[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
309 views2 pages

People Vs Hindoy

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the warrantless search and seizure conducted by police during a buy-bust operation at the home of Enrique and Bella. During the operation, Enrique sold marijuana to undercover officers. When back-up officers arrived, they searched the home without a warrant and found additional bricks of marijuana under a table. The Court ruled the warrantless search was valid as incident to Enrique's lawful arrest for selling drugs to the undercover officers. Enrique and Bella were convicted of illegal drug possession based on the drugs found during the search.

Uploaded by

Mhay Khaeyl Badajos AndohuYhan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
309 views2 pages

People Vs Hindoy

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the warrantless search and seizure conducted by police during a buy-bust operation at the home of Enrique and Bella. During the operation, Enrique sold marijuana to undercover officers. When back-up officers arrived, they searched the home without a warrant and found additional bricks of marijuana under a table. The Court ruled the warrantless search was valid as incident to Enrique's lawful arrest for selling drugs to the undercover officers. Enrique and Bella were convicted of illegal drug possession based on the drugs found during the search.

Uploaded by

Mhay Khaeyl Badajos AndohuYhan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

People

vs. Hindoy
G.R. No. 133662, May 10, 2001

FACTS:

The police conducted a buy-bust operation against a certain Bella of 248 Sto. Rosario St.,
Mandaluyong. It was Enrique, Bella’s live-in partner, who opened the door for the poseur-
buyers Eugenio and Cariaga. Eugenio said, "May bagong dating, kukuha kami (If there's new
stuff, we'll get some)," referring to marijuana. ENRIQUE answered, "Meron" (Yes, there is) so
Eugenio gave him one P500.00 and five P100.00 marked bills. After counting the money,
ENRIQUE asked BELLA to get the stuff. She complied and brought a brick of marijuana, with an
estimated weight of one kilogram, which was wrapped in newspaper. ENRIQUE, in turn, handed
it over to Eugenio. That was when they identified themselves as police officers. After giving the
prearranged signal to the backup operatives, the two entered the house then announced that
they were going to conduct a search. Under a table, they found a bag made of abaca containing
twelve more bricks of marijuana. Seized items were then transmitted to the NBI for chemical
analysis.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the warrantless search and seizure inside the accused’s dwelling was valid.

HELD:

The Supreme Court held that the warrantless search and seizure is valid. The search, being
incident to a lawful arrest, was valid notwithstanding the absence of a warrant. In fact, the
warrantless search and seizure, as an incident to a suspect's lawful arrest, may extend beyond
the person of the one arrested to include the premises or surrounding under his immediate
control.

Under paragraph (a), Section 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court provides that a peace officer
may, without a warrant, arrest a person when in his presence the person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense. This is one of the
exceptions to the right provided for by the Constitution against illegal searches and seizures.

In the case at bar, upon consummation of the illicit sale, PO3 Eugenio introduced himself and
SPO1 Cariaga as police officers. ENRIQUE and BELLA were apprised of their constitutional rights.
Thereafter, the officers searched the room where BELLA supposedly got the first block of
marijuana. There, they found an abaca bag under a folding table. Upon inspection, the bag
yielded twelve more blocks of compressed marijuana inside a plastic bag. The trial court,
therefore, was correct in admitting all thirteen blocks of marijuana in evidence.

Likewise, the trial court did not err when it convicted ENRIQUE and BELLA of illegal possession
of prohibited drugs punishable under Section 8 of R.A. No. 6425, as amended. They were
caught in possession of another 12.04 kilograms of marijuana in twelve individually wrapped
blocks, hidden in a bag under a table in their house. Their possession thereof gives rise to a
disputable presumption under Section 3[j], Rule 131 of the Rules of Court, that they were the
owners of the same.

You might also like