Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 251 views

    People Vs Malmstedt PDF

    Uploaded by

    KJPL_1987
    This case summary involves People vs Malmstedt, a case about searches and seizures. Mikael Malmstedt, a Swedish national, was charged with violating the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 after officers from NARCOM found marijuana derivatives in his possession during a search of his person and bags at a checkpoint without a warrant. The RTC found Malmstedt guilty and sentenced him to life in prison. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding the search was legal under the arrest without warrant exception for crimes committed in an officer's presence, and there was probable cause. However, two justices dissented, finding the search illegal as Malmstedt was not lawfully arrested and the officers did not know

    Copyright:

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

    People Vs Malmstedt PDF

    Uploaded by

    KJPL_1987
    251 views2 pages
    This case summary involves People vs Malmstedt, a case about searches and seizures. Mikael Malmstedt, a Swedish national, was charged with violating the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 after officers from NARCOM found marijuana derivatives in his possession during a search of his person and bags at a checkpoint without a warrant. The RTC found Malmstedt guilty and sentenced him to life in prison. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding the search was legal under the arrest without warrant exception for crimes committed in an officer's presence, and there was probable cause. However, two justices dissented, finding the search illegal as Malmstedt was not lawfully arrested and the officers did not know

    Original Title

    70. People vs Malmstedt (1).pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case summary involves People vs Malmstedt, a case about searches and seizures. Mikael Malmstedt, a Swedish national, was charged with violating the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 after officers from NARCOM found marijuana derivatives in his possession during a search of his person and bags at a checkpoint without a warrant. The RTC found Malmstedt guilty and sentenced him to life in prison. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding the search was legal under the arrest without warrant exception for crimes committed in an officer's presence, and there was probable cause. However, two justices dissented, finding the search illegal as Malmstedt was not lawfully arrested and the officers did not know

    Copyright:

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

    People Vs Malmstedt PDF

    Uploaded by

    KJPL_1987
    This case summary involves People vs Malmstedt, a case about searches and seizures. Mikael Malmstedt, a Swedish national, was charged with violating the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 after officers from NARCOM found marijuana derivatives in his possession during a search of his person and bags at a checkpoint without a warrant. The RTC found Malmstedt guilty and sentenced him to life in prison. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding the search was legal under the arrest without warrant exception for crimes committed in an officer's presence, and there was probable cause. However, two justices dissented, finding the search illegal as Malmstedt was not lawfully arrested and the officers did not know

    Copyright:

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

    Case Title Case # 70, People vs Malmstedt

    G.R. no. GR. No. 91108


    Main Topic Searches and Seizures
    Other Related Topic Taxation
    Date: June 19, 1991

    DOCTRINES
     "SEC. 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. — A peace officer or a
    private
    person may, without a warrant, arrest a person:
    (a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
    committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;

     Probable cause has been defined as such facts and circumstances


    which could lead a reasonable, discreet and prudent man to believe that
    an offense has been committed, and that the objects sought in
    connection with the offense are in the place sought to be
    searched.

    FACTS:

     June 15, 1989 – Mikael Malmstedt was charged before the RTC of Benguet for vilation of
    Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972
     Malmstedt, Swedisn National, entered the Philippines in December 1998 as a tourists.
     He went to Baguio City and then went to Sagada ang stayed there for 2 days.
     May 11, 1989 his supposed to be flight out of the country back to Sweden
     On May 11, 1989 Captain Vasco (NARCOM) ordered men to set-up temporary checkpoint
    along Mountain Province
     NARCOM was tipped of Caucasian from Sagada possessing drugs
     1:30pm, officers where inspecting the bus where the Swedish national was on board.
     In his possession was found Marijuana derivative hash located in his waist and 2 teddy
    bear that also contains the same marijuana derivative.
     During arraignment accused entered not guilty
     Accused raised the issue of illegal search of his personal effects, drugs were planted by
    NARCOM and the bags was not his but to an Australian couple
     He did not raise planting defense at earliest time, hence belied.
     RTC
     Guilty, sentence to life imprisonment
     Appeal
     Search was illegally made without search warrant. Hence inadmissible evidences
    ISSUE:
    Was there a violation of the Constitution amounting to inadminissible evidence?

    HELD:
     The accused was searched and arrested while transporting prohibited drugs. He was
    therefore caught in flagrante delicto. Hence falls under paragraph 1
    Par 1: “When in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
    committing, or is attempting to commit and offense.
     Even if no search warrant, there was probable cause to believe a crime was committed
    “Probable cause – such facts and circumstances which could lead a reasonable, discreet
    and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed, and that the objects
    sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched”
     When NARCOM received information, there was little time to furnish a search warrant.
    Like in Tangliben Case suspicion even without warrant is admissible
     Circumstances therefore justified probable cause

    Separate Opinios

    J. Narvasa Concurring and Dissenting

     If a person is searched without a warrant or under circumstances other than those justifying
    an arrest without warrant in accordance with law, merely a suspicion that he is engaged in
    some felony, (ie. He was arrested and searched in order to know if he committed a crime”
    - The arrest and the search is illegal (Fruit of the poisonous tree)
    - The soliders had no idea that he was committing a crime. They only had suspicion that
    Malmstedt has drugs with him.
    - Peo vs Aminnudin: No search warrant, no urgency, arrest was illegal
    - People vs Claudio: Identified himself as policemen, brought to station to search criminal,
    search was valid (because examination was conducted in the station)
    - People vs Tangliben: Cited Claudio case, criminal was searched in hq after being filed for
    suspicion of carrying drugs.
     Whats the point?
    - Officers secretly ascertained possession that lead to arrest/search
    - In case at hand, the search was not made by virtue of a warrant or a lawful warrantless
    arrest. Hence should have been uncsonstitutional.

    J. Cruz, Dissenting

     Inclination of some judges to wink at an illegal search and seizure as long as the subject was
    subsequently possessing illegal articles.
    - The existence of probable cause may have influence by the subsequent discovery of
    drugs.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy