Title
Ta-ala y Constantino vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 254800
Decision Date
Jun 20, 2022
Police arrested Ta-ala without a warrant for illegal firearms possession, but inconsistencies in the officers' account rendered the arrest invalid. The Supreme Court dismissed charges, ruling evidence inadmissible due to illegal arrest and flawed inquest proceedings.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 143264)

Factual Background

On August 6, 2016, CIDG operatives effected a warrantless arrest of petitioner and his companion, Wilford Palma y Zarceno (“Michael Diamante”), during a purported sting at Atlas Shippers Office in Bacolod. Officers claimed they observed petitioner wearing a Glock 26 pistol (SN ELR043) and saw the same weapon and numerous firearm accessories inside a package shipped from the United States. They executed an Affidavit of Arrest before ASP Vito Cruz two days later, inventorying the seized items and charging petitioner with illegal possession and smuggling under RA 10591 and the Customs Code.

Inquest and DOJ Resolutions

ASP Vito Cruz conducted an inquest, ultimately issuing two resolutions:
• August 22, 2016 – Recommended filing of two Informations against petitioner for illegal possession of firearm (Section 28) and accessories (Section 28), and dismissed the case against Palma for lack of probable cause.
• September 13, 2016 – Recommended filing of two additional Informations against petitioner for arms smuggling (Section 33, RA 10591) and customs violations (Sections 101(a) & 3601, Customs Code).

First Informations for Illegal Possession

September 6, 2016 – MDT filed two separate Informations before RTC-Branch 46 (Criminal Case No. 16-43163) and RTC-Branch 50 (Criminal Case No. 16-43164) charging petitioner with:

  1. Illegal possession of Glock 26 pistol and ammunitions (Section 28, RA 10591) – bail set at ₱80,000.
  2. Illegal possession of Class-A light weapon parts (Section 28[h] amended to Section 28[b], RA 10591) – bail set at ₱120,000.

Motions to Quash and Trial Court Orders

Petitioner filed motions to quash the Informations and suppress evidence, arguing illegal, warrantless arrest and invalid inquest. On November 3 and 22, 2016, RTC-Branch 46 denied his motions but granted the prosecution’s motion to amend the Information. Petitioner was arraigned and a not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.

Subsequent Informations for Smuggling and Customs Violations

October 18, 2016 – Informations docketed as Criminal Case No. 16-43487 (Section 33, RA 10591) before RTC-Branch 54 and No. 16-43488 (Sections 101[a] & 3601, Customs Code) before RTC-Branch 42. RTC-Branch 42 later allowed withdrawal of Case No. 16-43488.

Omnibus Motion in Criminal Case No. 16-43487

October 21, 2016 – Petitioner filed an Omnibus Motion to consolidate cases, determine probable cause, defer or allow bail, quash Information, and suppress evidence. RTC-Branch 54 denied all relief on November 2, 2016, admitted an amended Information, and arraigned petitioner on November 16, 2016.

Court of Appeals Proceedings

Petitioner elevated two certiorari petitions to the Court of Appeals:
• CA-G.R. SP No. 10697 (challenging Orders of RTC-Branch 46)
• CA-G.R. SP No. 10873 (challenging Resolutions of RTC-Branch 54)

May 9, 2019 – The Court of Appeals consolidated and dismissed both petitions for lack of merit, ruling that the warrantless arrest was valid, the motions to quash were moot post-arraignment, and certiorari was improper.

Issues Presented

  1. Whether the petition is now moot or academic.
  2. Whether petitioner’s warrantless arrest and incident search were lawful.
  3. Whether the inquest and preliminary investigation complied with procedural requirements.

Supreme Court Ruling

  1. Not moot: Petitioner filed timely motions before arraignment and never validly waived objections.
  2. Arrest unlawful: Affidavit of Arrest contained irreconcilable accounts—same Glock 26 pis




...continue reading

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