GR No 211214

Larry Manibog vs People of the Philippines

GR No 211214        March 20, 2019

Facts:

          

        Upon receipt of an information from a police asset that Manibog was standing outside the Municipal Tourism Office with a gun tucked in his waistband, Chief Inspector Beniat and his team proceeded to the area around 20 meters from the police station. Upon verification that such information was credible, the team slowly approached Manibog for fear that he might fight back. Upon closer look, Chief Inspector Beniat saw a bulge on Manibog’s waist which the police officer deduced to be a gun due to its distinct contour.

          

      As they have confirmed that Manibog had a gun tucked in his waistband, Chief Inspector disarmed and arrested him for violating the election gun ban and brought him to the police station for inquest proceeding. Manibog did not deny that he was carrying a gun but then he also alleged that Chief Inspector Beniat had other motives for such arrest.

          

      The RTC found Manibog guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the election offense with which he was charged. It also ruled that the warrantless search was incidental to a lawful arrest because there was probable cause for the police to frisk and arrest him. The CA upheld the finding of RTC. Manibog moved for reconsideration but was denied by the CA.

Issue:

          WON the warrantless search made upon Manibog was lawful, and if he was qualified to apply for probation.

Held:

          Yes, the warrantless search was lawful. No, he cannot apply for probation.

       Under the Constitution, search and seizure must be carried out through a judicial warrant; otherwise, the same would violate the Constitution. Any evidence resulting from it shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. But this is only the general rule. Exceptions to this were covered by jurisprudence.

         

         Since the warrantless search and seizure, as well as warrantless arrest, were found to be lawful, it is only just to hold Manibog guilty of the offense charged against him. He violated Section 264 of the Omnibus Election Code which provided for the sentence of his punishment and the prohibition to apply for probation.