G.R. No. 188016 - Republic vs. Team Energy Corp.

On June 27, 1995, Atty. Lorna Frances F. Cabanlas, Chief of the Legal, Information and Compliance Division of the BFAD, filed with RTC Quezon City-Branch 83 an application for Search Warrant No. 958 (95) against “Aiden Lanuza of 516 San Jose de la Montana Street, Mabolo, Cebu City” for alleged violation of Article 40(k) in relation to Article 41 of R.A. 7394 (Consumer Act).
The application recited reports by SPO4 Manuel P. Cabiles that on May 29, 1995 Lanuza sold drug products worth ₱7,232.00 without BFAD license; enclosed were the affiant’s report, his affidavit, plastic bags marked “Lanuza Bag 1 of 1” and “Lanuza Bag 2 of 2,” and a location sketch.

Paragraph 3 of the application mistakenly stated that the warrant was to be executed on the premises of “Belen Cabanero at New Frontier Village, Talisay, Cebu.”
No other portion of the application or supporting affidavit implicated Belen Cabanero; all other descriptions and evidence pointed exclusively to Aiden Lanuza’s address.

Judge Estrella T. Estrada issued the warrant on June 27, 1995, commanding search of “516 San Jose de la Montana Street, Mabolo, Cebu City” for specified medicines and drugs sold without a license.
On June 28, 1995, a PNP composite team served the warrant. They first searched Lanuza’s house (Lot No. 41) finding no drugs, then searched a warehouse (Lot No. 38) within the same compound and seized 52 cartons of assorted medicines. The items were inventoried and brought to BFAD custody.

On August 22, 1995, Aiden Lanuza filed a verified motion to quash the warrant and suppress/return the seized items, alleging: wrong premises, non-existent offense, want of authorization, general description, lack of personal knowledge, and unreasonable implementation.
RTC Branch 83 granted the motion on December 7, 1995 and ordered return of the items; a motion for reconsideration was denied on April 1, 1996.

The People filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court, arguing that the clerical error was harmless, Atty. Cabanlas was duly authorized, probable cause existed under Carillo v. People, the description was sufficient, and the seized items were prohibited.
A temporary restraining order was issued on June 26, 1996; the Solicitor General failed to timely file a reply, and the case was submitted for resolution.

Whether the clerical error (mentioning Belen Cabanero) invalidates Search Warrant No. 958 (95).
Whether Atty. Cabanlas was duly authorized by BFAD to apply for the warrant.
Whether probable cause existed absent documentary proof confirming Lanuza had no license.
Whether the warrant particularly described the place to be searched and the things to be seized.
Whether the execution of the warrant exceeded its scope, rendering the search and seizure unreasonable.