Facts:

The case involves Arturo Sullano y Santia (Petitioner) and the People of the Philippines (Respondent). It begins with a charge against the Petitioner for violating the gun ban in relation to the 2010 election period under Batas Pambansa Bilang (BP Blg.) 881 and the provisions of Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Resolution No. 8714. On February 11, 2010, in the morning, while aboard a Ceres bus in Prado St., Poblacion, Malay, Aklan, the accused was found in possession of one Colt M1911A1 caliber pistol, three pistol magazines, and fifteen live ammunition.

The police were tipped off about a passenger on the bus carrying a firearm. Following this information, a checkpoint was established. Police Senior Inspector (PSI) Lory Tarazona, along with other police officers, boarded the bus and identified Sullano as matching the description provided. Upon seeing a firearm’s handle protruding from his bag, they asked him to exit the bus and conducted a search which uncovered the loaded fir

...

Facts:

Incident and Arrest

• On February 11, 2010, during the election period for the May 10, 2010 national and local elections, petitioner Arturo Sullano y Santia was apprehended on board a Ceres bus in Malay, Aklan.
• The incident occurred after police, including PSI Lory Tarazona and PO3 Ben Estuya, received a text message tip describing a passenger in camouflage shorts allegedly carrying a firearm.
• At a coordinated checkpoint performed by Malay Police in conjunction with the municipal election officer, the bus was stopped, and a search was initiated on board.

Discovery and Inventory of Evidence

• While on board, PSI Tarazona observed, in plain view, the handle of a pistol protruding from Arturo’s half-open belt bag.
• Upon ordering the suspect to alight from the bus to avoid disturbance among other passengers, a subsequent frisk and search were conducted.
• The search yielded a loaded Colt M1911A1 calibre pistol (Serial Number 604182), three pistol magazines, and fifteen live rounds of ammunition.
• The seized items were inventoried by PO3 Estuya and later turned over for investigation, establishing the factual basis of the prosecution.

Arrest Procedure and Defendant’s Account

• Arturo was arrested in flagrante delicto after the officers discovered the firearm in plain view during the checkpoint operation.
• Although he admitted boarding the bus and acknowledged the police approach, he denied that the firearm belonged to him and contended that his arrest was executed without proper signage or procedure.
• He alleged that the checkpoint was irregularly conducted and argued that he was deprived of his right to be informed that he was charged under an administrative resolution rather than a penal law.

Trial Court and Appellate Proceedings

• In the Regional Trial Court’s judgment dated January 21, 2014, Arturo was convicted of violating the Omnibus Election Code (BP Blg. 881, as amended by RA No. 7166) in relation to COMELEC Resolution No. 8714, and was sentenced to imprisonment along with disqualification from holding public office.
• The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with a modification in penalty, imposing an indeterminate prison term of one to two years without probation and upholding the evidence procured during his arrest.
• Arturo’s subsequent petition for review was ultimately denied by the Supreme Court, which maintained the earlier decisions.

Issue:

Legality of the Checkpoint

• Whether the checkpoint conducted on the Ceres bus, as part of the gun ban enforcement during the election period, complied with constitutional and statutory requirements.
• Whether the absence of signage and proper warning constituted an illegal or irregular checkpoint operation.

Validity of Arrest and Waiver of Objections

• Whether Arturo’s warrantless arrest was lawful given that he did not challenge the arrest or its procedural aspects (e.g., lack of signage) at the time of arraignment.
• Whether his subsequent objections to the legality of the arrest should be deemed waived after he voluntarily submitted to the court’s jurisdiction.

Nature of the Charge

• Whether charging him under COMELEC Resolution No. 8714, an administrative resolution implemented pursuant to BP Blg. 881 and RA No. 7166, properly apprised him of his alleged offense.
• Whether the recitals in the information, which described the commission of an election offense involving the illegal possession of a firearm during a gun ban, were sufficient to constitute a penal charge.

Admissibility of Evidence

• Whether the evidence obtained through the plain view doctrine during the checkpoint search is admissible.
• Whether Arturo’s denial and claims of irregularity were outweighed by the positive and untainted testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)