Scribd
Upload
686 views

G.R. No. L-41686 November 17, 1980 People of The Philippines vs. Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch Ix, Quezon City Facts

The Regional Anti-Smuggling Action Center (RASAC) received a tip that highly dutiable goods were being transported from Angeles City to Manila in a blue Dodge car. RASAC agents stopped the car, driven by Sgt. Hope, and discovered 11 boxes in the vehicle. The agents seized the goods without a warrant. In court, the defense claimed the goods belonged to Antonio del Rosario and presented an invoice. The Supreme Court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure was lawful as the RASAC agents were authorized to retrieve goods reasonably suspected of violating tariff laws, in which the government has a direct interest. It found no violation of constitutional guarantees and remanded the case for further trial.

Uploaded by

Geelleanne L Ubalde
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
686 views

G.R. No. L-41686 November 17, 1980 People of The Philippines vs. Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch Ix, Quezon City Facts

The Regional Anti-Smuggling Action Center (RASAC) received a tip that highly dutiable goods were being transported from Angeles City to Manila in a blue Dodge car. RASAC agents stopped the car, driven by Sgt. Hope, and discovered 11 boxes in the vehicle. The agents seized the goods without a warrant. In court, the defense claimed the goods belonged to Antonio del Rosario and presented an invoice. The Supreme Court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure was lawful as the RASAC agents were authorized to retrieve goods reasonably suspected of violating tariff laws, in which the government has a direct interest. It found no violation of constitutional guarantees and remanded the case for further trial.

Uploaded by

Geelleanne L Ubalde
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

G.R. No.

L-41686 November 17, 1980

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL,


BRANCH IX, QUEZON CITY

FACTS:

The Regional Anti-Smuggling Action Center (RASAC) was informed by an undisclosed Informer that a
shipment of highly dutiable goods would be transported to Manila from Angeles City on a blue Dodge car.
Spurred by such lead, they stationed themselves in the vicinity of the toll gate of the North Diversion Road
at Balintawak, Quezon City.

A light blue Dodge car driven by Sgt. Hope who was accompanied by Monina Medina approached the exit
gate and after giving the toll receipt sped away towards Manila. The RASAC agents gave a chase and
overtook Sgt. Hope's car. Agent Sabado blew his whistle and signaled Sgt. Hope to stop but the latter
instead of heeding, made a U-turn back to the North Diversion Road, but he could not go through
because of the buses in front of his car. At this point, the agents succeeded in blocking Sgt. Hope's car
and the latter stopped.

The Agents saw four (4) boxes on the back seat of the Dodge and upon inquiry as to what those boxes
were, Sgt. Hope answered "I do not know." Respondents told that they were bringing the boxes to the
Tropical Hut at Epifanio de los Santos.

Arriving at the Tropical Hut, the party, together with Col. Abad who had joined them waited for the man
who according to Monina Medina was supposed to receive the boxes. As the man did not appear, Col.
Abad "called off the mission" and brought respondents and their car to Camp Aguinaldo.

An inspection of Sgt. Hope's car at Camp Aguinaldo yielded eleven (11) sealed boxes, four (4) on the rear
seat and seven (7) more in the baggage compartment which was opened on orders of Col. Abad.

ASAC Chairman Cruz, requested the Bureau of Customs to issue a Warrant of Seizure and Detention.
However, the agents admitted that they seized the said goods without a warrant. During the hearing,
Ownership of the goods was claimed by one Antonio del Rosario, whom presented a sales invoice
authenticated by BIR RDO No. 6, and averred that said goods were supposed to be transported back for
a consideration.

||

ISSUE: Whether or not the warrantless search and seizure conducted is lawful.

RULING:
What ASAC agents did was a faithful performance of a duty authorized under the Tariff and Customs
Code directing them as authorized agents to retrieve articles reasonably suspected of having been
possessed, issued or procured in violation of the tariff laws for which the government has a direct interest.

The circumstances of the case at bar undoubtedly fall squarely within the privileged area where search
and seizure may lawfully be effected without the need of a warrant. The facts being no less receptive to
the applicability of the classic American ruling, the latter's force and effect as well as the Mago decision
must be upheld and reiterated in this petition. the find that the constitutional guarantee has not been
violated and the respondent court gravely erred in issuing the order of August 20, 1975 declaring as
inadmissible evidence the items or articles obtained and seized by the apprehending agents without any
search warrant, as well as the pictures of said items attempted to be presented as evidence against the
accused.

WHEREFORE, the Order appealed from is hereby set aside and the case is ordered remanded for further
trial and reception of evidence without excluding the articles subject of the seizure or for such action as
the prosecution may take after the re-assessment and re-evaluation of its evidence as hereinabove
directed.

You might also like