THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILLIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, 

vs.
BASILIO DAMASO, Bernardo/BERNIE MENDOZA, KA DADO, accused-appellant.

G.R. No. 93516 August 12, 1992

FACTS: Basilio Damaso was charged with illegal possession of firearms after
subversive materials were confiscated from his dwelling. Prior to
this, the group of Lt. Quijardo were sent to verify the presence of
CPP/NPA members in Dagupan City. They put the rented apartment
of certain Rosemarie, a sister of the person they arrested previously,
under surveillance. A visitor of Rosemarie, Luzviminda Morados
was interviewed and declared that she worked for Bernie
Mendoza alias Basilio Damaso, the appellant. Through Morados,
the group of Lt. Quijardo reached the house of Damaso, and
the helper, Luz Tanciangco allowed them to enter inside the house.
Without a valid warrant, the group entered said dwelling and requested
the persons in the house to allow them to look around. This was when
they found the subversive materials which they later on confiscated.
The persons in the house were also brought to the headquarters for
investigation and they admitted that Damaso was the lessee of the house
and the owner of the confiscated items.

ISSUE: Whether or not the evidence against Basilio Damaso is admissible

RULING: No. The Court held that the group of Lt. Quijardo failed to comply with
the requirements of a valid search and seizure. The exceptions for a
warrantless search is not present in the case. The constitutional
immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures, being personal,
cannot be waived by anyone except a person whose rights are invaded
or a person who is expressly authorized to do so in his or her behalf.
Regardless of the fact that the helper allowed the authorities to enter when
Damaso was not in the house, there was no evidence to establish
that she was indeed a helper and even if it was true, there is no proof
that Damaso had given her authority to open his house in his absence.
The helper was not the authorized person to waive such right in
behalf of her employer. This, the search was held to be invalid for
lack of warrant and the evidence obtained held to be
inadmissible.