Title
Abuan vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 168773
Decision Date
Oct 27, 2006
Eliza Abuan convicted for illegal drug possession after a valid search warrant led to the discovery of shabu in her home; her defense of planted evidence was rejected.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 168773)

Facts:

    Initiation of the Criminal Case

    • A criminal complaint was filed in the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Calasiao, Pangasinan charging Eliza Abuan with violating Section 16, Article III of R.A. No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972).
    • On May 8, 1998, petitioner filed a motion to quash the criminal complaint and request bail pending resolution. The prosecutor consented to the motion and bail was fixed at P60,000.00.
    • The MTC found probable cause against Abuan for the offense and recommended the elevation of the records to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for further proceedings.

    Proceedings in the RTC and the Filing of the Amended Information

    • On November 12, 1998, an Amended Information was filed in RTC Branch 41, Dagupan City charging Abuan with possession of controlled substances.
    • The inculpatory portion of the Information detailed that on May 6, 1998, at Barangay Lasip, Calasiao, Pangasinan, Abuan allegedly had in her possession 57 small, heat-sealed plastic sachets of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu), along with an aluminum foil and assorted plastic sachets, without authority to possess them.
    • During arraignment, Abuan, represented by counsel, pleaded not guilty to the charge.

    Pretrial and Search Warrant Proceedings

    • During the pretrial on November 19, 1998, Abuan rejected the prosecution’s proposal to admit the validity of the search warrant, contending that it was invalid and that evidence obtained thereby should be suppressed.
    • Prior to evidence presentation on December 3, 1998, Abuan filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence alleging:
    • Lack of probable cause for the issuance of Search Warrant No. 98-62.
    • Testimony of the alleged witness, Marissa Gorospe, was fabricated and inconsistent, as she was purportedly unfamiliar to Abuan and even a fictitious persona.
    • The executing judge failed to ask proper “searching questions” to ascertain details about the paraphernalia.
    • Instead of de novo presentation of evidence to support the suppression motion, the RTC allowed Abuan to adduce her evidence at trial, despite her objections regarding the search warrant and ensuing evidence.

    Execution of the Search Warrant and the Seizure of Evidence

    • Based on information provided by a confidential informant, police officers from Calasiao Police Station, led by SPO3 Cesar Ramos, applied for and secured Search Warrant No. 98-62 from Executive Judge Eugenio G. Ramos in Lingayen, Pangasinan.
    • The warrant, issued after conducting “searching questions” on Marissa Gorospe, authorized the search of Abuan’s residence for evidence of drug-related activities.
    • On May 6, 1998, a team of police operatives and barangay officials executed the search:
    • Officers, in the presence of Barangay Captain Bernardo Mangaliag and Kagawad Miguel Garcia, entered Abuan’s house.
    • In a bedroom drawer, they discovered 57 sachets of suspected shabu, a roll of aluminum foil, and assorted plastic sachets.
    • The items were confiscated, inventoried, and subjected to laboratory examination, which confirmed the presence of methamphetamine hydrochloride.

    Presentation of Evidence by the Prosecution

    • The prosecution introduced documentary evidence including the search warrant, inventory/receipt, laboratory report, and testimonies of police officers (notably Gamboa and de Vera) who described the surveillance, execution of the search, and seized items.
    • Despite Abuan’s objections to the admission of the search warrant and the physical evidence, the trial court admitted them subject to the exercise of discretion and later probative evaluation.

    The Defense’s Position and Subsequent Proceedings

    • Abuan testified that on the morning of May 6, 1998, she was in bed with her daughters when armed men, without showing a warrant initially, raided her house.
    • She contended that:
    • The drugs were “planted” as a frame-up orchestrated by her brother, Arsenio Tana, who was present at the time.
    • The search warrant was void due to the fabricated and non-credible testimony of Marissa Gorospe, including claims that she was never employed by Avon Cosmetics (a fact used to support probable cause).
    • Her failure to present her daughters as witnesses further suggested suppression of crucial evidence that might have supported her account.
    • The RTC convicted Abuan on March 28, 2001, imposing an indeterminate penalty ranging from two years, four months and one day to four years and two months of prision correccional.
    • On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision but modified the penalty. Abuan raised issues regarding the validity of the search warrant and the handling of her objections.

    Petitioner’s Appeal Before the Supreme Court

    • In her petition, Abuan asserted that:
    • The CA erred in finding the search warrant valid, arguing that its issuance was based on false information and fabricated testimony.
    • She did not waive her right to question the warrant at arraignment or later, despite her objections during pretrial and her motion to suppress evidence.
    • With the inadmissibility of the evidence (shabu and paraphernalia), the prosecution failed to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
    • The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) countered that:
    • The investigating and judicial process concerning the search warrant met all legal requisites, including the judge’s evaluation of probable cause.
    • Abuan was estopped from later challenging the warrant because she did not raise the issue at the proper time.
    • The testimonial discrepancies pointed out were collateral and insufficient to negate the overall credibility of the prosecution’s evidence.

Issue:

  • Whether petitioner Abuan waived her right to challenge the validity of Search Warrant No. 98-62 by not raising the objection at the proper time during her arraignment or trial.
  • Whether the search warrant was validly issued, having been supported by probable cause derived from the affidavit/testimony of the alleged witness, Marissa Gorospe, and adequately subjected to judicial inquiry.
  • Whether the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant (57 sachets of shabu, aluminum foil, and plastic sachets) is admissible despite the alleged procedural irregularities and claims of fabrication.
  • Whether the cumulative evidence presented by the prosecution proves petitioner’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt of violating Section 16, Article III of R.A. No. 6425.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)
Unlock Full Case Digest

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is an AI-powered legal research tool in the Philippines with case digests and full jurisprudence. AI summaries highlight key points but might skip important details or context. Always check the full text for accuracy.

About Privacy Terms