut, the grou! found hanging on the wall a bloodstained bolo# 3he
bloodstained !air of short !ants, !olo shirt and bolo, together with the $itim*s dried blood sam!les, were sent
on the same day to the Dational :ureau of 5n$estigation, -agu!an +ity :ranh Offie, for forensi
e.amination# 3he results of the e.amination dislosed that the bloodstains found in the bolo, the bloodstains
on the !olo shirt and the bloodstains on the !air of short !ants had the same ty!e AOA blood as that of the
$itim# On 9 August 199/, +risanto :aula, (uben :aula, (obert :aula and -anilo -auos were harged
with murder before the (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh )=, of 6ingayen, 'angasinan# 1hen arraigned, the
aused all entered a !lea of not guilty to the offense harged# 3rial shortly thereafter ensued# 3he :aulas, et#
al# denied their in$ol$ement in 'atroinia2s &illing# 3he trial ourt rendered its 0udgment on 19 Do$ember
1999, on$iting :aula, et# al# of the rime harged, and sentened them to suffer the !enalty of (elusion
'er!etua and to !ay, 0ointly and se$erally, the heirs of 'atroinia +aburao ;a< 58,888#88 for the death of
'atroinia +aburao, ;b< '15,888#88 for funeral e.!enses, ;< moral damages of '95,888#88, and ;d< to !ay
!ro!ortionally the osts# :aula, et# al# a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the :aulas an be arrested without warrant for the &illing of 'etroinia +aburao, and whether
sei%ures an be effeted !ursuant to suh arrests#
$el%! 3he !rosri!tion against unreasonable searhes and sei%ures is not absolute, and the +ourt has had
oasions to rule that a warrantless searh and sei%ure of !ro!erty is $alid under ertain irumstanes# 3here
an, for instane, be a lawful warrantless searh inidental to a lawful arrest reogni%ed under Setion 12,
(ules 12/ of the (ules of +ourt and by !re$ailing 0uris!rudene, or sei%ure of e$idene in A!lain $iew,A its
elements being e.tant, or searh of a mo$ing $ehile, or onsented searh, or ustoms searh# 3he situation
here in 4uestion, howe$er, an hardly ome within the !ur$iew of any of the established e.e!tions# 5n a
warrantless searh inidental to a lawful arrest, the arrest itself must ha$e to be effeted under the
irumstanes enumerated by law# One suh ase is when an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and the
!eae offier has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it#
-anilo -auos, +risanto :aula and (uben :aula were not being arrested at the time that the bloodstained
bolo, !olo shirt and short !ants were allegedly ta&en from them but were 0ust being 4uestioned by the !olie
offiers onduting the in$estigation about the death of 'atroinia +aburao# 3he in$estigating offiers had no
!ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the aused had ommitted the rime# :eing in no !osition to
effet a warrantless arrest, the !olie offiers were thus li&ewise barred from effeting a warrantless searh
and sei%ure# 3he !olie offiers ated on a mere sus!iion that :aula, et# al# ould be res!onsible for the
ommission of the rime and only beause of their being at the store where the $itim was last seen# Mere
sus!iion annot satisfy the re4uirement of !robable ause whih signifies a reasonable ground of sus!iion
su!!orted by irumstanes suffiiently strong in themsel$es to warrant a autious man to belie$e that the
!erson aused is guilty of the offense with whih he an be harged# An illegal searh annot be underta&en
and then an arrest effeted on the strength of the e$idene yielded by that searh# 3he +ourt finds it less than
redible the stane of the !roseution that the !olo shirt and short !ants ha$e been $oluntarily gi$en# An
alleged onsent to a warrantless searh and sei%ure annot be based merely on the !resum!tion of regularity
in the !erformane of duty# 3his !resum!tion by itself, annot !re$ail against the onstitutionally !roteted
rights of an indi$idual, and %eal in the !ursuit of riminals annot ennoble the use of arbitrary methods that
the +onstitution itself abhors#
21) &eo'le vs. .#3c#3in [GR 136262, 11 *#ly 2111]
En Banc, 5endo6a (J): !( concur, ! on o""icial /usiness, ! on leave
Facs! At about )H)8 a#m# of 2/ August 1999, Sgt# (ogel, des& offier of the +a$ite +ity !olie station,
reei$ed a tele!hone all that a !erson had been shot near the emetery along Culian Feli!e :oule$ard in San
Antonio, +a$ite +ity# For this reason, a !olie team, om!osed of S'O1 Malinao, Cr#, 'O) (osal, 'O) ?stoy,
Cr#, 'O) Maniio, and S'O) Manalo, res!onded to the all and found 7enry '# 'iamonte slum!ed dead on his
triyle whih was then !ar&ed on the road# 'olie !hotogra!her Fred Agana too& !itures of the rime sene
showing the $itim slum!ed on the handle of the triyle# 'O) (osal testified that a triyle dri$er, who
refused to di$ulge his name, told him that Fidel Abrenia +ububin Cr# and the $itim were last seen together
oming out of the Sting +afe, loated in San Antonio near the gate of Sangley 'oint, +a$ite +ity, about a
&ilometer and a half away from the rime sene# Forthwith, 'O) (osal and S'O1 Malinao, Cr# went to the
afe and tal&ed to -anet "arellano, a food ser$erBwaitress in Sting +afe# "arellano desribed +ububin as a
lean, dar&>om!le.ioned, and mustahioed man who had on a white t>shirt and brown short !ants# Armando
'lata, another triyle dri$er, told 'O) (osal and S'O1 Malinao, Cr# that "arellano*s desri!tion fitted a
!erson &nown as alias ACun -ule#A Armando 'lata, who &new where +ububin li$ed, led 'O) (osal, S'O1
Malinao, Cr#, and 'roseutor 6u to +ubuubin*s house in "aria ?.tension, +a$ite +ity# 3he !oliemen
&no&ed on the door for about ) minutes before it was o!ened by a man who answered the desri!tion gi$en
by -anet "arellano and who turned out to be +ububin# 3he !olie o!erati$es identified themsel$es and
informed him that he was being sought in onnetion with the shooting near the emetery# +ububin denied
in$ol$ement in the inident# 'O) (osal and S'O1 Malinao, Cr# then as&ed !ermission to enter and loo&
around the house# S'O1 Malinao, Cr# said that u!on entering the house, he notied a white t>shirt, bearing the
brand name A7anesA and the name A-hen$herA written in the inner !ortion of the shirt*s hemline, !laed o$er
a di$ider near the &ithen# U!on lose e.amination, he said that he found it to be Abloodied#A 1hen he !i&ed
u! the t>shirt, two s!ent #)= aliber shells fell from it# 'O) (osal stayed with +ububin while he onduted a
searh# 3hey then too& the t>shirt and the two bullet shells# S'O1 Malinao, Cr# then as&ed +ububin to go with
them to Sting +afe for !ur!oses of identifiation# 3here, +ububin was !ositi$ely identified by -anet
"arellano as the $itim*s om!anion# 3he !olie in$estigators as&ed +ububin where the fatal gun was#
S'O1 Malinao, Cr# said +ububin refused to tell him where he hid the gun so he sought the latter*s !ermission
to go ba& to his house to ondut a further searh# 3hereu!on, S'O1 Malinao, Cr#, aom!anied by
'roseutor 6u, 'O) ?stoy, Cr#, 'O) Maniio, S'O) Manalo, and 'O) (osal, !roeeded thereto# 5nside the
house, they saw +ububin*s 11>year old son Chumar# 'O) ?stoy, Cr# found on to! of a !lasti water ontainer
;drum< outside the bathroom a homemade Smith and 1esson aliber #)= re$ol$er ;si. shooter<, without a
serial number# 7e found the gun loaded with fi$e li$e bullets# 'O) ?stoy, Cr# said that he insribed his initials
A(-?A ;for (aymundo -# ?stoy< on the ylinder of the gun with the use of a shar! ob0et# 1hile 'O) ?stoy,
Cr# was onduting the searh, S'O1 Malinao, Cr# and 'O) (osal stayed with +ububin in the sala# 3he #)=
aliber gun, the white A7anesA t>shirt, and the two s!ent #)= aliber shells were all !hotogra!hed# +ububin
was then ta&en to the !olie station, where he was !hotogra!hed along with the things sei%ed from him#
+ububin was harged for the rime of murder# On 5 Otober 199=, the (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh ==,
+a$ite +ity, found +ububin guilty of murder and sentened him to suffer the !enalty of death# 7ene, the
automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether there was A!robable auseA for 'O) (osal and S'O1 Malinao, Cr#, the arresting offiers, to
belie$e that +ububin ommitted the rime, to allow them to ondut the latter*s warrantless arrest#
$el%! (ule 11), P5 of the 19=5 (ules on +riminal 'roedure, as amended, !ro$ides that AA !eae offier or a
!ri$ate !erson may, without a warrant, arrest a !ersonH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has
ommitted, is atually ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen an offense has in fat 0ust
been ommitted, and he has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has
ommitted it, ;< 1hen the !erson to be arrested is a !risoner who has esa!ed from a !enal establishment or
!lae where he is ser$ing final 0udgment or tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending, or has esa!ed
while being transferred from one onfinement to another#A Under P5;b<, two onditions must onur for a
warrantless arrest to be $alidH first, the offender has 0ust ommitted an offense and, seond, the arresting !eae
offier or !ri$ate !erson has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has
ommitted it# 5t has been held that A!ersonal &nowledge of fats* in arrests without a warrant must be based
u!on !robable ause, whih means an atual belief or reasonable grounds of sus!iion#A 7erein, the arrest of
+ububin was effeted shortly after the $itim was &illed# 3here was no A!robable ause, howe$er, for 'O)
(osal and S'O1 Malinao, Cr#, the arresting offiers, to belie$e that +ububin ommitted the rime# 3he two
did not ha$e A!ersonal &nowledge of fatsA indiating that +ububin had ommitted the rime# 3heir
&nowledge of the irumstanes from whih they allegedly inferred that +ububin was !robably guilty was
based entirely on what they had been told by others, to witH by someone who alled the 'D' station in San
Antonio, +a$ite +ity at about )H)8 a#m# of 2/ August 1999 and re!orted that a man had been &illed along
Culian Feli!e :oule$ard of the said ity, by an alleged witness who saw +ububin and the $itim oming out
of the Sting +afe, by -anet "arellano, waitress at the Sting +afe, who said that the man last seen with the
$itim was lean, mustahioed, dar&>om!le.ioned and was wearing a white t>shirt and a !air of brown short
!ants, by a triyle dri$er named Armando 'lata who told them that the !hysial desri!tion gi$en by
"arellano fitted +ububin, alias ACun -uleA and who said he &new where +ububin li$ed and aom!anied
them to +ububin*s house# 3hus, 'O) (osal and S'O1 Malinao, Cr# merely relied on information gi$en to
them by others# :e that as it may, +ububin annot now 4uestion the $alidity of his arrest without a warrant#
3he reords show that he !leaded not guilty to the harge when arraigned on 11 Do$ember 1999# +ububin
did not ob0et to the arraignment, and thus has wai$ed the right to ob0et to the legality of his arrest# On the
other hand, the searh of +ububin*s house was illegal and, onse4uently, the things obtained as a result of the
illegal searh, i#e#, the white A7anesA t>shirt, two s!ent shells, and the #)= aliber gun, are inadmissible in
e$idene against him# 5t annot be said that the #)= aliber gun was diso$ered through inad$ertene# After
bringing +ububin to the Sting +afe where he was !ositi$ely identified by a waitress named -anet "arellano
as the $itim*s om!anion, the arresting offiers allegedly as&ed +ububin where he hid the gun used in
&illing the $itim# Aording to S'O1 Malinao, Cr#, when +ububin refused to answer, he sought +ububin*s
!ermission to go ba& to his house and there found the #)= aliber re$ol$er on to! of a !lasti water ontainer
outside the bathroom# 3hus, the gun was !ur!osely sought by the !olie offiers and they did not merely
stumble u!on it# Dor were the !olie offiers 0ustified in sei%ing the white A7anesA t>shirt !laed on to! of the
di$ider Ain !lain $iewA as suh is not ontraband nor is it inriminating in nature whih would lead S'O1
Malinao, Cr# to onlude that it would onstitute e$idene of a rime# +ontrary to what S'O1 Malinao, Cr# said,
the t>shirt was not AbloodiedA whih ould ha$e direted his attention to ta&e a loser loo& at it# From the
!hotogra!h of the t>shirt, it is not $isible that there were bloodstains# 3he atual t>shirt merely had some small
s!e&s of blood at its lower !ortion# Furthermore, there is no e$idene to lin& +ububin diretly to the rime#
216 &eo'le vs. Ro%ri:#eza [GR 9)912, 4 Fe3r#ary 1992]
Facs! A7rosecutionB At around 5H88 !#m# of 1 Culy 19=9, +5+ +iriao 3aduran was in their head4uarters at
the Offie of the Darotis (egional Unit at +am! :agong 5balon, 6egas!i +ity, together with SBSgt# ?l!idio
Molinawe, +5+ 6eonardo :# "alutan and their ommanding offier, Ma0or +risostomo M# @eidem, when a
onfidential informer arri$ed and told them that there was an ongoing illegal traffi of !rohibited drugs in
3agas, -araga, Albay# Ma0or @eidem formed a team to ondut a buybust o!eration, whih team was gi$en
'288#88 in different denominations to buy mari0uana# 3hese bills were treated with ultra$iolet !owder at the
'hili!!ine +onstabulary +rime 6aboratory ;'++6<# Sgt# Molinawe ga$e the money to 3aduran who ated as
the !oseur buyer# 7e was told to loo& for a ertain -on, the alleged seller of !rohibited drugs# 3aduran went to
3agas alone and, while along the road, he met Samuel Sego$ia# 7e as&ed Sego$ia where he ould find -on
and where he ould buy mari0uana# Sego$ia left for a while and when he returned, he was aom!anied by a
man who was later on introdued to him as -on (odrigue%a# After agreeing on the !rie of '288#88 for 188
grams of mari0uana, -on halted a !assing triyle dri$en by Antonio 6oneras# 7e boarded it and left 3aduran
and Sego$ia# 1hen he ame ba&, -on ga$e 3aduran Aa ertain ob0et wra!!ed in a !lastiA whih was later
identified as mari0uana, and reei$ed !ayment therefor# 3hereafter, 3aduran returned to the head4uarters and
made a re!ort regarding his said !urhase of mari0uana# :ased on that information, Ma0or @eidem ordered a
team to ondut an o!eration to a!!rehend the sus!ets# 5n the e$ening of the same date, +5+ "alutan and
SBSgt# Molinawe !roeeded to (egidor Street, -araga, Albay and arrested (odrigue%a, Antonio 6oneras and
Samuel Sego$ia# 3he onstables were not, howe$er, armed with a warrant of arrest when they a!!rehended
the three aused# 3he arrests were brought to the head4uarters for in$estigation# 3hereafter, agents of the
Darotis +ommand ;DA(+OM< onduted a raid in the house of Co$enio (odrigue%a, -on*s father#
3aduran did not go with them# -uring the raid, they were able to onfisate dried mari0uana lea$es and a
!lasti syringe, among others# 3he searh, howe$er, was not authori%ed by any searh warrant# 3he ne.t day,
Co$enio (odrigue%a was released from detention but -on (odrigue%a was detained# ADe"enseB -on
(odrigue%a, on the other hand, laimed that on said date he was in the house of his aunt in San (o4ue,
6egas!i +ity# 7e stayed there o$ernight and did not lea$e the !lae until the ne.t day when his brother arri$ed
and told him that their father was ta&en by some military men the !reeding night# (odrigue%a went to +am!
:agong 5balon and arri$ed there at around =H88 a#m# of 2 Culy 19=9# 1hen he arri$ed, he was as&ed if he
&new anything about the mari0uana inident, to whih 4uestion he answered in the negati$e# 6i&e Sego$ia, he
was made to hold a '18#88 bill and was brought to the rime laboratory for e.amination# From that time on,
he was not allowed to go home and was detained inside the am!# 7e was also tortured in order to ma&e him
admit his om!liity in the alleged sale of mari0uana#
On 18 Culy 19=9, -on (odrigue%a, Samuel Sego$ia and Antonio 6oneras, for !ossession of 188 grams of
mari0uana lea$es and for selling, in a buy>bust o!eration, said 188 grams of dried mari0uana lea$es for a
onsideration of '288#88# -uring the arraignment, all the aused !leaded not guilty to the harge against
them# 3he (egional 3rial +ourt of 6egas!i +ity, :ranh 18, found -on (odrigue%a guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of $iolating Setion 4, Artile 55 of the -angerous -rugs At of 1992 ;(e!ubli At /425, as amended<
and sentened him to suffer the !enalty of life im!risonment and to !ay a fine of '28,888#88 and osts# 3he
ourt, howe$er, a4uitted Sego$ia and 6oneres# (odrigue%a a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether the time of -on (odrigue%a2s arrest is material in determining his ul!ability in the rime
harged#
$el%! As !ro$ided in the !resent +onstitution, a searh, to be $alid, must generally be authori%ed by a searh
warrant duly issued by the !ro!er go$ernment authority# 3rue, in some instanes, the +ourt has allowed
go$ernment authorities to ondut searhes and sei%ures e$en without a searh warrant# 3hus, when the owner
of the !remises wai$es his right against suh inursion, when the searh is inidental to a lawful arrest, when
it is made on $essels and airraft for $iolation of ustoms laws, when it is made on automobiles for the
!ur!ose of !re$enting $iolations of smuggling or immigration laws, when it in$ol$es !rohibited artiles in
!lain $iew, or in ases of ins!etion of buildings and other !remises for the enforement of fire, sanitary and
building regulations, a searh may be $alidly made e$en without a searh warrant# 7erein, howe$er, the raid
onduted by the DA(+OM agents in the house of Co$enio (odrigue%a was not authori%ed by any searh
warrant# 5t does not a!!ear, either, that the situation falls under any of the aforementioned ases# 7ene,
(odrigue%a*s right against unreasonable searh and sei%ure was learly $iolated# 3he DA(+OM agents ould
not ha$e 0ustified their at by in$o&ing the urgeny and neessity of the situation beause the testimonies of
the !roseution witnesses re$eal that the !lae had already been !ut under sur$eillane for 4uite some time#
7ad it been their intention to ondut the raid, then they should, beause they easily ould, ha$e first seured
a searh warrant during that time# Further, the inonsistenies made by !roseution witnesses gi$e more
redibility to the testimony of -on (odrigue%a# 1hile it is true that (odrigue%a*s defense amounts to an alibi,
and as suh is the wea&est defense in a riminal !roseution, there are, nonetheless, some e$identiary as!ets
!ointing to the truth in his testimony# Firstly, the Coint Affida$it of Arrest orroborates his testimony that he
was not among those who were arrested on the night of 1 Culy 19=9# 7is o>aused Sego$ia also testified that
(odrigue%a was not with them when they were a!!rehended by the DA(+OM agents# 7ene, (odrigue%a is
a4uitted of the rime harged, due to the failure of the !roseution to establish its ause#
212 Go vs. .o#r o7 A''eals [GR 111(32, 11 Fe3r#ary 1992]
En Banc, 3eliciano (J): C concur
Facs! On 2 Culy 1991, ?ldon Maguan was dri$ing his ar along 1ilson St#, San Cuan, Metro Manila, heading
towards '# "ue$arra St# (olito "o y 3ambunting entered 1ilson St#, where it is a one>way street and started
tra$eling in the o!!osite or AwrongA diretion# At the orner of 1ilson and C# Abad Santos Sts#, "o*s and
Maguan*s ars nearly bum!ed eah other# "o alighted from his ar, wal&ed o$er and shot Maguan inside his
ar# "o then boarded his ar and left the sene# A seurity guard at a nearby restaurant was able to ta&e down
"o*s ar !late number# 3he !olie arri$ed shortly thereafter at the sene of the shooting and there retrie$ed an
em!ty shell and one round of li$e ammunition for a 9mm aliber !istol# Ferifiation at the 6and
3rans!ortation Offie showed that the ar was registered to one ?lsa Ang "o# 3he following day, the !olie
returned to the sene of the shooting to find out where the sus!et had ome from, they were informed that
"o had dined at +ra$ings :a&e Sho! shortly before the shooting# 3he !olie obtained a fasimile or
im!ression of the redit ard used by "o from the ashier of the ba&e sho!# 3he seurity guard of the ba&e
sho! was shown a !iture of "o and he !ositi$ely identified him as the same !erson who had shot Maguan#
7a$ing established that the assailant was !robably "o, the !olie launhed a manhunt for "o# On = Culy 1991,
"o !resented himself before the San Cuan 'olie Station to $erify news re!orts that he was being hunted by
the !olie, he was aom!anied by two ;2< lawyers# 3he !olie forthwith detained him# An eyewitness to the
shooting, who was at the !olie station at that time, !ositi$ely identified "o as the gunman# 3hat same day,
the !olie !rom!tly filed a om!laint for frustrated homiide against "o with the Offie of the 'ro$inial
'roseutor of (i%al# First Assistant 'ro$inial 'roseutor -ennis Filla 5gnaio ;A'roseutorA< informed "o, in
the 'resene of his lawyers# that he ould a$ail himself of his right to !reliminary in$estigation but that he
must first sign a wai$er of the !ro$isions of Artile 125 of the (e$ised 'enal +ode# "o refused to e.eute any
suh wai$er# On 9 Culy 1991, while the om!laint was still with the 'roseutor, and before an information
ould be filed in ourt, the $itim, ?ldon Maguan, died of his gunshot wound;s<# Aordingly, on 11 Culy
1991, the 'roseutor, instead of filing an information for frustrated homiide, filed an information for murder
before the (egional 3rial +ourt# Do bail was reommended# At the bottom of the information, the 'roseutor
ertified that no !reliminary in$estigation had been onduted beause the aused did not e.eute and sign a
wai$er of the !ro$isions of Artile 125 of the (e$ised 'enal +ode# 5n the afternoon of 11 Culy 1991, "o*s
ounsel filed with the !roseutor an omnibus motion for immediate release and !ro!er !reliminary
in$estigation, alleging that the warrantless arrest of "o was unlawful and that no !reliminary in$estigation
had been onduted before the information was filed# On 12 Culy 1991, "o filed an urgent e.>!arte motion for
s!eial raffle in order to e.!edite ation on the 'roseutor*s bail reommendation# 3he ase was raffled to the
sala of Cudge :en0amin F# 'elayo ;:ranh 1/=, (3+ of 'asig +ity<, who, on the same date, a!!ro$ed the ash
bond !osted by "o and ordered his release# "o was in fat released that same day# On 1/ Culy 1991, the
'roseutor filed with the (egional 3rial +ourt a motion for lea$e to ondut !reliminary in$estigation and
!rayed that in the meantime all !roeedings in the ourt be sus!ended# On the said date, the trial ourt issued
an Order 9 granting lea$e to ondut !reliminary in$estigation and anelling the arraignment set for 15
August 1991 until after the !roseution shall ha$e onluded its !reliminary in$estigation# On 19 Culy 1991,
howe$er, the Cudge motu !ro!rio issued an Order, ;1< realling the 12 Culy 1991 Order whih granted bailH
!etitioner was gi$en 4= hours from reei!t of the Order to surrender himselfH ;2< realling and anelling the
1/ Culy 1991 Order whih granted lea$e to the 'roseutor to ondut !reliminary in$estigationH ;)< treating
"o*s omnibus motion for immediate release and !reliminary in$estigation dated 11 Culy 1991 as a !etition for
bail and set for hearing on 2) Culy 1991# On 19 Culy 1991, "o filed a !etition for ertiorari, !rohibition and
mandamus before the Su!reme +ourt assailing the 19 Culy 1991 Order# "o also mo$ed for sus!ension of all
!roeedings in the ase !ending resolution by the Su!reme +ourt of his !etitionH this motion was, howe$er,
denied by Cudge 'elayo# On 2) Culy 1991, "o surrendered to the !olie# :y a (esolution dated 24 Culy 1991,
the Su!reme +ourt remanded the !etition for ertiorari, !rohibition and mandamus to the +ourt of A!!eals#
On 1/ August 1991, Cudge 'elayo issued an order in o!en ourt setting "o*s arraignment on 2) August 1991#
On 19 August 1991, "o filed with the +ourt of A!!eals a motion to restrain his arraignment# On 2) August
1991, Cudge 'elayo issued a +ommitment Order direting the 'ro$inial 1arden of (i%al to admit "o into his
ustody at the (i%al 'ro$inial Cail# On the same date, "o was arraigned# 5n $iew, howe$er, of his refusal to
enter a !lea, the trial ourt entered for him a !lea of not guilty# 3he trial ourt then set the riminal ase for
ontinuous hearings on 19, 24 and 2/ Se!tember, on 2, ), 11 and 19 Otober, and on 9, =, 14, 15, 21 and 22
Do$ember 1991# On 29 August 1991# "o filed a !etition for habeas or!us in the +ourt of A!!eals# On )8
August 1991, the +ourt of A!!eals issued the writ of habeas or!us# 3he !etition for ertiorari, !rohibition
and mandamus, on the one hand, and the !etition for habeas or!us, u!on the other, were subse4uently
onsolidated in the +ourt of A!!eals# 3he +ourt of A!!eals, on 2 Se!tember 1991, issued a resolution
denying "o*s motion to restrain his arraignment on the ground that motion had beome moot and aademi#
On 19 Se!tember 1991, trial of the riminal ase ommened# On 2) Se!tember 1991, the +ourt of A!!eals
rendered a onsolidated deision dismissing the 2 !etitions on the grounds that "o*s warrantless arrest was
$alid and "o*s at of !osting bail onstituted wai$er of any irregularity attending his arrest, among others# On
) Otober 1991, the !roseution !resented three ;)< more witnesses at the trial# "o*s +ounsel also filed a
A1ithdrawal of A!!earaneA with the trial ourt, with "o*s onformity# On 4 Otober 1991, "o filed the
!resent !etition for (e$iew on +ertiorari# On 14 Otober 1991, the +ourt issued a (esolution direting Cudge
'elayo to held in abeyane the hearing of the riminal ase below until further orders from the Su!reme
+ourt#
"ss#e! 1hether "o was arrested legally without warrant for the &illing of Maguan, and is thus not entitled to
be released !ending the ondut of a !reliminary in$estigation#
$el%! "o*s warrantless AarrestA or detention does not fall within the terms of Setion 5 of (ule 11) of the
19=5 (ules on +riminal 'roedure whih !ro$ides that AA !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may, without a
warrant, arrest a !ersonH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be reated has ommitted, is atually
ommitting, or is attem!ting to ommit an offense, ;b< 1hen an offense has in fat 0ust been ommitted, and
he has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it, and ;< 1hen
the !erson to be arrested is a !risoner who has esa!ed from a !enal establishment or !lae where he is
ser$ing final 0udgment or tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending or has esa!ed while being
transferred from one onfinement to another# 5n ases falling under !aragra!hs ;a< and ;b< hereof, the !erson
arrested without a warrant shall be forthwith deli$ered to the nearest !olie station or 0ail, and he shall be
!roeeded against in aordane with (ule 112, Setion 9#A "o*s AarrestA too& !lae / days after the shooting
of Maguan# 3he AarrestingA offiers ob$iously were not !resent, within the meaning of Setion 5;a<, at the
time "o had allegedly shot Maguan# Deither ould the AarrestA effeted / days after the shooting be
reasonably regarded as effeted Awhen Lthe shooting hadM in fat 0ust been ommittedA within the meaning of
Setion 5 ;b<# Moreo$er, none of the AarrestingA offiers had any A!ersonal &nowledgeA of fats indiating that
"o was the gunman who had shot Maguan# 3he information u!on whih the !olie ated had been deri$ed
from statements made by alleged eyewitnesses to the shooting >> one stated that "o was the gunman another
was able to ta&e down the alleged gunman*s ar*s !late number whih turned out to be registered in "o*s
wife*s name# 3hat information did not, howe$er, onstitute A!ersonal &nowledge#A 5t is thus lear to the +ourt
that there was no lawful warrantless arrest of "o within the meaning of Setion 5 of (ule 11)# 5t is lear too
that Setion 9 of (ule 112 is also not a!!liable# 5ndeed, "o was not arrested at all# 1hen he wal&ed into the
San Cuan 'olie Station, aom!anied by two ;2< lawyers, he in fat !laed himself at the dis!osal of the
!olie authorities# 7e did not state that he was AsurrenderingA himself, in all !robability to a$oid the
im!liation he was admitting that he had slain ?ldon Maguan or that he was otherwise guilty of a rime#
1hen the !olie filed a om!laint for frustrated homiide with the 'roseutor, the latter should ha$e
immediately sheduled a !reliminary in$estigation to determine whether there was !robable ause for
harging "o in ourt for the &illing of ?ldon Maguan# 5nstead, as noted earlier, the 'roseutor !roeeded
under the erroneous su!!osition that Setion 9 of (ule 112 was a!!liable and re4uired "o to wai$e the
!ro$isions of Artile 125 of the (e$ised 'enal +ode as a ondition for arrying out a !reliminary
in$estigation# 3his was substanti$e error, for "o was entitled to a !reliminary in$estigation and that right
should ha$e been aorded him without any onditions# Moreo$er, sine "o had not been arrested, with or
without a warrant, he was also entitled to be released forthwith sub0et only to his a!!earing at the
!reliminary in$estigation#
21( &eo'le vs. .ali;li; [GR 1239(1, 31 A#:#s 2111]
En Banc, <uisum/ing (J): !4 concur
Facs! 6anie S# 6imin was 14 years old and had been li$ing with the family of Jagawad Manny Ferrer and
+resenia Ferrer for the !ast ) years# On the night of 2 A!ril 1995, she was left alone in one of the two houses
of the Ferrers sine her usual om!anions, the sons of Manny and +resenia, were out for the night ;diso<#
3he Ferrers were in the other house about 15 meters away# At around 11H)8 '#M#, she was awa&ened when she
heard somebody, later identified as Manuel +alimlim y Muyano, enter her room# +alimlim immediately
!o&ed a &nife at the left side of her ne& and said AAom!any me beause 5 &illed my wife#A She was then
dragged to the !ig !en, about =>9 meters away from the !lae where she sle!t# Afterwards, she was again
foribly ta&en ba& to her room, then to her ousin*s room and to the &ithen# 5n eah of these !laes,
+alimlim foribly had se.ual interourse with her while he !o&ed a &nife against her ne&# Aording to
6imin, she first reogni%ed +alimlim while they were in the &ithen when she was able to remo$e the loth
o$ering his fae# She stated that she &new +alimlim beause she had seen him always following her
whene$er she went to shool# 6imin laimed that she did not struggle nor shout nor resist beause she was
afraid that a!!ellant might &ill her# After the fourth interourse, +alimlim threatened that he would &ill her if
she re!orted the inidents# -es!ite the threat, she told her ousin, Maniris Ferrer, who then re!orted the
matter to -r# Dany Iuinto who li$ed nearby# 3he ra!es were re!orted to the station of S'O1 Mario Suratos
by Jagawad Ferrer# -r# (iardo Ferrer onduted the !hysial e.amination on 6anie, and found that there
was minimal $aginal bleeding and there were laerations in the hymen, the !ositions of whih were at 9H88
o*lo&, /H88 o*lo& and )H88 o*lo&, all fresh, indiating that there were insertions within the !ast 24 hours#
3here was also a whitish $aginal disharge whih was found !ositi$e for s!ermato%oa# Manuel +alimlim
denied the ausations# +alimlim was harged in 4 informations for ra!e in +riminal +ases U>=525, =/)= to
=/48# On 19 Do$ember 1995, the (egional 3rial +ourt, First Cudiial (egion, :ranh 4/, Urdaneta,
'angasinan found +alimlim guilty of 4 ounts of ra!e and sentened him to suffer the !enalty of death, to !ay
the offended !arty the amount of '58,888#88 as damages, and to !ay the osts, in eah of the ases# 7ene,
the automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether +alimlim may raise the illegality of the warrantless arrest onduted against him, es!eially
as the arrest was made a day after the rime was ommitted#
$el%! +alimlim a$ers that his arrest $iolated Setion 5 of (ule 11), 48 sine his arrest was made one day
after the rime was ommitted, but without any 0udiial warrant, although the !olie had am!le time to get
one# 3his he laims is also in $iolation of Artile 555, Se# 2 of the +onstitution# :ut here it will be noted that
+alimlim entered a !lea of not guilty to eah of the informations harging him of ra!e# 3hus, he had
effeti$ely wai$ed his right to 4uestion any irregularity whih might ha$e aom!anied his arrest and the
unlawful restraint of his liberty# 3his is lear from a reading of Setion 9 of (ule 119 of the (e$ised (ules of
+riminal 'roedure, whih !ro$ides that Athe failure of the aused to assert any ground of a motion to 4uash
before he !leads to the om!laint or information, either beause he did not file a motion to 4uash or failed to
allege the same in said motion, shall be deemed a wai$er of any ob0etions e.e!t those based on the grounds
!ro$ided for in !aragra!hs ;a<, ;b<, ;g< and ;i< of setion ) of this (ule#A "i$en the irumstanes of his ase,
the e.e!tions do not a!!ly here and the +ourt is onstrained to rule that +alimlim is esto!!ed from raising
the issue of the legality of his arrest# Moreo$er, the illegal arrest of an aused is not suffiient ause for
setting aside a $alid 0udgment rendered u!on a suffiient om!laint after a trial free from error# 3he defense*s
laim of warrantless arrest whih is illegal annot render $oid all other !roeedings inluding those leading to
the on$ition of +alimlim, nor an the state be de!ri$ed of its right to on$it the guilty when all the fats on
reord !oint to his ul!ability#
219 &eo'le vs. Enrile [GR 241(9, 26 May 1993]
Facs! At about /H)8 !#m# of 25 Otober 19=5, a buy>bust team om!osed of 'at# Caime Flores and 'at#
1ilson (anes of the Iue%on +ity 'olie Anti>Darotis Unit was dis!athed to entra! (ogelio Abugatal at
(oose$elt A$enue in San Franiso del Monte, Iue%on +ity# 3he !lan was made on the strength of a ti! gi$en
by (enato 'olines, a !olie informer, who was himself to !ose as the buyer# On that oasion the !oliemen
saw 'olines hand o$er to Abugatal the mar&ed money re!resenting !ayment for the mo& transation#
Abugatal left with the money and returned 18 minutes later with a wra!!ed ob0et whih he ga$e 'olines# 3he
two !oliemen then a!!roahed Abugatal and !laed him under arrest, at the same time onfisating the
wra!!ed ob0et# Subse4uent laboratory e.amination re$ealed this to be mari0uana with flowering to!s
weighing 22 grams# U!on !rodding, Abugatal led the !oliemen to a house at 28 -e Fera Street, also in San
Franiso del Monte, Iue%on +ity, where he alled out for Antonio ?nrile# ?nrile ame out and met them at
the gate# Abugatal !ointed to ?nrile as the soure of the mari0uana, whereu!on the !oliemen immediately
arrested and fris&ed him# 3hey found in the right front !o&et of his trousers the mar&ed money earlier
deli$ered to Abugatal# At the !olie head4uarters, Abugatal signed a sworn onfession# ?nrile refused to ma&e
any statement !ending onsultation with a lawyer# Antonio ?nrile y Fillaroman and (ogelio Abugatal y
Mar4ue% were harged for $iolation of the -angerous -rug At by the (egional 3rial +ourt of Iue%on +ity#
3he (3+, after trial and on 14 February 19=/, found ?nrile and Abugatal guilty beyond reasonable doubt and
sentened them to life im!risonment and a fine of ')8,888#88# :oth a!!ealed# Abugatal, howe$er, was &illed
in an attem!ted 0ailbrea& and thus the a!!eal is dismissed as to him#
"ss#e! 1hether the mar& money found in ?nrile2s !ossession, !ursuant to a warrantless arrest, searh and
sei%ure, !ro$ide for his riminal ul!ability#
$el%! 5t was Abugatal who was allegedly aught red>handed by the !oliemen as he sold the mari0uana to
'olines# ?nrile was not e$en at the sene of the entra!ment at that time# Abugatal said he did lead the
!oliemen to ?nrile*s house where he !ointed to ?nrile as the soure of the mari0uana# ?$en assuming this to
be true, that irumstane alone did not 0ustify ?nrile*s warrantless arrest and searh# Under (ule 11), Setion
5, of the (ules of +ourt, a !eae offier or a !ri$ate !erson may ma&e a warrantless arrest only under any of
the following irumstanesH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene, the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually
he has !ersonal &nowledge of fats indiating that the !erson to be arrested has ommitted it, and ;< 1hen
the !erson to be arrested is a !risoner who has esa!ed from a !enal establishment or !lae where he is
ser$ing final 0udgment or tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending, or has esa!ed while being
transferred from one onfinement to another# 'aragra!hs ;a< and ;b< are learly ina!!liable# 'aragra!h ;b< is
also not in !oint beause the !oliemen who later arrested ?nrile at his house had no !ersonal &nowledge that
he was the soure of the mari0uana# Aording to the !oliemen themsel$es, what ha!!ened was that they
as&ed Abugatal who ga$e him the mari0uana and were told it was ?nrile# 5t was for this reason that they
!roeeded to ?nrile*s house and immediately arrested him# 1hat the !oliemen should ha$e done was seure
a searh warrant on the basis of the information su!!lied by Abugatal and then, with suh authority,
!roeeded to searh and, if the searh was fruitful, arrest ?nrile# 3hey had no right to sim!ly fore themsel$es
into his house on the bare ;and subse4uently disallowed< allegations of Abugatal and bundle ?nrile off to the
!olie station as if he had been aught in flagrante delito# 3he diso$ery of the mar&ed money on him did
not mean he was aught in the at of selling mari0uana# 3he mar&ed money was not !rohibited !er se# ?$en if
it were, that fat alone would not retroati$ely $alidate the warrantless searh and sei%ure#
211 &eo'le vs. &as#%a: [GR 12((22, 4 May 2111]
3irst Division, 7ardo (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 2/ Se!tember 1995, at around 1H)8 !#m#, S'O2 'e!ito +ali! of the 'D' Sison, 'angasinan, went to
:rgy# Artaho to ondut anti>0ueteng o!erations# 7e urinated at a bushy bamboo fene behind the !ubli
shool# About 5 meters away, he saw a garden of about 98 s4uare meters# 3here were mari0uana !lants in
between orn !lants and amote to!s# 7e in4uired from a store&ee!er nearby as to who owned the house with
the garden# 3he storeowner told him that Alberto 'asudag y :o&ang owned it# S'O2 +ali! went to the 'olie
Station and re!orted to +hief of 'olie (omeo +# Astrero# 3he latter dis!athed a team ;om!osed of S'O2
+ali!, S'O) Fa0arito, S'O) Alantara and 'O) (asa< to ondut an in$estigation# At around 2H)8 !#m#, the
team arri$ed at :rgy# Artaho and went straight to the house of 'asudag# S'O) Fa0arito loo&ed for 'asudag
and as&ed him to bring the team to his ba&yard garden whih was about 5 meters away# U!on seeing the
mari0uana !lants, the !oliemen alled for a !hotogra!her, who too& !itures of 'asudag standing beside one
of the mari0uana !lants# 3hey u!rooted 9 mari0uana !lants# 3he team brought 'asudag and the mari0uana
!lants to the !olie station# On 19 -eember 199/, 4th Assistant 'ro$inial 'roseutor of 'angasinan
?miliano M# Matro filed with the (egional 3rial +ourt, 'angasinan, Urdaneta an 5nformation harging
'asudag with $iolation of (A /425, Se# 9# On 18 February 1999, the trial ourt arraigned the aused# 7e
!leaded not guilty# 3rial ensued# 3he (egional 3rial +ourt, 'angasinan, :ranh 4/, Urdaneta found 'asudag
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal ulti$ation of mari0uana and sentened him to relusion !er!etua
and to !ay a fine of '588,888#88, without subsidiary !enalty and other aessories of the law# 'asudag
a!!ealed#
"ss#e! 1hether time was of the essene to u!root and onfisate the mari0uana !lants#
$el%! As a general rule, the !rourement of a searh warrant is re4uired before a law enforer may $alidly
searh or sei%e the !erson, house, !a!ers or effets of any indi$idual# 3he +onstitution !ro$ides that Athe right
of the !eo!le to be seure in their !ersons, houses, !a!ers and effets against unreasonable searhes and
sei%ures of whate$er nature and for any !ur!ose shall be in$iolable#A Any e$idene obtained in $iolation of
this !ro$ision is inadmissible# 7erein, the !olie authorities had am!le o!!ortunity to seure from the ourt a
searh warrant# S'O2 'e!ito +ali! in4uired as to who owned the house# 7e was a4uainted with mari0uana
!lants and immediately reogni%ed that some !lants in the ba&yard of the house were mari0uana !lants# 3ime
was not of the essene to u!root and onfisate the !lants# 3hey were three months old and there was no
suffiient reason to belie$e that they would be u!rooted on that same day# 1ith the illegal sei%ure of the
mari0uana !lants, the sei%ed !lants are inadmissible in e$idene against 'asudag#
211 &eo'le vs. A;inn#%in [GR L-24(61, 6 *#ly 19((]
Facs! 5del Aminnudin y Ahni was arrested on 25 Cune 19=4, shortly after disembar&ing from the MBF 1ilon
9 at about =H)8 !#m#, in 5loilo +ity# 3he '+ offiers who were in fat waiting for him sim!ly aosted him,
ins!eted his bag and finding what loo&ed li&ed mari0uana lea$es too& him to their head4uarters for
in$estigation# 3he two bundles of sus!et artiles were onfisated from him and later ta&en to the D:5
laboratory for e.amination# 1hen they were $erified as mari0uana lea$es, an information for $iolation of the
-angerous -rugs At was filed against him# 6ater, the information was amended to inlude Farida Ali y
7assen, who had also been arrested with him that same e$ening and li&ewise in$estigated# :oth were
arraigned and !leaded not guilty# Subse4uently, the fisal filed a motion to dismiss the harge against Ali on
the basis of a sworn statement of the arresting offiers absol$ing her after a Athorough in$estigation#A 3he
motion was granted, and trial !roeeded only against Aminnudin, who was e$entually on$ited, and
sentened to life im!risonment !lus a fine of '28,888#88#
"ss#e! 1hether there was am!le o!!ortunity to obtain a warrant of arrest against Aminnudin, for alleged
!ossession and trans!ort of illegal drugs#
$el%! 5t is not dis!uted, and in fat it is admitted by the '+ offiers who testified for the !roseution, that
they had no warrant when they arrested Aminnudin and sei%ed the bag he was arrying# 3heir only
0ustifiation was the ti! they had earlier reei$ed from a reliable and regular informer who re!orted to them
that Aminnudin was arri$ing in 5loilo by boat with mari0uana# 3heir testimony $aries as to the time they
reei$ed the ti!, one saying it was two days before the arrest ;this was the delaration of the hief of the
arresting team, 6t# +i!riano Iuerol, Cr#<, another two wee&s and a third Awee&s before Cune 25#A 3here was no
warrant of arrest or searh warrant issued by a 0udge after !ersonal determination by him of the e.istene of
!robable ause# +ontrary to the a$erments of the go$ernment, Aminnudin was not aught in flagrante nor was
a rime about to be ommitted or had 0ust been ommitted to 0ustify the warrantless arrest allowed under (ule
11) of the (ules of +ourt# ?$en e.!edieny ould not be in$o&ed to dis!ense with the obtention of the
warrant# 3he !resent ase !resented no urgeny# From the onfliting delarations of the '+ witnesses, it is
lear that they had at least two days within whih they ould ha$e obtained a warrant to arrest and searh
Aminnudin who was oming 5loilo on the MBF 1ilon 9# 7is name was &nown# 3he $ehile was identified#
3he date of its arri$al was ertain# And from the information they had reei$ed, they ould ha$e !ersuaded a
0udge that there was !robable ause, indeed, to 0ustify the issuane of a warrant# Set they did nothing# Do
effort was made to om!ly with the law# 3he :ill of (ights was ignored altogether beause the '+ lieutenant
who was the head of the arresting team, had determined on his own authority that Asearh warrant was not
neessary#A
212 &eo'le vs. &lana [GR 12(2(), 22 =ove;3er 2111]
En Banc, 7er %uriam* !C concur*
Facs! On 2) Se!tember 1994, at around 18H)8 a#m#, Feli. 6agud was wal&ing at the feeder road in :arangay
+obe, -umarao, +a!i%# 7e 0ust ame from his farm in Ali!asyawan, -umarao and was on his way home to
'oblaion 5lawod# A mo$ement at about 58 meters to his left side aught his attention# 7e saw ) !ersons who
seemed to be wrestling# 7e ame nearer so he would be able to see them more learly# From about a distane
of 28 meters, he saw the ) men holding a girl while another man was on to! of her# 3he girl was being ra!ed
and she was later stabbed# Frightened that the assailants would see him, 6agud ran away# 7e intended to go
straight home but when he !assed by the house of 'orferio 7aguisan, the latter in$ited him for a Amilagrosa#A
6agud obliged and stayed at the house of his A&um!areA until 2H88 a#m# On 2/ Se!tember 1994, the $itim,
7elen 'erote, was found dead by her brother and the !olie in :rgy# +obe, -umarao, +a!i%# 3he body was in
!rone !osition and was already in an ad$ane state of deom!osition# 6agud identified Antonio 'lana ;Q
A+atongA<, ?dgardo 'erayra and (ene Salde$ea as the three men who were holding the girl while their fourth
om!anion was ra!ing her# At the time of the inident, he did not yet reogni%e the fourth man who was on
to! of the girl# 7owe$er, when he saw 'lana, et# al# at the munii!al hall where they were brought when they
were arrested on 2/ Se!tember 1994, he identified the fourth man to be (ihard :anday# On the other hand,
!er the !ost mortem e.amination onduted by -r# (iardo :etita, (ural 7ealth Offier of +uartero, +a!i%,
the $itim sustained the following in0uriesH ;1< +lean edges stab wound 2.5 m left anterior hest, ;2<
A$ulsion with irregular edges wound =.12 m middle hest area, ;)< A$ulsion of the nose and u!!er li!
!ortionBarea, ;4< +lean edges wound or stab wound 2.5 m e!igastri area, ;5< +lean edges stab wound 2.5
m left hy!ogastri area, ;/< +lean edges stab wound 2.5 m hy!ogastri area, ;9< +lean edges stab wound
2.5 m left !osterior u!!er ba&, ;=< +lean edges stab wound 2.5 m mid u!!er !ortion of the ba&, ;9<
+lean edges stab wound 2.5 m left !osterior ba& le$el of =th ribs, ;18< +lean edges stab wound 2.5 m left
ba& le$el of left lumbar area, ;11< +lean edges wound 2.5 m middle low ba& area, ;12< +lean edges
wound 2.5 m right low ba& area at le$el of lumbar area, ;1)< +lean edges wound 2.5 m left gluteal area
near the anus, ;14< FaginaH 5ntroitus an easily insert 2 fingersB7ymen with laeration ) and 9 o*lo& ;old
laeration< and on the state of deom!osition, and that the most !robable ause of death was massi$e
hemorrhage or blood loss seondary to multi!le stab wounds# Aording to -r# :etita, the $itim died more
than 92 hours already before the !olie authorities found her body# An information was filed against 'lana, et#
al# for the rime of ra!e with homiide before the (egional 3rial +ourt, :ranh 15 of (o.as +ity ;+riminal
+ase 4/59<# At their arraignment, 'lana, et# al# !leaded not guilty# On 2) Do$ember 199/, after due trial, a
0udgment was rendered by the trial ourt finding 'lana, et# al# guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the rime of
ra!e with homiide# 3he trial ourt im!osed u!on them the su!reme !enalty of death, and ordered them to !ay
0ointly and se$erally the heirs of the $itim, 7elen 'erote, '25,888#88 as atual damages and '58,888#88 as
i$il liability# 7ene, the automati re$iew#
"ss#e! 1hether the trial ourt erred in not ensuring the atuation of the !olie authorities in detaining 'lana,
et# al# without benefit of +ourt filed information nor 0udiial order of detention as well as $iolation of their
onstitutional rights during their so>alled ustodial in$itation and interrogation#
$el%! 'lana, et# al# already wai$ed their right to 4uestion the irregularity, if any, in their arrest# 3hey
res!eti$ely entered a !lea of Anot guiltyA at their arraignment# :y so !leading, they submitted to the
0urisdition of the trial ourt, thereby uring any defet in their arrest, for the legality of an arrest affets only
the 0urisdition of the ourt o$er their !ersons#
213 &eo'le vs. .on%e [GR 113269, 11 A'ril 2111]
2econd Division, <uisum/ing (J): 4 concur
Facs! On 25 May 1992 at about =H88 A#M#, A!ollo (omero was home sitting by the window and drin&ing
offee when he saw 4 men in Santolan Street blo& the !ath of 2 5ndian nationals ;bombay< on a motoryle#
Osar +onde y 6uto !o&ed a gun at the two 5ndians while his three om!anions ;Ale0andro 'ere% Cr# y
+arsillar, Allan Atis y Abet, and another unidentified man< a!!roahed and stabbed the 5ndians# Atis too& the
goods whih were being sold by the two 5ndians on installment# After the stabbing, the four men fled from the
rime sene towards Mabolo Street# 'O) (odenio Se$illano of the 5ntelligene and 5n$estigation -i$ision
;55-< of the 'D', Jaloo&an +ity in$estigated the inident# On )8 May 1992, the !olie arrested +onde, 'ere%
and Atis# 'olie reo$ered the wea!ons used in the robbery, when Feliidad Maabare, +onde*s wife, went to
the !olie station to tal& to +onde# 3hese wea!ons were diso$ered inside her bag after a routine ins!etion#
Se$illano admitted, howe$er, that they did not ha$e a warrant of arrest when they a!!rehended the aused#
Dor did they ha$e a searh warrant when they ins!eted Feliidad*s bag and when they searhed the house of
a ertain Cimmy where they found the stolen items# +onde, 'ere% and Atis were harged with the rime of
robbery with homiide# 3he aused entered !leas of not guilty# On 15 -eember 199) the (egional 3rial
+ourt, :ranh 129, Jaloo&an +ity found +onde, Atis and 'ere% guilty of the s!eial om!le. rime of
robbery with homiide and sentened eah of them to suffer the !enalty of relusion !er!etua with the
aessory !enalties under the law, and to 0ointly and se$erally indemnify the heirs of eah of the $itims,
Su&hde$ Singh and :iant Singh, in the amount of '58,888#88# +onde, et# al# a!!ealed# 7owe$er, the ounsel
de !arte for 'ere%, Atty# Cose M# Mar4ue%, failed to file brief for 'ere%, !rom!ting this +ourt to dismiss his
a!!eal# 3he deision of the trial ourt beame final and e.eutory with res!et to 'ere%# 7ene the !resent
a!!eal onerns only Atis and +onde, who filed their se!arate briefs#
"ss#e! 1hether the illegal warrantless arrest, whih was wai$ed, is suffiient ause for setting aside a $alid
0udgment rendered u!on a suffiient om!laint after trial free of error#
$el%! 3he arrests of +onde, et# al# ame after the la!se of 5 days from the time they were seen ommitting the
rime# At the time they were arrested, the !olie were not armed with any warrants for their arrests# Setion 5
of (ule 11), of the (e$ised (ules of +riminal 'roedure 29 enumerates the instanes when an arrest an be
made without warrant, namelyH ;a< 1hen, in his !resene the !erson to be arrested has ommitted, is atually
he has !robable ause to belie$e based on !ersonal &nowledge of fats or irumstanes that the !erson to be
arrested has ommitted it, and ;< 1hen the !erson to be arrested is a !risoner who has esa!ed from a !enal
establishment or !lae where he is ser$ing final 0udgment or tem!orarily onfined while his ase is !ending,
or has esa!ed while being transferred from one onfinement to another# Done of the abo$e irumstanes is
!resent herein# +onde, et# al# were merely wal&ing along 3andang Sora A$enue and were not ommitting any
rime# Deither an it be said that the rime had 0ust been ommitted as 5 days had already !assed from the
time of the robbery with homiide# 5t annot also be said that the arresting offiers had !robable ause based
on !ersonal &nowledge, as 'O) Se$illano admitted that they learned about the sus!ets from A!ollo (omero
and ertain unnamed informants# Further, the la!se of 5 days ga$e the !olie more than enough time to
ondut sur$eillane of the a!!ellants and a!!ly for a warrant of arrest# +learly, the rights of +onde, et# al#,
!ro$ided in Se# 2, Art# 555 of the +onstitution 2= were $iolated# Unfortunately, they did not assert their
onstitutional rights !rior to their arraignment# 3his is fatal to their ase# An aused is esto!!ed from
assailing the legality of his arrest if he failed to mo$e for the 4uashing of the 5nformation against him before
his arraignment# 1hen they entered their !leas on arraignment without in$o&ing their rights to 4uestion any
irregularity, whih might ha$e aom!anied their arrests, they $oluntarily submitted themsel$es to the
0urisdition of the ourt and the 0udiial !roess# Any ob0etion, defet, or irregularity attending their arrests
should had been made before they entered their !leas# 5t is muh too late for them to raise the 4uestion of their
warrantless arrests# 3heir !leas to the information u!on arraignment onstitute lear wai$ers of their rights
against unlawful restraint of liberty# Furthermore, the illegal arrest of an aused is not suffiient ause for
setting aside a $alid 0udgment rendered u!on a suffiient om!laint after trial free from error# 3he warrantless
arrest, e$en if illegal, annot render $oid all other !roeedings inluding those leading to the on$ition of the
a!!ellants and his o>aused, nor an the state be de!ri$ed of its right to on$it the guilty when all the fats
on reord !oint to their ul!ability#

Poli Searches and Seizure

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Poli Searches and Seizure

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Narratives

Вам также может понравиться