G.R. No. 86218 - People vs. Bagista y Bangco

On July 4, 1988, the Narcotics Command (NARCOM) Detachment Office in Baguio City received confidential information from a regular informant.
The informant reported that a 23-year-old woman with naturally curly hair and a height of approximately 5′2″ to 5′3″ would be transporting marijuana from the north.
Acting on this tip, NARCOM officers—Sgt. Oscar Parajas, Sgt. Godofredo Fider, and a civilian agent—proceeded to Km. 16, Acop, Tublay, Benguet at around 11:00 a.m.

The officers established a checkpoint at the said location and stopped all vehicles, both private and public, originating from the north.
The search was aimed at detecting any vehicle carrying marijuana leaves based on the descriptive information provided.
The operation extended for about 4½ hours, reflecting an extensive checkpoint and search process.

The NARCOM agents stopped a Dangwa Tranco bus (Plate No. AVD 938, body number 428) coming from Lepanto, Benguet.
Upon boarding the bus, Sgt. Parajas identified the passengers and announced that they were NARCOM agents who would be inspecting the baggage.
While inspecting the rear of the bus, Sgt. Parajas noted a woman with the described physical features seated on the right side (facing the driver) on the last seat, with a shoulder bag bearing black and orange stripes on her lap.
A thorough inspection of the bag revealed three bundles of marijuana leaves covered by assorted clothing, leading to its confiscation.
The woman was arrested on the spot and later identified as accused-appellant Elsie Bagista, who was subsequently brought to the NARCOM office, booked, and investigated.

The confiscated bundles from the bag were subjected to a laboratory examination and were found positive for marijuana.
The Receipt of Property Seized and documents like the Booking Sheet and Arrest Report, all bearing the accused’s signature, were presented as additional evidence.

Accused-appellant Bagista denied involvement in marijuana trafficking, claiming she was engaged in buying and selling vegetables, specifically cabbages.
She testified that she had boarded the bus at Abatan, Benguet, with ten sacks of cabbages to sell to a buyer in Baguio City, and that the bag with marijuana was taken from the luggage carrier above the seats.
To corroborate her claim, she presented the conductor, Nestor Yangkin, who testified about the circumstances during the inspection, particularly regarding the handling of the bag and the loading of vegetable sacks.
A discrepancy arose between her account and Yangkin’s testimony concerning the origin and handling of the vegetable sacks.

The trial court relied heavily on the testimony of Sgt. Parajas, whose details regarding the operation, the discovery of the bag on the accused’s lap, and the absence of improper motives in his conduct were found credible.
Discrepancies noted by the defense (e.g., the color of the bag’s stripes and the nature of the marijuana) were deemed immaterial by the trial court.
The court ruled that the accused’s failure to object to the admissibility of the evidence (alleging a warrantless search) amounted to a waiver of that objection.
Based on the evidence presented, the trial court convicted Bagista for violating Section 4, Article II of Republic Act No. 6425, sentencing her to life imprisonment, a fine of P20,000.00, subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and imposing costs.

Whether the warrantless search conducted by the NARCOM agents at the checkpoint was constitutional and legally justified.
Whether the information provided by the informant, on its own, established sufficient probable cause for an extensive and indiscriminate vehicle search.

Whether the evidence obtained (e.g., bundles of marijuana and the related documentary evidence) should be excluded for being the product of a warrantless search.
Whether the accused’s failure to object to the search’s legality in the lower court constitutes a waiver of her right to challenge the evidence's admissibility.

The relative credibility of Sgt. Parajas’ testimony versus the conflicting accounts of the accused and her witness, Nestor Yangkin.
The impact of discrepancies in the testimonies regarding the vegetable sacks on the determination of the accused’s involvement in drug trafficking.

Whether the evidence presented (primarily the testimony of the NARCOM officer and the laboratory results) was sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.