G.R. No. 199042 - Villanueva y Alcaraz vs. People

On June 15, 2004, in Caloocan City, petitioner Danilo Villanueva y Alcaraz was charged with violating Section 11, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (possession of 0.63 gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride).
He pleaded not guilty on July 15, 2004, and was represented by appointed counsel.

Brian Resco filed a complaint alleging that Villanueva shot him along C-3 Road, Navotas City. Four policemen (PSI Arturo, PO3 Coralde, PO2 Mananghaya, SPO1 Asiones) and Resco then went to Villanueva’s home, informed him of the complaint, and “invited” him to the police station.
At the station, Villanueva was subjected to a body search. Coralde felt an object in the left pocket of his pants, ordered Villanueva to remove it, and recovered a sachet of shabu marked “DAV 06-15-04.” The sachet was turned over to NPD-SOCO for examination.

Villanueva testified he was at home watching TV when police “invited” him to the station after telling him he was identified as Resco’s assailant.
He was frisked, detained, and no warrant was shown or offered.

RTC, Branch 127, Caloocan City (Apr. 6, 2009) found Villanueva guilty beyond reasonable doubt, sentenced him to 12 years and 1 day to 17 years and 8 months imprisonment, fined ₱300,000, and ordered forfeiture of the drugs.
CA, Fourteenth Division (May 4, 2011) affirmed the conviction; its October 18, 2011 resolution denied reconsideration.
Villanueva petitioned the Supreme Court, contending that his warrantless arrest and the subsequent search and seizure were illegal and that the evidence should have been excluded.

Whether petitioner’s warrantless “invitation” and arrest without a warrant fall outside any lawful exception under Rule 113, Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Whether the search of petitioner’s person and seizure of the sachet constitute an unlawful search and seizure, rendering the evidence inadmissible under the exclusionary rule.