Case Summary (G.R. No. 45987)
Trial Court Decision
The RTC of La Trinidad, Benguet convicted Malmstedt of violating Section 4, Article II of RA 6425. It rejected his defenses—illegal search, planting of evidence, and non-ownership of the travel bags—citing his failure to assert them at the earliest opportunity. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and fined ₱20,000, plus costs.
Appellant’s Arguments on Appeal
Malmstedt contended that the searches were conducted without a warrant, rendering the discovered hashish inadmissible under the Constitution’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. He renewed claims that the hashish was planted and that he merely carried bags for an Australian couple, who would collect them later.
Legal Framework on Search and Seizure
Under the 1987 Constitution, searches and seizures require warrants based on probable cause, except:
• As an incident to a lawful arrest (Rule 126 §12).
• Arrest without warrant when a crime is committed in an officer’s presence or where the officer has personal knowledge of facts indicating a person’s guilt (Rule 113 §5).
• Probable cause is judged by the totality of circumstances.
Supreme Court Majority Decision
The Court held that Malmstedt was caught in flagrante delicto transporting prohibited drugs. Given the credible reports and on-the-spot information about a Caucasian from Sagada, officers had sufficient probable cause to believe a crime was in progress and to inspect personal effects without warrant. His refusal to promptly present identification heightened suspicion. Thus, the warrantless searches fell within the arrest-incident exception, and the hashish was admissible. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.
Key Reasoning on Probable Cause
• Persistent reports and fresh intelligence about a Caucasian from Sagada carrying drugs justified immediate action.
• The bulge at Malmstedt’s waist and his delay in producing identification corroborated suspicion.
• Requiring a warrant under such circum
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 45987)
Procedural History
- Information dated 15 June 1989 charging appellant with violation of Section 4, Article II of R.A. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act), as amended
- Tried before the Regional Trial Court, La Trinidad, Benguet, Branch 10 (Criminal Case No. 89-CR-0663)
- Appellant pleaded not guilty and raised defense of illegal search and planting of evidence
- RTC rendered decision on 12 October 1989 finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt, imposing life imprisonment and P20,000 fine
- Appellant elevated case to the Supreme Court via petition for review
Factual Background
- Appellant, a Swedish national, tourist in the Philippines since December 1988 (third entry)
- Traveled from Sagada to Baguio City on 11 May 1989 aboard a Skyline bus (Body No. 8005, Plate AVC 902)
- First Regional Narcotics Command (NARCOM) established a temporary checkpoint at km 14, Acop, Tublay, upon reports of drug transport from Sagada and tip about a Caucasian courier
- At approximately 1:30 PM, bus was stopped, two NARCOM officers inspected passengers
- Officer noticed a bulge at appellant’s waist, demanded identification; upon appellant’s failure to produce passport immediately, ordered pouch opened
- Four brown tape-wrapped objects revealed hashish; appellant escorted off bus, two traveling bags retrieved from luggage rack
- Bags contained teddy bears with concealed hashish; appellant later presented passport
- Appellant taken to Camp Dangwa headquarters; officers opened bears in investigation room, confirmed hashish
- Representative samples submitted to PC Crime Laboratory, positively identified as hashish
Issue
- Whether the warrantless search and seizure of appellant’s personal effects was lawful and whether the resulting evidence is admissible
Appellant’s Contentions
- Search was made without a warrant and thus violated the constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures (Art. III, Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution)
- Hashish was planted by NARCOM officers in his pouch
- Two traveling bags were not his property but entrusted to him by an Australian couple
- Officers took pouch bag when he produced passport and later charged him with posses