11 People Vs Aruta

PEOPLE VS ARUTA
Facts: On Dec. 13, 1988, P/Lt. Abello was tipped

Issue: Whether or Not the
police correctly searched and seized the drugs from
off by his informant that a certain Aling Rosa will
the accused.
be arriving from Baguio City with a large volume of
marijuana and assembled a team. The next day, at
the Victory Liner Bus terminal they waited for the
Held: The following cases are specifically
bus coming from Baguio, when the informer pointed
provided or allowed by law:
out who Aling Rosa was, the team approached her
and introduced themselves as NARCOM agents. 1. Warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest
When Abello asked aling Rosa about the contents recognized under Section 12, Rule 126 of the Rules
of her bag, the latter handed it out to the police. of Court 8 and by prevailing jurisprudence
They found dried marijuana leaves packed in a
plastic bag marked cash katutak. 2. Seizure of evidence in "plain view," the elements
of which are: (a) a prior valid intrusion based on the
Instead of presenting its evidence, the defense filed valid warrantless arrest in which the police are
a demurrer to evidence alleging the illegality of legally present in the pursuit of their official duties;
the search and seizure of the items. In her (b) the evidence was inadvertently discovered by
testimony, the accused claimed that she had just the police who had the right to be where they are;
come from Choice theatre where she watched a (c) the evidence must be immediately apparent, and
movie Balweg. While about to cross the road an (d) "plain view" justified mere seizure of evidence
old woman asked her for help in carrying a shoulder without further search;
bag, when she was later on arrested by the police.
She has no knowledge of the identity of the old 3. Search of a moving vehicle. Highly regulated by
woman and the woman was nowhere to be found. the government, the vehicle's inherent mobility
Also, no search warrant was presented. reduces expectation of privacy especially when its
transit in public thoroughfares furnishes a highly
The trial court convicted the accused in violation of
reasonable suspicion amounting to probable cause
the dangerous drugs of 1972
that the occupant committed a criminalactivity; warrant, arrest a person:
4. Consented warrantless search; (a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested
has committed, is actually committing, or is
5. Customs search; attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and
6. Stop and Frisk; he has probable cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person
7. Exigent and Emergency Circumstances. to be arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner
The essential requisite of probable cause must still who has escaped from a penal establishment or
be satisfied before a warrantless search and seizure place where he is serving final judgment or is
can be lawfully conducted. temporarily confined while his case is pending, or
has escaped while being transferred from one
The accused cannot be said to be committing a
confinement to another.
crime, she was merely crossing the street and was
not acting suspiciously for the Narcom agents to In cases falling under paragraph (a) and (b) above,
conclude that she was committing a crime. There the person arrested without a warrant shall be
was no legal basis toeffect a warrantless arrest of forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or
the accuseds bag, there was no probable cause and jail and shall be proceeded against in accordance
the accused was not lawfully arrested. with section 7 of Rule 112.
The police had more than 24 hours to procure

a search warrant and they did not do so. The seized RULE 126, RULES OF COURT
marijuana was illegal and inadmissible evidence.
Section 2. Court
where application for search warrant shall be filed.
RULE 113, RULES OF COURT Anapplication for search warrant shall be filed
with the following:
Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. A
peace officer or a private person may, without a
a) Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a
crime was committed. (a) The officer must forthwith deliver the property
b) For compelling reasons stated in the application, seized to the judge who issued the warrant,
any court within the judicial region where the crime together with a true inventory thereof duly verified
was committed if the place of the commission of the under oath.
crime is known, or any court within the judicial (b) Ten (10) days after issuance of
region where the warrant shall be enforced. the search warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain
if the return has been made, and if none, shall
However, if the criminal action has already been summon the person to whom the warrant was
filed, the application shall only be made in the court issued and require him to explain why no return was
where the criminal action is pending. made. If the return has been made, the judge shall
ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule has been
Section 7. Right to break door or window complained with and shall require that the property
to effect search. The officer, if refused admittance seized be delivered to him. The judge shall see to it
to the place of directed search after giving notice of that subsection (a) hereof has been complied with.
his purpose and authority, may break open any (c) The return on the search warrant shall be filed
outer or inner door or window of a house or any part and kept by thecustodian of the log book
of a house or anything therein to execute the on search warrants who shall enter therein the date
warrant or liberate himself or any person lawfully of the return, the result, and other actions of the
aiding him when unlawfully detained therein. judge.
Section 12. Delivery of property and inventory A violation of this section shall constitute contempt
thereof to court; return and proceedings thereon. of court.

11 People Vs Aruta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11 People Vs Aruta

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

11 People Vs Aruta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PEOPLE VS ARUTA

Facts: On Dec. 13, 1988, P/Lt. Abello was tipped

The police had more than 24 hours to procure

You might also like