Case Summary (G.R. No. 232006)
Petitioner and Respondents
• Petitioner: Michael Labrador Abellana (alias Michael Badajos/Badayos)
• Respondents: Judge Meinrado P. Paredes; People of the Philippines; S/Supt. Benjamin Delos Santos (ret.)
Key Dates
• May 26, 2008 – Search and seizure; arrest pursuant to warrant
• Nov. 9, 2007 – Motion for physical re-examination and re-weighing granted
• Apr. 4, 2008 – Release on bail after re-weighing
• Dec. 3, 2008 – Atty. Raul Albura enters appearance for petitioner
• Apr. 30, 2009 – Failure to appear for defense evidence hearing
• July 29, 2009 – Promulgation of RTC decision convicting petitioner
• Feb. 10, 2010 – Arrest on final judgment
• June 20, 2017 – Filing of habeas corpus petition
• July 10, 2019 – Supreme Court decision
Applicable Law
• 1987 Constitution – Due Process (Art. III, Sec. 1) and Right to Counsel (Art. III, Sec. 12)
• RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002), Sections 11 & 12, Article II
• Rules of Court – Rule 102 (writ of habeas corpus), Rule 120 § 6 (promulgation of judgment), Rule 38 (relief from judgment)
Facts of Arrest and Seizure
Acting on a valid search warrant issued by RTC Branch 13, police officers searched petitioner’s house in Barangay Suba, Cebu City. They found a heat-sealed pack of white crystalline substance (methamphetamine hydrochloride) and drug-paraphernalia in petitioner’s possession. Two Informations were filed: one for possession of 6.89 g of shabu (later re-weighed at 4.4562 g) and another for possession of instruments for using dangerous drugs.
Trial Stage and Pre-trial Motions
Petitioner pleaded not guilty. His first counsel, Atty. Dario Rama Jr., filed a motion to quash the search warrant (denied) and a successful motion for re-weighing of seized drugs. Petitioner posted bail and was released April 4, 2008. After the prosecution rested, petitioner’s demurrer to evidence was denied.
Counsel Changes and Procedural Posture
On December 3, 2008, Atty. Raul Albura entered his appearance. The RTC scheduled the initial presentation of defense evidence for September 10, 2008, and subsequently for April 30, 2009.
Failure to Appear and Promulgation of Judgment
Neither petitioner nor counsel appeared on April 30, 2009. The RTC nonetheless submitted the case for decision and, on July 29, 2009, promulgated a decision convicting petitioner of violating Sections 11 and 12 of RA 9165, sentencing him to 12 years and one day to 15 years plus a ₱300,000 fine, and six months and one day to four years plus a ₱10,000 fine.
Post-conviction Motions and Denials
By August 13, 2009, petitioner filed a motion for new trial or reconsideration, alleging improper notice and counsel negligence. The RTC denied this motion on December 28, 2009 under Rule 120 § 6(a), finding petitioner’s absence without justifiable cause and noting failure to surrender within 15 days as required to preserve remedies. The RTC further held that petitioner had not been denied due process, as he had been represented and permitted to cross-examine witnesses.
Petition for Relief from Judgment
On August 16, 2010, third counsel Atty. Reynaldo Acosta filed a petition for relief from judgment, claiming the denial of the right to be heard and incompetent counsel by Atty. Albura. The RTC denied it (Sept. 7, 2010) for lack of basis and for untimeliness under Rule 38. A motion for reconsideration filed October 6 and Dec. 28, 2010 was denied January 24, 2011.
Court of Appeals Resolution
Petitioner’s certiorari petition to the CA was dismissed February 17, 2012. The CA agreed that he received notice of hearings, failed to appear, and that the proper remedy was appeal, not relief from judgment. The resolution became final March 16, 2012.
Habeas Corpus Petition Before the Supreme Court
Petitioner filed for habeas corpus June 20, 2017, invoking deprivation of due process and of the right to competent counsel as exceptional post-conviction grounds. The OSG opposed, arguing petitioner had ample opportunity to be heard, received notice, and that counsel’s negligence binds petitioner; the judgment is final and immutable.
Issue Presented
Whether petitioner’s detention is unlawful by reason of constitutional deprivation—lack of due process and competent counsel—sufficient to void the proceedings and warrant the writ under Rule 102 and the 1987 Constitution.
Supreme Court’s Analysis on Due Process
Due process guarantees a reasonable opportunity to be heard, not perfect notice. Petitioner filed multiple motions (to quash, re-weighing, bail, demurrer), was represented dur
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 232006)
Facts of the Underlying Arrest and Seizure
- On May 26, 2008 at about 4:30 p.m., a police team executing a search warrant entered petitioner’s two-storey house in Barangay Suba, Cebu City.
- Petitioner Michael Labrador Abellana, also known as Michael Badayos, was present and informed of the search warrant violation of Sections 11 and 12, Article II of R.A. 9165.
- In petitioner’s front pocket, officers found a heat-sealed transparent plastic pack of white crystalline substance (marked SW-MAB-01) and assorted drug paraphernalia (scissors, lighters, improvised clip, tinfoil, burner, empty plastic packs, and improvised funnel).
- Petitioner was charged under two Informations: one for possession of 6.89 grams of “shabu” (methylamphetamine hydrochloride), and another for possession of drug‐use instruments and paraphernalia.
Trial Court Proceedings and Motions
- Petitioner pleaded not guilty and moved to quash the search warrant; the RTC denied the motion on September 15, 2006.
- Atty. Dario Rama, Jr. initially represented petitioner; after pre-trial, petitioner moved for physical re-examination and re-weighing of the seized shabu, resulting in a reduced weight of 4.4562 grams.
- Based on the re-weighing, petitioner successfully petitioned for bail and was released on April 4, 2008.
- The prosecution rested; petitioner filed a demurrer to evidence, which the RTC denied.
- On December 3, 2008, Atty. Raul Albura substituted as petitioner’s counsel.
Submission for Decision and Promulgation of Judgment
- On April 30, 2009, the RTC submitted the case for decision following petitioner’s and counsel’s failure to appear for scheduled defense presentation.
- On July 29, 2009, the RTC promulgated its decision (dated May 11, 2009) convicting petitioner:
- Violation of Section 11, Article II, R.A. 9165 – 12 years and one day to 15 years’ imprisonment, plus ₱300,000 fine.
- Violation of Section 12, Article II, R.A. 9165 – six months and one day to four years’ imprisonment, plus ₱10,000 fine.
Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration in the RTC
- On August 13, 2009, petitioner filed a motion alleging deprivation of due process and improper notice after substituting counsel, and raised factual errors in the Decision.
- The RTC found petitioner’s absence at promulgation was “without justifiable cause,” and p