Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Doria
Tags: criminal procedure, dangerous drugs act, doria, people v. doria, plain view, plain view
doctrine,warrantless arrest, warrantless search
FACTS
Members of the PNP Narcotics Command received information that one Jun [Doria] was engaged in
illegal drug activities, so they decided to entrap and arrest him in a buy-bust operation. He was arrested.
They frisked him but did not find the marked bills on him, and upon inquiry, he revealed that he left it at
the house of his associate Neneth [Gaddao], so he led the police team to her house.
The team found the door open and a woman inside the house. Jun identified her
as Neneth, and she was asked by SPO1 Badua about the marked money as PO3 Manlangit looked
over her house [he was still outside the house]. Standing by the door, PO3 Manlangit noticed a carton
box under the dining table. One of the box s flaps was open, and inside it was something wrapped in
plastic, and it appeared similar to the marijuana earlier sold to him by Jun. His suspicion aroused, so
he entered the house and took hold of the box. He peeked inside the box and saw 10 bricks of what
appeared to be dried marijuana leaves. SPO1 Badua recovered the marked bills from Neneth and they
arrested her. The bricks were examined and they were found to be dried marijuana leaves.
Florencio Doria and Violeta Gaddao were charged with violation of RA 6425 [Dangerous Drugs
Act of 1972], Section 4 [Sale, Administration, Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of Prohibited
Drugs] in relation to Section 21 [Attempt and Conspiracy]. RTC convicted them.
RATIO
Re: warrantless arrest
Gaddao s warrantless arrest was illegal because she was arrested solely on the basis of the alleged
identification made by Doria. Doria did not point to her as his associate in the drug business, but as the
person with whom he left the marked bills. This identification does not necessarily mean that Gaddao
conspired with Doria in pushing drugs. If there is no showing that the person who effected the warrantless
arrest had knowledge of facts implicating the person arrested to the perpetration of the criminal offense,
the arrest is legally objectionable.
Since the warrantless arrest of Gaddao was illegal, the search of her person and home and the
subsequent seizure of the marked bills and marijuana cannot be deemed legal as an incident to her
arrest.
An object is in plain view if the object itself is plainly exposed to sight. The difficulty arises when the
object is inside a closed container. Where the object seized was inside a closed package, the object itself
is not in plain view and therefore cannot be seized without a warrant. If the package is such that an
experienced observer could infer from its appearance that it contains the prohibited article, then the article
is deemed in plain view. It must be immediately apparent to the police that the items that they observe
may be evidence of a crime, contraband or otherwise subject to seizure.
In his direct examination, PO3 Manlangit said that he was sure that the contents of the box were
marijuana because he himself checked and marked the said contents. On cross-examination, however,
he admitted that he merely presumed the contents to be marijuana because it had the same plastic
wrapping as the "buy-bust marijuana." Each of the ten bricks of marijuana in the box was individually
wrapped in old newspaper and placed inside plastic bags-- white, pink or blue in color. PO3 Manlangit
himself admitted on cross-examination that the contents of the box could be items other than
marijuana. He did not know exactly what the box contained that he had to ask appellant Gaddao about
its contents. It was not immediately apparent to PO3 Manlangit that the content of the box was marijuana;
hence, it was not in plain view and its seizure without the requisite search warrant was in violation of the
law and the Constitution. It was fruit of the poisonous tree and should have been excluded and never
considered by the trial court.
The fact that the box containing about 6 kilos of marijuana was found in Gaddao s house Gaddao does
not justify a finding that she herself is guilty of the crime charged.
In a prosecution for illegal sale of dangerous drugs, what is material is the submission of proof that the
sale took place between the poseur-buyer and the seller and the presentation of the drug as evidence in
court.
Prosecution established the fact that in consideration of the P1,600.00 he received, Doria sold
and delivered 970 grams of marijuana to PO3 Manlangit, the poseur-buyer
Prosecution failed to prove that Gaddao conspired with accused-appellant Doria in the sale of
said drug