,eekin! the reversal of the decision of the trial court findin! him !uilt5 of the
crime char!ed, accused ar!ues that the search of his personal effects as
ille!al "ecause it as made ithout a search arrant and, therefore, the
prohi"ited dru!s hich ere discovered durin! the ille!al search are not
admissi"le as evidence a!ainst him.
$he %onstitution !uarantees the ri!ht of the people to "e secure in their
persons, houses, papers and effects a!ainst unreasona"le searches and
seiEures.
!
4oever, here the search is made pursuant to a laful arrest,
there is no need to o"tain a search arrant. . laful arrest ithout a arrant
ma5 "e made "5 a peace officer or a private person under the folloin!
circumstances.
"
,ec. 5 Arrest "ithout "arrantD "hen la"ful. FF . peace
officer or a private person ma5, ithout a arrant, arrest a
person2
(a) >hen, in his presence, the person to "e arrested has
committed is actuall5 committin!, or is attemptin! to
commit an offenseD
(") >hen an offense has in fact <ust "een committed, and
he has personal knoled!e of facts indicatin! that the
person to "e arrested has committed itD and
(c) >hen the person to "e arrested is a prisoner ho has
escaped from a penal esta"lishment or place here he is
servin! final <ud!ment or temporaril5 confined hile his
case is pendin!, or has escaped hile "ein! transferred
from one confinement to another.
In cases fallin! under para!raphs (a) and (") hereof, the
person arrested ithout a arrant shall "e forthith
delivered to the nearest police station or <ail, and he shall
"e proceeded a!ainst in accordance ith #ule 11/,
,ection 1. (*a 11a).
.ccused as searched and arrested hile transportin! prohi"ited dru!s
(hashish). . crime as actuall5 "ein! committed "5 the accused and he as
cau!ht in flarante !elicto. $hus, the search made upon his personal effects
falls s?uarel5 under para!raph (1) of the fore!oin! provisions of la, hich
allo a arrantless search incident to a laful arrest.
7
>hile it is true that the ).#%:M officers ere not armed ith a search
arrant hen the search as made over the personal effects of accused,
hoever, under the circumstances of the case, there as sufficient pro"a"le
cause for said officers to "elieve that accused as then and there
committin! a crime.
3ro"a"le cause has "een defined as such facts and circumstances hich
could lead a reasona"le, discreet and prudent man to "elieve that an offense
has "een committed, and that the o"<ects sou!ht in connection ith the
offense are in the place sou!ht to "e searched.
#
$he re?uired pro"a"le
cause that ill <ustif5 a arrantless search and seiEure is not determined "5
an5 fi@ed formula "ut is resolved accordin! to the facts of each case.
9
>arrantless search of the personal effects of an accused has "een declared
"5 this %ourt as valid, "ecause of e@istence of pro"a"le cause, here the
smell of mari<uana emanated from a plastic "a! oned "5 the accused,
10
or
here the accused as actin! suspiciousl5,
11
and attempted to flee.
12
.side from the persistent reports received "5 the ).#%:M that vehicles
comin! from ,a!ada ere transportin! mari<uana and other prohi"ited
dru!s, their %ommandin! :fficer also received information that a %aucasian
comin! from ,a!ada on that particular da5 had prohi"ited dru!s in his
possession. ,aid information as received "5 the %ommandin! :fficer of
).#%:M the ver5 same mornin! that accused came don "5 "us from
,a!ada on his a5 to 'a!uio %it5.
>hen ).#%:M received the information, a fe hours "efore the
apprehension of herein accused, that a %aucasian travellin! from ,a!ada to
'a!uio %it5 as carr5in! ith him prohi"ited dru!s, there as no time to
o"tain a search arrant. In the Tanliben case,
13
the police authorities
conducted a surveillance at the 9ictor5 &iner $erminal located at '!5. ,an
)icolas, ,an 8ernando 3ampan!a, a!ainst persons en!a!ed in the traffic of
dan!erous dru!s, "ased on information supplied "5 some informers.
.ccused $an!li"en ho as actin! suspiciousl5 and pointed out "5 an
informer as apprehended and searched "5 the police authorities. It as
held that hen faced ith on-the-spot information, the police officers had to
act ?uickl5 and there as no time to secure a search arrant.
It must "e o"served that, at first, the ).#%:M officers merel5 conducted a
routine check of the "us (here accused as ridin!) and the passen!ers
therein, and no e@tensive search as initiall5 made. It as onl5 hen one of
the officers noticed a "ul!e on the aist of accused, durin! the course of the
inspection, that accused as re?uired to present his passport. $he failure of
accused to present his identification papers, hen ordered to do so, onl5
mana!ed to arouse the suspicion of the officer that accused as tr5in! to
hide his identit5. 8or is it not a re!ular norm for an innocent man, ho has
nothin! to hide from the authorities, to readil5 present his identification
papers hen re?uired to do soG
$he receipt of information "5 ).#%:M that a %aucasian comin! from
,a!ada had prohi"ited dru!s in his possession, plus the suspicious failure of
the accused to produce his passport, taken to!ether as a hole, led the
).#%:M officers to reasona"l5 "elieve that the accused as tr5in! to hide
somethin! ille!al from the authorities. 8rom these circumstances arose
a probable cause hich <ustified the arrantless search that as made on
the personal effects of the accused. In other ords, the acts of the ).#%:M
officers in re?uirin! the accused to open his pouch "a! and in openin! one
of the rapped o"<ects found inside said "a! (hich as discovered to
contain hashish) as ell as the to (/) travellin! "a!s containin! to (/)
tedd5 "ears ith hashish stuffed inside them, ere prompted "5 accused7s
on attempt to hide his identit5 "5 refusin! to present his passport, and "5
the information received "5 the ).#%:M that a %aucasian comin! from
,a!ada had prohi"ited dru!s in his possession. $o deprive the ).#%:M
a!ents of the a"ilit5 and facilit5 to act accordin!l5, includin!, to search even
ithout arrant, in the li!ht of such circumstances, ould "e to sanction
impotence and ineffectiveness in la enforcement, to the detriment of
societ5.
>4B#B8:#B, premises considered, the appealed <ud!ment of conviction
"5 the trial court is here"5 .88I#MB0. %osts a!ainst the accused-appellant.
,: :#0B#B0.
Melencio-#errera, $aras, %eliciano, Bi!in, Gri&o-A'uino, Me!ial!ea,
Reala!o an! Davi!e, (r., ((., concur.
Sarmiento, (., is on leave.
Se$%&%'e O$(n(on)
NAR*ASA, J., concurrin! and dissentin!2
$he ancient tradition that a man7s home is his castle, safe from intrusion
even "5 the kin!, has not onl5 found its niche in all our charters, from 19+5
to the presentD it has also received unvar5in! reco!nition and acceptance in
our case la.
1
$he present %onstitution
2
declares that H
$he ri!ht of the people to "e secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects a!ainst unreasona"le
searches and seiEures of hatever nature and for an5
purpose, shall "e inviola"le, and no search arrant or
arrant of arrest shall issue e@cept upon pro"a"le cause
to "e determined personall5 "5 the <ud!e after
e@amination under oath or affirmation of the complainant
and the itnesses he ma5 produce, and particularl5
descri"in! the place to "e searched, and the persons or
thin!) to "e seiEed.
It further ordains that an5 evidence o"tained in violation of said ri!ht, amon!
others, Ashall "e inadmissi"le for an5 purpose in an5 proceedin!.A
3
$he rule is that no person ma5 "e su"<ected "5 the police or other
!overnment authorit5 to a search of his "od5, or his personal effects or
"elon!in!s, or his residence e@cept "5 virtue of a search arrant or on the
occasion of a le!itimate arrest.