Title
People vs. Alberto II
Case
G.R. No. 247906
Decision Date
Feb 10, 2021
Accused-appellants convicted for transporting 887.88g of heroin; SC upheld conviction, ruling warrantless search legal, chain of custody preserved.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 78903)

Charges and Initial Proceedings

The accused-appellants were charged based on a complaint filed on August 3, 2009, for the unlawful transportation of heroin. They faced an initial hearing where they filed motions to quash the charges, arguing that their arrest and subsequent search of their belongings were conducted unlawfully. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasay City denied these motions, leading to their arraignment where both pleaded not guilty.

Evidence Presented

The prosecution presented testimony from Special Investigator Joel Otic and other agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), detailing their operations stemming from a tip-off about Vargas carrying heroin. On the day of the incident, they monitored the accused at the hotel, witnessed their interactions, and subsequently stopped Alberto at NAIA, where they believed he possessed illegal drugs. The NBI's search at their office revealed heroin in the luggage.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

On March 11, 2014, the RTC convicted both accused-appellants, sentencing them to life imprisonment and imposing a fine of P500,000 each. The court found sufficient evidence of conspiracy and active participation in the transportation of illegal drugs, emphasizing that the testimony provided by NBI agents was credible and corroborated by their operational procedures.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

The accused-appellants appealed the RTC decision to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the conviction on May 22, 2018. The CA reiterated that the transportation of illegal drugs did not require proof of intent to commit the crime, as the nature of the offense was mala prohibita. The court also found that the evidence confirmed the illegal act, and upheld the presumption of regularity in the NBI’s operations.

Arguments in the Appeal

The accused-appellants, through their counsel, alleged various procedural and substantive errors. Vargas claimed she was unlawfully arrested without a warrant, and her rights were violated during the process. Alberto contended that he was forcibly taken into custody and not allowed to reject the NBI's invitation. They also challenged the legality of the search of the black trolley bag, asserting it was a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Ruling of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the lower courts. It held that the movement of heroin constituted illegal transportation, meeting the requirements for conviction under R.A. 9165. The Court found no merit in the arguments claiming illegal arrest or search, determining that both accused voluntarily submitted to the NBI's procedures and consented to the search of their belongings, fulfilling the legal standards for a warrantless search under exigent circumstances.

Complia

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.