Case Summary (G.R. No. 120135)
Petitioner
George Codes Antiquera
Respondent
People of the Philippines
Key Dates
- January 13, 2004: Information filed for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia
- February 11, 2004 (4:45 a.m.): Police visibility patrol and alleged warrantless arrest/search
- July 30, 2004: RTC of Pasay City Decision convicting Antiquera and Cruz
- September 21, 2007: CA Decision affirming RTC
- December 11, 2013: Supreme Court Decision
Applicable Law
- 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
- Section 5(a), Rule 113, Rules of Criminal Procedure (warrantless arrest in flagrante delicto)
- Section 12, Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)
Facts
- During a patrol on David Street, Pasay City, police officers observed two men flee house No. 107-C and peeked through a partially opened door.
- Inside, they claimed to have seen Antiquera holding an improvised “tooter” and lighter, and Cruz with aluminum foil and burner, engaged in a “pot session.”
- Officers entered without a warrant, arrested both, and seized a jewelry box containing improvised burners, plastic sachets with white crystalline traces, and other paraphernalia.
- A chemical examiner confirmed traces of methamphetamine hydrochloride on the seized paraphernalia.
- Antiquera challenged the legality of the entry and arrest, recounting that officers forcibly entered while he was asleep, handcuffed him, and later showed him the seized box at the station.
Procedural History
- RTC convicted both accused for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia, citing valid warrantless arrest under Rule 113, Section 5(a).
- CA affirmed the conviction on September 21, 2007; motion for reconsideration denied.
- Antiquera elevated the case to the Supreme Court.
Issue
Whether the warrantless entry, arrest, and search violated the Constitution and rendered the seized paraphernalia inadmissible, thereby invalidating the conviction for illegal possession of drug paraphernalia.
Ruling
The Supreme Court held that:
- In flagrante delicto requires that the crime or overt act be committed in the presence or view of the arresting officer.
- Officers failed to chase the fleeing suspects and, without lawful grounds, forced open the door to peer inside. No crime was plainly exposed.
- Entry and subsequent search were warrantless and illegal; any evidence obtained therefore inadmissible under the exclusionary rule.
- The seized drug parapherna
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 120135)
Facts of the Case
- On January 13, 2004, the Pasay City Prosecutor charged George Codes Antiquera and Corazon Olivenza Cruz with illegal possession of paraphernalia for dangerous drugs (RA 9165) in RTC Criminal Case No. 04-0100-CFM.
- Cruz jumped bail and was tried in absentia.
- On February 11, 2004, at about 4:45 a.m., PO1 Gregorio Recio, PO1 Laurence Cabutihan, P/Insp. Eric Ibon, PO1 Rodelio Rania, and two civilian operatives were on visibility patrol on David Street, Pasay City.
- They saw two unidentified men flee from House No. 107-C and board a passing jeep.
- Suspecting a crime, the officers approached the partially opened door of the house, pushed it about 4–6 inches, and observed Antiquera and Cruz engaged in a “pot session”: Antiquera held an improvised tooter and pink lighter; Cruz held aluminum foil and an improvised burner.
- The officers announced themselves, entered without a warrant, and arrested both accused.
- In the living room they found, inside a wooden jewelry box, an improvised burner, wok, scissors, 10 small plastic sachets with white crystalline traces, an improvised scoop, and seven strips of aluminum foil.
- All items were seized and brought to the Drug Enforcement Unit; forensic testing confirmed methamphetamine hydrochloride (“shabu”) on the paraphernalia.
- Antiquera claimed the police forced entry while he and Cruz were asleep, handcuffed him upon e