PP. v. Usana (Escano)

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 323 11/30/13 9:03 PM
754 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Usana
*
G.R. Nos. 129756-58. January 28, 2000.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

JULIAN DEEN ESCAÑO, VIRGILIO TOME USANA and
JERRY CASABAAN LOPEZ, accused. VIRGILIO TOME
USANA and JERRY CASABAAN LOPEZ, accused-
appellants.
Searches and Seizures; Warrantless Searches; Checkpoints; For

as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected
to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a
visual search, said routine checks cannot be regarded as violative of
_______________
* FIRST DIVISION.
755
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 755
People vs. Usana
an individuals right against unreasonable search.·This Court has

ruled that not all checkpoints are illegal. Those which are
warranted by the exigencies of public order and are conducted in a
way least intrusive to motorists are allowed. For, admittedly, routine
checkpoints do intrude, to a certain extent, on motoristsÊ right to
„free passage without interruption,‰ but it cannot be denied that, as
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000142a91a859689273db8000a0082004500cc/p/AAAF5442/?username=Guest Page 1 of 20
a rule, it involves only a brief detention of travelers during which

the vehicleÊs occupants are required to answer a brief question or
two. For as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants
subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is
limited to a visual search, said routine checks cannot be regarded as
violative of an individualÊs right against unreasonable search. In
fact, these routine checks, when conducted in a fixed area, are even
less intrusive.
Same; Same; Same; Election Law; Gun Ban; The COMELEC
would be hard put to implement the ban if its deputized agents were
limited to a visual search of pedestrians.·The checkpoint herein
conducted was in pursuance of the gun ban enforced by the
COMELEC. The COMELEC would be hard put to implement the
ban if its deputized agents were limited to a visual search of
pedestrians. It would also defeat the purpose for which such ban
was instituted. Those who intend to bring a gun during said period
would know that they only need a car to be able to easily perpetrate
their malicious designs.
Same; Same; Same; The Court sees no need for checkpoints to be
announced; Badges of legitimacy of checkpoints may still be
inferred from their fixed location and the regularized manner in
which they are operated.·We see no need for checkpoints to be
announced, as the accused have invoked. Not only would it be
impractical, it would also forewarn those who intend to violate the
ban. Even so, badges of legitimacy of checkpoints may still be
inferred from their fixed location and the regularized manner in
which they are operated.
Same; Same; Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement in
Searches.·Usana and Lopez also question the validity of the
search. The trial court, in convicting the three accused for violation
of R.A. No. 6425, accepted as aboveboard the search done by the
Makati Police of the trunk of the car. Jurisprudence recognizes six
generally accepted exceptions to the warrant requirement: (1)
search inciden-
756
People vs. Usana
tal to an arrest; (2) search of moving vehicles; (3) evidence in plain

view; (4) customs searches; (5) consented warrantless search; and
(6) stop-and-frisk situations.
Same; Same; A warrantless search of a vehicle cannot be
invalidated where there are indications that the same was
consented to by the owner.·Even though there was ample
opportunity to obtain a search warrant, we cannot invalidate the
search of the vehicle, for there are indications that the search done
on the car of Escaño was consented to by him. Both Lopez and
Usana testified that Escaño was with the police officers when they
searched the car. There was no apparent objection made by Escaño
as he seemed to have freely accompanied the police officers to the
car. PO3 Suba, on the other hand, testified that „Escaño readily
agreed to open the trunk,‰ upon request of SPO4 de los Santos. But
according to Escaño, he refused the request of the police officers to
search his car. We must give credence to the testimony of PO3
Suba. Not only is it buttressed by the testimony of Usana and Lopez
that Escaño freely accompanied the police officers to the car, it is
also deemed admitted by Escaño in failing to appeal the decision.
The findings of fact of the trial court are thus deemed final as
against him.
„Same; Same; Dangerous Drugs Act; The fact that two of the
accused were with the third accused in the latterÊs car before the
„finding‰ of the hashish, which was made sometime after the lapse
of an appreciable time and without their presence, leaves much to be
desired to implicate them to the offense of selling, distributing, or
transporting the prohibited drug.·Despite the validity of the
search, we cannot affirm the conviction of Usana and Lopez for
violation of R.A. No. 6425, as amended. The following facts militate
against a finding of conviction: (1) the car belonged to Escaño; (2)
the trunk of the car was not opened soon after it was stopped and
after the accused were searched for firearms; (3) the car was driven
by a policeman from the place where it was stopped until the police
station; (4) the carÊs trunk was opened, with the permission of
Escaño, without the presence of Usana and Lopez; and (5) after
arrival at the police station and until the opening of the carÊs trunk,
the car was in the possession and control of the police authorities.
No fact was adduced to link Usana and Lopez to the hashish found
in the trunk of the car. Their having been with Escano in the
latterÊs car before the „finding‰ of the hashish sometime after the
lapse of an appreciable time and without their presence left much to
be desired to implicate them to
757
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 757
People vs. Usana
the offense of selling, distributing, or transporting the prohibited

drug. In fact, there was no showing that Usana and Lopez knew of
the presence of hashish in the trunk of the car or that they saw the
same before it was seized.
APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of

Makati City, Br. 64.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Fojas, Caballero, Salinas & Tan for accused-
appellants.
DAVIDE, JR., C.J.:
Accused-appellants Virgilio T. Usana and Jerry C. Lopez,

together with Julian D. Escaño, were charged before the
Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 64, in
Criminal Case No. 95-936 with violation of Section 4, Article
1
II of Republic Act No. 6425, as amended. Escaño and
Usana were also charged in Criminal Case No. 95-937 and
No. 95-938 with illegal possession of firearms and
ammunition in violation of Presidential Decree No. 1866.
The accusatory portion of the Information in Criminal
Case No. 95-936 reads as follows:
That on or about the 5th day of April, 1995, in the City of Makati,
Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring and
confederating together and all of them mutually helping and aiding
one another, without being authorized by law, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell, distribute and transport
3.3143 kilograms of „HASHISH,‰ a prohibited drug, in violation of
2
the above-cited law.
________________
1 Otherwise known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972.

2 Original Record (OR), 2; Rollo, 11.
758

People vs. Usana
The charge against accused Julian D. Escaño in Criminal

Case No. 95-937 reads as follows:
Honorable Court, the above-named accused did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession, direct
custody and control one (1) pc. of cal. .45 pistol, government model
with Serial No. 990255, with magazine containing 7 live ammos
and two (2) more magazines for cal. .45 pistol containing 7 live
ammos each, without first securing the necessary license or permit
from the proper government authorities and which firearm and
3
ammunitions he carried outside of his residence.
The accusatory portion of the information against Virgilio

Usana in Criminal Case No. 95-938 reads:
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have in his possession, direct
custody and control One (1) pc. of rifle carbine with Serial No.
7176644 with a banana type magazine loaded with 28 live
ammuni-tions without first securing the necessary license or permit
from the proper government authorities and which firearms and
4
ammuni-tions he carried outside of his residence.
The cases were consolidated and jointly

5
tried.
In its Decision of 30 May 1997, which was promulgated
on 17 June 1997, the trial court convicted Escaño and
herein appellants in Criminal Case No. 95-936, Escaño in
Criminal Case No. 95-937, and appellant Usana in Criminal
Case, No. 95-938.
Escaño filed on 19 June 1997 a Notice of Appeal, but on

16 July 1997, he filed a Manifestation and Withdrawal of
Ap-
_______________
Id., 3; id., 12.

3
Id., 4; id., 13.

4
5 OR, Vol. II, 65-68; Rollo, 43-62. Per Judge Delia H.
Pangani-ban.
759
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 759

People vs. Usana
6
peal, which was granted by the trial court in its Order of 17
7
July 1997.
Usana and Lopez filed a Notice of Appeal on 30 June
8
1997, manifesting therein that they were appealing to this
Court and to the Court of Appeals. Considering the
penalties imposed, the decision in Criminal Case No. 95-936
was appealed to this Court, while the Court of Appeals took
cognizance of the appeal from Criminal Case No. 95-938. In
9
its Order of 30 June 1997, the trial court gave due course to
the appeal and ordered the transmittal of the record in
Criminal Case No. 95-936 to this Court and the record of
Criminal Case No. 95-938 to the Court of Appeals.
Accordingly, it is only the appeal from the judgment in
Criminal Case No. 95-936 that is now before this Court. Due
to the differing versions of the parties, there is a need to
narrate each of the testimonies of the key players in this
case.
The prosecution has this version of the events: On the 5th
of April 1995 and during a COMELEC gun ban, some law
enforcers of the Makati Police, namely, PO3 Eduardo P.
Suba, PO3 Bernabe Nonato, SPO4 Juan de los Santos, and
10
Inspector Ernesto Guico, were manning a checkpoint at
the corner of Senator Gil Puyat Ave. and the South Luzon
11
Expressway (SLEX). They were checking the cars going to
Pasay City, stopping those they found suspicious, and
imposing merely a running stop on the others. At about past
midnight,
12
they stopped a Kia Pride car with Plate No. TBH
493. PO3 Suba saw a long firearm on the lap of the person
seated at the passenger seat, who was later identified as
Virgilio Usana. They asked the driver, identified as Escaño,
to open the door. PO3
________________
6 Rollo, 109.
7 Id., 112.
8 OR, Vol. II, 99.
9 Id., 101.
10 TSN, 6 July 1995, 56.
11 TSN, 6 July 1995, 55.
12 Id., 63; OR, 140-142.
760

People vs. Usana
Suba seized the long firearm, an M-l US Carbine, from

Usana. When Escaño, upon order of the police, parked along
Sen. Gil Puyat Ave., the other passengers were searched for
more weapons. Their search yielded a .45 caliber firearm
13
which they seized from Escaño.
The three passengers were thereafter brought to the
police station Block 5 in the Kia Pride driven by PO3
14
Nonato. Upon reaching the precinct, Nonato turned over
the key to the desk officer. Since SPO4 de los Santos was
suspicious of the vehicle, he requested Escaño to open the
15
trunk. Escaño readily agreed and opened the trunk
16 17
himself using his key. They noticed a blue bag inside it,
which they asked Escaño to open. The bag contained a
18
parcel wrapped in tape, which, upon examination by
National Bureau of Investigation Forensic Chemist Emilia
A. Rosaldos, was found positive for hashish weighing 3.3143
19
kilograms.
A certification was issued by the Firearms and Explosive
Office of the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) to
the effect that Escaño was not a licensed/registered firearms
holder of any kind and caliber. Usana, however, according to
the same certification is a licensed/registered holder of a

pistol Colt 45 caliber with license issued on 14 October 1994
and to expire on April 1996. Usana also has an application
for a pistol Uzi Cal. 9mm. Neither of the two guns seized
20
were licensed/registered with the NAPOLCOM.
For his part, Escaño (or Jovy) testified that on the 4th of
April 1995, between 11:00 and 11:30 in the morning, he was
at the lobby of Legend Hotel, at Pioneer St., Mandaluyong
City, to meet with his business partners, including Usana
and
_______________
13 Id., 64-68.
14 TSN, 13 July 1995, 79.
15 Id., 12, 80.
16 Id., 14-15, 81-82.
17 Id., 16.
18 Id., 18.
19 TSN, 6 July 1995, 17-19; 24-25. See also Exhibit „C.‰
20 OR, 240; Exhibit „Q.‰
761
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 761

People vs. Usana
Lopez. He saw his friend and erstwhile co-employee at

Philippine Airlines, Ramon Cabrera, who had borrowed his
wifeÊs car. Since it was his wifeÊs birthday the following day,
he asked Cabrera if he could get 21back the car. Cabrera
readily gave him the keys of the car.
He left the hotel at around 11:45 in the evening with
Usana and Lopez. Using his wifeÊs car, they cruised
southward along Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) and
turned right at Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue. They stopped before
crossing SLEX because the traffic light turned red. From
the other side of SLEX, he could see a group of policemen.
Upon crossing SLEX, they were flagged down by one of the
policemen, so he slowed down and stopped. PO3 Nonato
asked him to roll down the window and demanded to see his
license. He asked if he had committed any violation, but
PO3 Nonato accused him of being drunk, which he denied.

The policemen persisted in asking for his license, but he did
not budge and instead reiterated that there was no reason
for him to surrender his license for he had not committed
any violation. A verbal tussle ensued resulting in the
drawing of firearms by the policemen which prompted
Usana to suggest that they go to the police station because
the policemen were carrying guns and they have not done
22
anything wrong.
He stated further that he was the one who drove to the
police station along Dian St. with his companions. He
parked the car then they were brought to the office of the
23
Deputy Station Commander, Lieutenant Eco. The
policemen asked if they could search his car. He then
inquired if he was not entitled to a lawyer and why they
needed to conduct a search when they had not even told him
what he had violated. Apparently, he thought they were
there only for verification purposes. Lt. Eco explained that
that was the reason why they were going to search his car,
to see if he had done anything illegal. Although the police
were insistent in asking for
________________
21 TSN, 27 August 1996, 8-12.

22 Id., 13-24.
23 TSN, 27 August 1996, 31-33.
762

People vs. Usana
the keys to his car, he continuously refused. Lt. 24

Eco asked
his men to usher the trio into the detention cell.
After two hours, he was brought back to Lt. EcoÊs office.
Lt. Eco pointed to a bag, a rifle, a pistol and a package
wrapped in masking tape or packing tape on his desk, and
said these items constituted evidence of illegal possession of
firearms and transporting of drugs. He was surprised that
they found those items from his car because his key had
been with him all the time. He was handcuffed, brought to
25
his car, and again was surprised to see its trunk open.
On the other hand, Lopez had a different story. He
claimed he was the26mechanic of Usana and they lived in the
same subdivision. On 4 April 1995, he was working on
UsanaÊs pick-up truck at the latterÊs house when Escaño
dropped by at around 4:30 in the afternoon27 looking for
Usana who was then working in Forbes Park. At around
5:30 p.m., they left UsanaÊs house in EscañoÊs metallic gray
Kia Pride. Inside the car, he saw a .45 caliber pistol and two
spare magazines tucked in the right side and left side of
EscañoÊs waist. He also saw a carbine under the right
passenger seat. When he inquired about the guns, Escaño
replied that such did not pose any problem since they were
licensed. Before going
28
to Usana, they went to Pasay City to
see a certain Jerry. They met Usana at the Sen. Gil Puyat
Station of the LRT at around 9:00 p.m. He gave his seat to
Usana but was 29unaware if the latter noticed the rifle
beneath the seat.
They went home via Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue but were
stopped at a checkpoint after crossing SLEX. The policemen
directed their flashlights
30
at them and one opened the front
passenger door. The latter saw the rifle under UsanaÊs
seat.
________________
24 TSN, 27 August 1996, 38-40.

25 Id., 41-43.
26 TSN, 24 October 1996, 4.
27 Id.
28 Id., 5-7.
29 TSN, 24 October 1996, 11-12.
30 Id., 13-16.
763
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 763

People vs. Usana
Usana and Escaño were ordered to get out of the car. PO3
Nonato immediately saw the gun tucked in EscañoÊs waist
and asked if he was a policeman. Escaño replied that
everything would be explained at the police station. He was

also asked to step out. No firearm was, however, found in his
31
possession.
When confronted about the guns, Escaño tried to
intercede for his two companions and said that „. . . these
two don't know anything about it, I just took them for a
drive.‰ They subsequently went to police station Block 5. A
32
certain Toto, a policeman, drove the Kia Pride to Block 5.
Upon reaching the police station, Escaño was
immediately brought to the office of Lt. Eco while he and
Usana were asked to sit on the bench. After a few minutes,
PO3 de los Santos came out of the office of Lt. Eco to talk to
him. He told him that all he knew about Escaño is that he
was a wealthy flight attendant with military connections.
After returning to Lt. EcoÊs office, PO3 de los Santos went
out of the police station with Lt. Eco and Escaño. The three
came back with a blue bag which he had never seen before.
The bag was opened before the three suspects. Escaño
reiterated that his two companions had nothing to do with
33
the bag.
He and Usana stayed overnight in their cell and only saw
Escaño in the morning of April 5. At around 4:00 p.m., they
were transferred to the CID and stayed in the office of a
certain Inspector Sipin. Escaño admitted he owned the
34
bag/case.
For his part, Usana testified that he was a duly licensed
architect who was gainfully employed by Rolando de Asis
35
and Taytay Management Corporation. He admitted
36
owning a licensed .45 caliber pistol. In March 1995, he
hired as me-
_______________
31 Id., 17-20.
32 Id., 20-22.
33 Id., 22-27.
34 TSN, 24 October 1996, 27-30.
35 TSN, 5 November 1996, 4, 9, 11; Exhibit 4.
36 Id., 14-15.
764

People vs. Usana
chanic Lopez, who lives in Bernabe Subdivision Phase II

where he also lives. Escaño on the other hand, was
introduced to him by a certain Roberto Samparado, a
neighbor of Lopez. Escaño, an international flight attendant
of Philippine Airlines and a businessman who owns Verge
Enterprises, also supplied materials to the Philippine
37
Army
and planned to engage in a construction business.
On 4 April 1995, at around 7:30 p.m., he paged Escaño to
talk about the materials for the five prototype gunship
helicopters they were supposed to supply. They talked on
the phone, agreeing to meet between 8:30 and 9:00 p.m. at 38
the Sen. Gil Puyat Ave. Station of the Light Rail Transit,
and met at around a quarter past nine. Escaño was on board
a metallic Kia Pride with Lopez on the passenger seat.
Lopez vacated the seat for him. They went to Magallanes
Village to meet
39
a certain Norman Garcia and talk about the
documents relating to the helicopter gunship of the Air
Force. They arrived there at 11:30 p.m. While they were
talking with Garcia, he noticed a gun and magazines tucked
in EscañoÊs waist. Upon inquiry, Escaño
40
said it was not a
problem and only for his protection. On their way to Roxas
Boulevard, they were stopped at a checkpoint along Sen. Gil
Puyat Ave. Policemen knocked on the car windows so he
and Escaño rolled down their windows. A person in civilian
clothes suddenly opened the right door, took something from
the side of his seat and shouted, „ThereÊs a gun.‰ He was
surprised because he did not carry anything when he
boarded the car; neither did he see anything inside the car41
because it was dark and he was not wearing his eyeglasses.
The person who took the gun asked if he was a policeman,
and he said he was an architect. He was then asked to alight
from the car, then frisked. Escaño was also asked to alight
from a car. They saw a gun tucked in
________________
37 TSN, 24 October 1996, 16-20; Exhibit 6.

38 Id., 22-23.
39 Id., 33; Exhibit 7.
40 TSN, 24 October 1996, 29-31.
41 TSN, 24 October 1996, 24-28.
765
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 765

People vs. Usana
his waist, so they asked if he was a policeman, and Escaño

answered in the negative. Lopez was then ordered to get out
of the car by the person in civilian clothes and was also
searched. They rode the Anfra service vehicle of the police.
One of the policemen asked Lopez to handcuff him and
Escaño. The policeman who asked Escaño to get out of the
car drove the Anfra van to Block42
5 where they arrived at
1:30 in the morning of 5 April.
He and Lopez waited outside the office of Lt. Eco while
Escaño was inside with the arresting officers. Lt. Eco came
out of his office and urged Lopez to tell the truth. He heard
Lopez say that they were both just with Escaño and that
they knew nothing about the guns; neither do they own any.
SPO4 de los Santos entered the office of Lt. Eco and came
out five minutes later with Escaño, Lt. Eco, and the other
arresting officers, Nonato, Suba and Erwin Eco, the person
in civilian clothes. All six went out to the parking area and
returned after about five minutes. Lt. Eco was carrying a
bag which he placed on top his desk. Lopez and Escaño were
asked about the contents of the bag. The two replied it was
the first time they saw that bag. Lt. Eco opened the bag
before them. They all saw something in brown paper. He
and Lopez simultaneously exclaimed that they knew
nothing about the contents of the bag, and they implored
Escaño
43
to tell the police that they had nothing to do with
it.
The trial court found the prosecutionÊs version more
credible than that of any one of the accused, and ruled that
the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to
convict the accused as charged. It decreed:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing judgment is hereby

rendered as follows:
1. In Criminal Case No. 95-936, accused JULIAN ESCAÑO y
DEEN, VIRGILIO USANA y TOME and JERRY LOPEZ y

CASABAAN are GUILTY as charged and are sentenced to
suffer impris-
_______________
42 TSN, 5 November 1996, 37-45.

43 Id., 46-50.
766

People vs. Usana
onment of RECLUSION PERPETUA, and to pay a fine of

P500,000.00.
The Branch Clerk of Court is directed to turn over to the
Dangerous Drugs Board the 3.314 kilograms of Hashish
(marijuana) for its appropriate disposition in accordance with law;
and
2. In Criminal Cases Nos. 95-937 and 95-938, accused JULIAN

ESCAÑO y DEEN and VIRGILIO USANA y TOME are
GUILTY as charged in the two separate informations
respectively filed against them and are sentenced to suffer
the indeterminate prison term from TEN (10) YEARS of
PRISION MAYOR maximum, as minimum to SEVENTEEN
(17) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of
44
RECLUSION TEMPORAL maximum as maximum.
The firearms and ammunitions subject matter of these cases

which are still with the City ProsecutorÊs Office are forfeited in favor
of the Government are directed to be turned over to the Firearms
and Explosive Unit, PNP, Camp Crame, Quezon City for its
appropriate disposition.
45
SO ORDERED.
Accused-appellants Usana and Lopez anchor their appeal

on the following arguments:
1. The trial court erred in admitting in evidence the

hashish seized without search warrant when the
police officers already had the opportunity to secure
a search warrant before searching the bag found at

the baggage compartment at the back of the car;
2. Assuming that the hashish is admissible in
evidence, the trial court erred in finding appellants
to have conspired with Escaño in transporting the
hashish when the evidence clearly shows that the
hashish was owned and possessed solely by Escaño;
3. The trial court erred in convicting appellants of
illegal possession of hashish despite the fact that
they were neither in actual nor constructive
possession of the illegal drug; and
________________
44 Per R.A. No. 8294, amending P.D. 1866, the penalty for violation of
the second paragraph of Section 1 therefor has been reduced to prision
mayor in its minimum period and a fine of P30,000.
45 Rollo, 61-62.
767
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 767

People vs. Usana
4. The trial court erred in not considering the

exculpatory testimony of Julian Escaño in favor of
appellants. Before going any further, some words
are in order regarding the establishment of
checkpoints.
Accused-appellants assail the manner by which the

checkpoint in question was conducted. They contend that
the checkpoint manned by elements of the Makati Police
should have been announced. They also complain of its
having been conducted in an arbitrary and discriminatory
manner.
We take46 judicial notice of the existence of the COMELEC
resolution imposing a gun ban during the election period
issued pursuant to Section 52(c) in relation to Section 26(q)
of the Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881).
The national and local elections in 1995 were held on 8
May, the second Monday of the month. The incident, which

happened on 5 April 1995, was well within the election
period.
This Court has ruled that not all checkpoints are illegal.
Those which are warranted by the exigencies of public order
and are conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists are
47
allowed. For, admittedly, routine checkpoints do intrude, to
a certain extent, on motoristsÊ right to „free passage without
interruption,‰ but it cannot be denied that, as a rule, it
involves only a brief detention of travelers during which the
vehicleÊs occupants are required to answer a brief question
or two. For as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its
occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of
the vehicle is limited to a visual search, said routine checks
cannot be regarded as violative of an individualÊs right
against unreasonable search. In fact, these routine checks,
48
when conducted in a fixed area, are even less intrusive.
The checkpoint herein conducted was in pursuance of the
gun ban enforced by the COMELEC. The COMELEC would
be hard put to implement the ban if its deputized agents
were
________________
46 Section 2 (a), COMELEC Resolution No. 2735.

47 Valmonte v. de Villa, 185 SCRA 665 (1990).
48 Id., 669.
768

People vs. Usana
limited to a visual search of pedestrians. It. would also

defeat the purpose for which such ban was instituted. Those
who intend to bring a gun during said period would know
that they only need a car to be able to easily perpetrate
their malicious designs.
The facts adduced do not constitute a ground for a
violation of the constitutional rights of the accused against
illegal search and seizure. PO3 Suba admitted that they
were merely stopping cars they deemed suspicious, such as
those whose windows are heavily tinted just to see if the

passengers thereof were carrying guns. At best they would
merely direct their flashlights inside the cars they would
stop, without opening the car's doors or subjecting its
passengers to a body search. There is nothing
discriminatory in this as this is what the situation demands.
We see no need for checkpoints to be announced, as the
accused have invoked. Not only would it be impractical, it
would also forewarn those who intend to violate the ban.
Even so, badges of legitimacy of checkpoints may still be
inferred from their fixed location49 and the regularized
manner in which they are operated.
Usana and Lopez also question the validity of the search.
The trial court, in convicting the three accused for violation
of R.A. No. 6425, accepted as aboveboard the search done by
the Makati Police of the trunk of the car. Jurisprudence
recognizes six generally accepted exceptions to the warrant
requirement: (1) search incidental to an arrest; (2) search of
moving vehicles; (3) evidence in plain view; 50
(4) customs
searches; (5) consented
51
warrantless search; and (6) stop-
and-frisk situations.
________________
49 U.S. v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 49 L Ed. 2d 1116 [1976], as

cited in Valmonte v. de Villa, supra.
50 See Mustang Lumber v. CA, 257 SCRA 430, 449-450 [1996]; 1
JOAQUIN G. BERNAS, The Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines: A Commentary, 1987 ed., 104-105.
51 See People v. Chua Ho San, G.R. No. 128222, 17 June 1999, 9, 308
SCRA 432.
769
VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 769

People vs. Usana
Even though there was ample opportunity to obtain a

search warrant, we cannot invalidate the search of the
vehicle, for there are indications that the search done on the
car of Escaño was consented to by him. Both Lopez and
Usana testified that Escaño was with the police officers
52
when they searched the car. There was no apparent
objection made by Escaño as he seemed to have freely
accompanied the police officers to the car. PO3 Suba, on the
other hand, testified that „Escaño readily agreed
53
to open the
trunk,‰ upon request of SPO4 de los Santos. But according
to Escaño, he 54refused the request of the police officers to
search his car. We must give credence to the testimony of
PO3 Suba. Not only is it buttressed by the testimony of
Usana and Lopez that Escaño freely accompanied the police
officers to the ear, it is also deemed admitted by Escaño in
failing to appeal the decision. The findings of fact of the trial
court are thus deemed final as against him.
Despite the validity of the search, we cannot affirm the
conviction of Usana and Lopez for violation of R.A. No.
6425, as amended. The following facts militate against a
finding of conviction: (1) the car belonged to Escaño; (2) the
trunk of the car was not opened soon after it was stopped
and after the accused were searched for firearms; (3) the car
was driven by a policeman from the place where it was
stopped until the police station; (4) the carÊs trunk was
opened, with the permission of Escaño, without the presence
of Usana and Lopez; and (5) after arrival at the police
station and until the opening of the carÊs trunk, the car was
in the possession and control of the police authorities. No
fact was adduced to link Usana and Lopez to the hashish
found in the trunk of the car. Their having been with
Escaño in the latterÊs car before the „finding‰ of the hashish
sometime after the lapse of an appreciable time and without
their presence left much to be desired to implicate them to
the offense of selling, distributing, or
________________
52 TSN, 24 October 1996, p. 23; 5 November 1996, 48.

53 TSN, 13 July 1995, 14.
54 TSN, 27 August 1995, 38-40.
770

People vs. Usana
transporting the prohibited drug. In fact, there was no

showing that Usana and Lopez knew of the presence of
hashish in the trunk of the car or that they saw the same
before it was seized.
IN VIEW WHEREOF, that portion of the challenged
decision of 30 May 1997 of the Regional Trial Court,
Makati, Branch 64, insofar as Criminal Case No. 95-936 is
concerned with regard to accused-appellants VIRGILIO T.
USANA and JERRY C. LOPEZ, holding them guilty of
violation of Section 4, Article II of R.A. No. 6425, as
amended, is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and
another is hereby rendered ACQUITTING them therein on
ground of reasonable doubt and ORDERING their
immediate release from confinement at the New Bilibid
Prison, unless their further detention is justified for any
lawful ground. The Director of the Bureau of Corrections is
hereby directed to report to the Court the release of said
accused-appellants within five (5) days from notice of this
decision.
SO ORDERED.
Puno, Kapunan, Pardo and Ynares-Santiago, JJ.,

concur.
Judgment as to accused-appellants reversed and set aside

and ordered acquitted.
Note.·An extensive search without warrant could only

be resorted to if the officers conducting the search had
reasonable or probable cause to believe before the search
that either the motorist was a law offender or that they
would find the instrumentality or evidence pertaining to the
commission of a crime in the vehicle to be searched. (Aniag,
Jr. vs. Commission on Elections, 237 SCRA 424 [1994])
··o0o··
771
© Copyright 2013 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

PP. v. Usana (Escano)

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

PP. v. Usana (Escano)

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 323 11/30/13 9:03 PM

754 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

Searches and Seizures; Warrantless Searches; Checkpoints; For

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 755

People vs. Usana

an individuals right against unreasonable search.·This Court has

a rule, it involves only a brief detention of travelers during which

756 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Usana

tal to an arrest; (2) search of moving vehicles; (3) evidence in plain

be desired to implicate them to

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 757

People vs. Usana

the offense of selling, distributing, or transporting the prohibited

APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

DAVIDE, JR., C.J.:

Accused-appellants Virgilio T. Usana and Jerry C. Lopez,

1 Otherwise known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972.

758 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The charge against accused Julian D. Escaño in Criminal

The accusatory portion of the information against Virgilio

The cases were consolidated and jointly

Escaño filed on 19 June 1997 a Notice of Appeal, but on

Id., 3; id., 12.

Id., 4; id., 13.

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 759

760 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Suba seized the long firearm, an M-l US Carbine, from

the same certification is a licensed/registered holder of a

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 761

Lopez. He saw his friend and erstwhile co-employee at

PO3 Nonato accused him of being drunk, which he denied.

21 TSN, 27 August 1996, 8-12.

762 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

the keys to his car, he continuously refused. Lt. 24

24 TSN, 27 August 1996, 38-40.

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 763

everything would be explained at the police station. He was

764 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Usana

chanic Lopez, who lives in Bernabe Subdivision Phase II

37 TSN, 24 October 1996, 16-20; Exhibit 6.

41 TSN, 24 October 1996, 24-28.

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 765

his waist, so they asked if he was a policeman, and Escaño

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing judgment is hereby

1. In Criminal Case No. 95-936, accused JULIAN ESCAÑO y

DEEN, VIRGILIO USANA y TOME and JERRY LOPEZ y

42 TSN, 5 November 1996, 37-45.

766 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

onment of RECLUSION PERPETUA, and to pay a fine of

2. In Criminal Cases Nos. 95-937 and 95-938, accused JULIAN

The firearms and ammunitions subject matter of these cases

Accused-appellants Usana and Lopez anchor their appeal

1. The trial court erred in admitting in evidence the

a search warrant before searching the bag found at

VOL. 323, JANUARY 28, 2000 767

4. The trial court erred in not considering the

Accused-appellants assail the manner by which the

May, the second Monday of the month. The incident, which

46 Section 2 (a), COMELEC Resolution No. 2735.

768 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED