(Part 2)
“The Supreme Court said: ‘It bears noting that before resorting to a search incidental to a lawful arrest, the existence of a crime must first be established’”
“IN AN an arrest made in flagrante delicto, it is required that the apprehending officer must have been spurred by probable cause to arrest a person caught. Probable cause refers to ‘such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent [person] to believe that an offense has been committed by the person sought to be arrested’” (G.R. 250306. Aug. 10, 2022).
“In this case, PO2 Tanay testified they received a tip from a confidential informant that marijuana plants could be found in the De Lima [residence]… To verify the tip, the police officers proceeded to the De Lima residence and conducted a surveillance where they observed the house from the roadside” (op.cit.)
“According to PO2 Tanay, they were positioned at a distance of 10 meters from the house when they saw a man going downstairs holding a potted plant. According to PO2 Tanay, since their confidential informant already told them that the person had some marijuana plants, they already assumed the potted plant was marijuana.”
“[I]n effecting the warrantless arrest, the police officers relied solely on the tip they received from the confidential informant.
“It is settled that reliable information alone is insufficient to support a warrantless arrest absent any overt act from the person to be arrested indicating a crime has just been committed, was being committed, or is about to be committed.”
“[W]hen the police officers saw [Jumarang], he was simply going downstairs while holding a potted plant.
“[He] was, at this moment, not committing a crime and it was not even shown he was about to do so or that he had just done so… [he was just] descending from the stairs, and there was no outward indication that called for his arrest.”
“[T]he fact that accused-appellant was holding a pot, which the police suspected to be a marijuana plant is not a justification to effect the warrantless arrest.
“The Court has held that a reasonable suspicion is not synonymous with the personal knowledge required under Section 5(a) to effect a valid warrantless arrest.”
“PO2 Tanay merely assumed the plant he saw in the pot being carried by [Jumarang] was marijuana based on the information relayed to them by their confidential informant.”
“Clearly, PO2 Tanay had no personal knowledge as to the type of plant that [Jumarang] was holding, to produce probable cause to believe that the plant was indeed a marijuana plant.”
“The present case is similar to People v. Villareal, where the Court held the warrantless arrest of the accused was unconstitutional, as simply holding something in one’s hands cannot in any way be considered as a criminal act.”
“[T]he police officers, who were at a distance of 10 meters away from [Jumarang], cannot be said to have properly determined the nature of the plant that he was holding was a marijuana plant” (op.cit.)
“It bears noting that before resorting to a search incidental to a lawful arrest, the existence of a crime must first be established. There being none, the search made on [Jumarang] cannot be considered as a valid warrantless search.”
