Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 38 views

    10 People v. Laguio, JR., 518 SCRA 393-Manatad

    Uploaded by

    Grace Ann Tamboon
    The Supreme Court ruled the evidence presented by the prosecution against Lawrence Wang was inadmissible. Wang was merely walking to his car when police frisked and arrested him without cause. Police testified finding drugs and firearms in Wang's car and on his person, but the Court found Wang showed no suspicious behavior to warrant his arrest. The arrest was based on an uncorroborated tip about Wang's involvement with others previously arrested, which alone does not constitute probable cause. Therefore, the evidence collected during the illegal arrest, including the drugs and firearms, was inadmissible.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    10 People v. Laguio, JR., 518 SCRA 393-Manatad

    Uploaded by

    Grace Ann Tamboon
    38 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled the evidence presented by the prosecution against Lawrence Wang was inadmissible. Wang was merely walking to his car when police frisked and arrested him without cause. Police testified finding drugs and firearms in Wang's car and on his person, but the Court found Wang showed no suspicious behavior to warrant his arrest. The arrest was based on an uncorroborated tip about Wang's involvement with others previously arrested, which alone does not constitute probable cause. Therefore, the evidence collected during the illegal arrest, including the drugs and firearms, was inadmissible.

    Original Title

    10 People v. Laguio, Jr., 518 SCRA 393-Manatad

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled the evidence presented by the prosecution against Lawrence Wang was inadmissible. Wang was merely walking to his car when police frisked and arrested him without cause. Police testified finding drugs and firearms in Wang's car and on his person, but the Court found Wang showed no suspicious behavior to warrant his arrest. The arrest was based on an uncorroborated tip about Wang's involvement with others previously arrested, which alone does not constitute probable cause. Therefore, the evidence collected during the illegal arrest, including the drugs and firearms, was inadmissible.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    38 views2 pages

    10 People v. Laguio, JR., 518 SCRA 393-Manatad

    Uploaded by

    Grace Ann Tamboon
    The Supreme Court ruled the evidence presented by the prosecution against Lawrence Wang was inadmissible. Wang was merely walking to his car when police frisked and arrested him without cause. Police testified finding drugs and firearms in Wang's car and on his person, but the Court found Wang showed no suspicious behavior to warrant his arrest. The arrest was based on an uncorroborated tip about Wang's involvement with others previously arrested, which alone does not constitute probable cause. Therefore, the evidence collected during the illegal arrest, including the drugs and firearms, was inadmissible.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    G.R. No.

    128587             March 16, 2007

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner,


    vs.
    HON. PERFECTO A.S. LAGUIO, JR., in his capacity as Presiding Judge, Branch 18, RTC,
    Manila, and LAWRENCE WANG Y CHEN, Respondents.

    Facts:

    In this case, private respondent LAWRENCE WANG Y CHEN was charged with three
    crimes before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 18, Manila namely: (1) Violation of Section 16,
    Article III in relation to Section 2(e)(2), Article I of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6425 (Dangerous
    Drugs Act) (2) Violation of Presidential Decree No. 1866 (Illegal Possession of Firearms); and (3)
    Violation of Comelec Resolution No. 2828 in relation to R.A. No. 7166 (COMELEC Gun Ban).
    The respondent judge granted the Demurrer of Evidence filed by the private respondent and
    acquitted him of the three (3) charges.

    During the testimony of Police Inspector Cielito Coronel, he testified that he together
    with Captain Margallo and two other police officers approached Wang and introduced
    themselves as police officers and upon learning that he is Lawrence Wang, they immediately
    frisked him and asked him to open the back compartment of the BMW Car. When frisked, there
    was found inside the front right pocket of Wang and confiscated from him an unlicensed AMT
    Cal. 380 9mm automatic Back-up Pistol loaded with ammunitions. At the same time, the other
    members of the operatives searched the BMW car and found inside it were the following items:
    (a) 32 transparent plastic bags containing white crystalline substance with a total weight of
    29.2941 kilograms, which substance was later analyzed as positive for methamphetamine
    hydrochloride, a regulated drug locally known as shabu; (b) cash in the amount of ₱650,000.00;
    (c) one electronic and one mechanical scales; and (d) an unlicensed Daewoo 9mm Pistol with
    magazine. 

    Issue:

    Whether or not the pieces of evidence presented by the prosecution were inadmissible.

    Ruling:

    Yes, the pieces of evidence presented by the prosecution were inadmissible. The
    Supreme Court held that the facts and circumstances surrounding the present case did not
    manifest any suspicious behavior on the part of private respondent Lawrence Wang that would
    reasonably invite the attention of the police. He was merely walking from the Maria Orosa
    Apartment and was about to enter the parked BMW car when the police operatives arrested
    him, frisked and searched his person and commanded him to open the compartment of the car,
    which was later on found to be owned by his friend, David Lee. He was not committing any
    visible offense then. Therefore, there can be no valid warrantless arrest in flagrante delicto. It is
    settled that "reliable information" alone, absent any overt act indicative of a felonious enterprise
    in the presence and within the view of the arresting officers, is not sufficient to constitute
    probable cause that would justify an in flagrante delicto arrest.

    What is clearly established from the testimonies of the arresting officers is that Wang
    was arrested mainly on the information that he was the employer of Redentor Teck and Joseph
    Junio who were previously arrested and charged for illegal transport of shabu. Teck and Junio
    did not even categorically identify Wang to be their source of the shabu they were caught with
    in flagrante delicto. Upon the duo’s declaration that there will be a delivery of shabu on the
    early morning of the following day, May 17, which is only a few hours thereafter, and that
    Wang may be found in Maria Orosa Apartment along Maria Orosa Street, the arresting officers
    conducted "surveillance" operation in front of said apartment, hoping to find a person which
    will match the description of one Lawrence Wang, the employer of Teck and Junio. These
    circumstances do not sufficiently establish the existence of probable cause based on personal
    knowledge.

    You might also like