Case Digest: Quelnan vs People GR No 166061

By ResIpsaLoquitor -
Quelnan vs People 

GR No 166061                                                                                      July 6, 2007

Facts:
Sometime in 1996, the Police Assistance and Reaction Against Crime (PARAC) was tasked to implement a search warrant to a certain Bernard Lim for probably possessing MA HCI (Shabu). The team was escorted to the unit by the security officer (Punsaran), upon arrival at the place to be searched, a male person naked from the waist up opened the door, which was later identified as Quelnan. The team presented the search warrant and proceeded with the search. In the presence of Quelnan and Punsaran, they found on top of a bedroom table 3 pieces of transparent plastic sachet containing white crystalline substance which was later examined as Shabu. The next day, Quelnan was arrested for violation of Sec. 16 Art. III of RA 6425.

Quelnan in his defense averred that he is not residing in the said unit, but he is the registered owner of the said unit, which he leased to Sung Kok Lee beginning May 1996. That he was there during he search for he was collecting the rent. That he was forced to sign some documents at gunpoint, handcuffed and brought to PARAC Office. Two days later, he was brought to Makati Prosecutor's Office for inquest and a case was filed against him.

Issue:
Whether or not the search warrant was properly enforced provided that he was not the subject of the search warrant.

Whether or not Quelnan was validly arrested. 

Ruling:
Yes, there is no provision of law that requires the search warrant must name the person who occupies the described premises, that where the search warrant is issued for the search of a specifically described premises only and not for the search of a person, and failure to name to owner or occupant of such property in the affidavit and search warrant does not invalidate the warrant.

Yes, Quelnan was arrested inflagrante delicto. In the prosecution of illegal possession of shabu the following requisites must be present:
  1. the accused is found in possession of a regulated drug;
  2. the person is not authorized by law or by duly constituted authorities; and
  3. the accused has knowledge that the said drug is a regulated drug.
That there must be intent to possess the drug, which includes actual possession or constructive possession. Actual possession exist when the drug is immediate physical possession or control of the accused, while constructive possession exist when he drug is under the dominion and control of the accused or when he has the right to exercise dominion over the place where it is found.

Quelnan was found and caught in flagrante when the shabu was found in his constructive possession.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Case Digest: Ebralinag vs The Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu GR No 95770 95887

By ResIpsaLoquitor -
Ebralinag, et al. vs. The Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu GR Nos. 95770 and 95887                                                     March 1, 1993 Facts: The petitioners (Ebralinag, et al.) are elementary and high school students who were expelled from their classes by public school authorities for refusing to salute the flag, sing the national anthem and recite the patriotic pledge as required by RA 1265 and Department Order No. 8 of the DepEd. Jehovah's Witnesses admittedly teach their children not to salute the flag, sing the national anthem, and recite the patriotic pledge for they believe that those are "acts of worship" or "religious devotion” which they "cannot conscientiously give . . . to anyone or anything except God". They feel bound by the Bible's command to "guard ourselves from idols — 1 John 5:21". They consider the flag as an image or idol representing the State (p. 10, Rollo). They think the action of th
Read more

Tax Case Digest: ABAKADA Guro Party List vs. Ermita GR No 168056

By PactaSuntServanda -
ABAKADA Guro Party List vs. Ermita G.R. No. 168056                                       September 1, 2005 Facts: ABAKADA GURO Party List, et al., filed a petition for prohibition o questioning the constitutionality of Sections 4, 5 and 6 of R.A. No. 9337, amending Sections 106, 107 and 108, respectively, of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC).  Section 4 imposes a 10% VAT on sale of goods and properties; Section 5 imposes a 10% VAT on importation of goods; and Section 6 imposes a 10% VAT on sale of services and use or lease of properties; These provisions contain a provision which authorizing the President, upon recommendation of the Secretary of Finance, to raise the VAT rate to 12%, effective January 1, 2006, after specified conditions have been satisfied. Issues: Whether or not there is a violation of Article VI, Section 24 of the Constitution. Whether or not there is undue delegation of legislative power in violation of Article VI Sec 28(2) of the
Read more

Case Digest: Estrada vs Escritor 492 SCRA 1 AM No P-02-1651

By ResIpsaLoquitor -
Estrada vs. Escritor, 492 SCRA 1, A.M. No. P-02-1651,  August 4, 2003 Facts: Escritor is the Court Interpreter of RTC Branch 253 of Las Piñas City. Estrada requested an investigation of respondent for cohabiting with a man not her husband and having a child with the latter while she was still married.Estrada believes  that Escritor is committing a grossly immoral act which tarnishes the image of the judiciary, thus she should not be allowed to remain employed  therein as it might appear that the court condones her act. Escritor admitted the above-mentioned allegations but denies any liability for the alleged gross immoral conduct for the reason that she is a member of the religious sect Jehovah’s Witness and Watch Tower Society and her conjugal arrangement is approved and is in conformity with her religious beliefs. She further alleged that they executed a “Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness” in accordance with her religion which allows members of Jehovah’s Witnesses who h
Read more