People V. Valdez G.R. No. 129296 September 25, 2000 Facts of The Case
People V. Valdez G.R. No. 129296 September 25, 2000 Facts of The Case
793
PEOPLE v. VALDEZ
G.R. No. 129296
September 25, 2000
Petitioner was charged with Section 9 of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, and was sentenced to death
penalty by lethal injection. The facts of the case are as follows:
On September 1996, police officer Tipay was tipped by an informer about the presence of a marijuana
plantation allegedly owned by petitioner Valdez in Nueva Vizcaya. The plants were allegedly near the
petitioners hut. The chief of police of the province formed a reaction to team to uproot the plants and
arrest the cultivator of the same. On the next day, they trekked to the place where the plants were being
grown. Upon arrival, their informant pointed to the petitioner who was inside his nipa hut. They started to
look around the area and saw seven (7) five-foot high flowering marijuana plants. The petitioner later
admitted to the same. The police uprooted the plants and sent it to the Crime Laboratory for analysis.
Upon identification as a prohibited drug, the appellant was taken into custody. It was also found out that
the land where the plants were being cultivated is part of the public domain. Identified by the Department
of Environment and Natural Resources.
Petitioner contends that the search was unlawful and that there was no warrant of arrest or search warrant
presented during the apprehension. On the other hand, the Solicitor General argues that there was no
search and that the marijuana plants were in plain view of the police officers.
ISSUE
Whether or not the arrest and search were illegal
HELD/RATIO
As the Court ruled, there was no search warrant issued by a judge after personal determination of the
existence of probable cause. From the declarations of the police officers themselves, it is clear that they
had at least one (1) day to obtain a warrant to search appellant's farm. There was also enough evidence
for them to convince the judge to grant them a search warrant. Therefore, the marijuana plants, as
products of the illegal search and seizure, cannot be admitted as evidence.