Case Digest (G.R. No. 224587)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Sammy Yusop y Muhammad, G.R. No. 224587, July 28, 2020, Supreme Court First Division, Reyes, J. Jr., writing for the Court.The prosecution (the People of the Philippines) filed an Information dated November 23, 2011 in Regional Trial Court (RTC), Cagayan de Oro City, Branch 25, Criminal Case No. 2011-1109, charging Sammy Yusop y Muhammad with illegal transport of dangerous drugs in violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165. The Information alleged that on November 21, 2011 Yusop, in conspiracy with an identified shipper, retrieved at an LBC branch a consigned television set containing two sealed plastic cellophane packages with crystalline substance later tested positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu), totaling about 1,481.46 grams.
PDEA agents acted on a confidential informant’s tip that a large quantity of shabu would be shipped via LBC from Las Piñas to Cagayan de Oro and that the consignee would be Yusop. Surveillance at the SM City CDO LBC branch ensued; when Yusop appeared the following evening to claim the package, PDEA confronted and arrested him, and, at his request or on his opening, the shabu was found concealed in the television’s back portion. The seized items were inventoried and photographed at the scene and later submitted to the PDEA Crime Laboratory where forensic tests were positive for shabu.
At trial Yusop admitted claiming the package for another person for payment and denied knowledge of the contents. The RTC, in a February 9, 2012 Judgment, found Yusop guilty as charged and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00, holding that the warrantless arrest and the subsequent search were justified by exigent circumstances and that the chain of custody of the seized drugs was preserved under Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA), Cagayan de Oro City, in a March 27, 2015 Decision in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01002-MTN affirmed the RTC in toto, finding the arrest lawful and rejecting Yusop’s denial as ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the warrantless arrest of accused-appellant Sammy Yusop lawful under Section 5, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court?
- Was the search and seizure following the arrest admissible as incident to a lawful arrest under Section 13, Rule 126?
- Did the prosecution’s non-compliance with the witness requirements of Section 21, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (the three-wi...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)