The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled anew that “violating ordinances and regulations alone is insufficient to trigger a valid warrantless search and seizure, especially when the penalty does not involve imprisonment.”
With its ruling based on previous decisions, the SC reversed the judgments of conviction issued by both the regional trial court (RTC) and the Court of Appeals (CA), and ordered the acquittal of Angelito G. Ridon of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition.
The SC decision written by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez was made public last Oct. 7.
A summary of the decision issued by the SC’s Public Information Office (SC-PIO) stated that in 2013 while driving his motorcycle in Makati City, police officers ordered Ridon to stop because he was turning onto a one-way street.
Instead of stopping, Ridon made a U-turn.
The police officers and a Bantay Bayan representative pursued and cornered Ridon.
When Ridon fell off his motorcycle, he searched for something at this waist. The Bantay Bayan representative apprehended him while the police officers drew their firearms aimed at Ridon.
Recovered from Ridon was a revolver without a serial number and loaded with ammunition. The police officers arrested Ridon who was charged with violation of Republic Act No. 10591, the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act.
The RTC convicted Ridon and meted out a jail term of eight years and one day to 10 years.
The CA affirmed the conviction as it ruled that the warrantless search on Ridon was valid as part of a lawful arrest for traffic violation.
Ridon elevated his case before the SC.
In granting Ridon’s petition, the SC ruled that the warrantless search was invalid.
Quoting from the SC decision, the SC-PIO said: “Searches and seizures without a warrant may be allowed if they are part of a lawful arrest under Rule 126, Section 13 of the Rules of Court. However, a lawful arrest must first be conducted before a warrantless search and seizure can be done.”
It said: “In the present case, the police officers' basis for pursuing Ridon was his violation of traffic rules for entering a one-way street. A traffic violation, however, does not call for an arrest but merely the confiscation of the driver’s license. Hence, regardless of Ridon’s guilt in entering the one-way street, he was not under arrest when the police officers pursued him.”
“As there was no valid arrest, the warrantless search done on Ridon after was also not valid.”
It also said:
“The SC also ruled that the warrantless search cannot be justified as a ‘stop-and-frisk’ search, which is allowed when a police officer observes suspicious or unusual conduct. The Court said there must be two or more reasonable suspicious circumstances to justify a stop-and-frisk.
“In the present case, Ridon’s attempt to flee after being flagged for entering a one-way street did not indicate he was guilty of concealing a prohibited item. His act of drawing something from his waist cannot also be considered a reasonable suspicious circumstance, as the police officers did not see any distinct bulge or shape that would have led them to believe that what Ridon was about to draw was a gun.
“As the search and seizure done on Ridon was illegal, the firearm seized from him was inadmissible in court. With no other admissible evidence left, the Court acquitted Ridon.”
In the dispositive portion of the decision, the SC said: “Accordingly, the petition is granted. The decision dated Oct. 4, 2019 and the resolution dated March 13, 2020 of the Court of Appeals in CA GR CR No. 41294 are reversed and set aside. Petitioner Angelito Ridon y Guevarra is acquitted.”
It ordered the immediate issuance of an entry of judgment.