Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 505 views

    People v. Laguio

    Uploaded by

    Allen Windel Bernabe
    The Supreme Court denied the petition to nullify the trial court's ruling granting the demurrer to evidence and acquitting the respondent. The Court found that the warrantless arrest and search of the respondent was unlawful. There were no suspicious circumstances that justified the arrest in flagrante delicto. Mere information about the respondent's involvement without any overt criminal act was insufficient to establish probable cause for the warrantless arrest and search. As the arrest was illegal, the subsequent search was also unlawful.

    Copyright:

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

    People v. Laguio

    Uploaded by

    Allen Windel Bernabe
    505 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court denied the petition to nullify the trial court's ruling granting the demurrer to evidence and acquitting the respondent. The Court found that the warrantless arrest and search of the respondent was unlawful. There were no suspicious circumstances that justified the arrest in flagrante delicto. Mere information about the respondent's involvement without any overt criminal act was insufficient to establish probable cause for the warrantless arrest and search. As the arrest was illegal, the subsequent search was also unlawful.

    Original Title

    35. People v. Laguio

    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 denied the petition to nullify the trial court's ruling granting the demurrer to evidence and acquitting the respondent. The Court found that the warrantless arrest and search of the respondent was unlawful. There were no suspicious circumstances that justified the arrest in flagrante delicto. Mere information about the respondent's involvement without any overt criminal act was insufficient to establish probable cause for the warrantless arrest and search. As the arrest was illegal, the subsequent search was also unlawful.

    Copyright:

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

    People v. Laguio

    Uploaded by

    Allen Windel Bernabe
    The Supreme Court denied the petition to nullify the trial court's ruling granting the demurrer to evidence and acquitting the respondent. The Court found that the warrantless arrest and search of the respondent was unlawful. There were no suspicious circumstances that justified the arrest in flagrante delicto. Mere information about the respondent's involvement without any overt criminal act was insufficient to establish probable cause for the warrantless arrest and search. As the arrest was illegal, the subsequent search was also unlawful.

    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

    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:
    - Petitioner, People of the Philippines filed this petition for review to nullify and set aside the
    resolution of RTC in criminal case, granting private respondent, Lawrence Wang Demurrer to
    Evidence and acquitted him of 3 charges filed against him.
    - The trial court resolved the case on the basis of its findings that the arrest preceded the search,
    and finding no basis to rule in favor of a lawful arrest, it ruled that the incidental search is
    likewise unlawful.
    - Any and all pieces of evidence acquired as a consequence thereof are inadmissible in evidence.
    Thus, the trial court dismissed the case for lack of evidence.
    - Contrary to its position at the trial court, the People, however, now posits that inasmuch as it has
    been shown in the present case that the seizure without warrant of the regulated drugs and
    unlicensed firearms in the accused possession had been validly made upon probable cause and
    under exigent circumstances, then the warrantless arrest of the accused must necessarily have to
    be regarded as having been made on the occasion of the commission of the crime in flagrante
    delicto, and therefore constitutionally and statutorily permissible and lawful.
    - In effect, the People now contends that the warrantless search preceded the warrantless arrest.
    - Since the case falls under an exception to the general rule requiring search warrant prior to a valid
    search and seizure, the police officers were justified in requiring the private respondent to open
    his BMW car's trunk to see if he was carrying illegal drugs.

    ISSUE:
    - W/N there was lawful arrest, search and seizure by the police operatives in this case despite the
    absence of a warrant of arrest and/or a search warrant. NO

    RULING:
    - The Supreme Court denies the petition.
    - 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 under paragraph (a) of Section 5.
    - 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.
    - Neither may the warrantless arrest be justified under paragraph (b) of Section 5.
    - 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 duos 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 as required in paragraph (b) of Section 5. And doubtless, the warrantless
    arrest does not fall under paragraph (c) of Section 5.
    - The inevitable conclusion, as correctly made by the trial court, is that the warrantless arrest was
    illegal.
    - Ipso jure, the warrantless search incidental to the illegal arrest is likewise unlawful.
    - The People’s contention that Wang waived his right against unreasonable search and seizure has
    no factual basis.
    - While we agree in principle that consent will validate an otherwise illegal search, however, based
    on the evidence on record, Wang resisted his arrest and the search on his person and belongings.
    - The implied acquiescence to the search, if there was any, could not have been more than mere
    passive conformity given under intimidating or coercive circumstances and is thus considered no
    consent at all within the purview of the constitutional guarantee.
    - WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED.

    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