People vs. Macarona

Probable cause justifying a warrantless search and seizure cannot be based exclusively on an initial and unverified tip from a confidential informant; it must be premised on a myriad of suspicious circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious person to believe that a crime has been committed and the item sought is in the possession of the accused.

On January 2, 2015, a confidential informant notified Police Officer 2 Sapalicio that JR and Meloy Macarona were about to transport illegal drugs from Davao City to Lupon aboard a white Mitsubishi L300 van. Sapalicio relayed this to Police Senior Inspector Joel O. Danlag, and within an hour, a checkpoint was set up in Purok Macopa, Davao Oriental. At 4:00 p.m., Police Officer 1 Ronquillo flagged down the white L300 van at the checkpoint and asked the Macaronas to roll down their windows. Upon doing so, Ronquillo saw a sachet containing a white crystalline substance in the driver's visor, which he believed to be shabu, and informed Sapalicio.

Sapalicio then called on Lupon's barangay officials to witness the search of the vehicle. In the presence of Kagawad Elizer Clapano and Barangay Captain Generoso Rañeses, Sapalicio searched the vehicle and found another small sachet in the van's dashboard cover and two big sachets in the driver's seat cover. The seized sachets were marked in the presence of the barangay officials and the Macaronas, and later turned over for qualitative examination. Police Inspector Bajade examined the contents and issued a chemistry report finding the four sachets positive for 92.2303 grams of shabu.

The Macaronas denied knowledge of the prohibited drugs. Meloy claimed he was hired as a driver to bring the van from Davao City to Mati City, with JR merely accompanying him. They asserted that the officers did not mark or make an inventory of the seized items at the checkpoint, and it was only at the police station that they saw the drugs and the officers marked the contraband. The Regional Trial Court found the Macaronas guilty beyond reasonable doubt of transporting shabu, upholding the validity of the search and the chain of custody, a finding later affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

• Illegal Search: Petitioner argued that the seized items should not have been admitted in evidence because they were obtained through an illegal search, considering that a solitary tip did not constitute probable cause for a warrantless search.
• Plain View Doctrine: Petitioner claimed that the plain view doctrine is not applicable as the seized sachets were not in plain view.
• Chain of Custody: Petitioner averred that even assuming the search was valid, the police officers did not comply with the chain of custody rule under Section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act.

• Validity of Search and Seizure: Respondent countered that the warrantless search was valid and the integrity and identity of the seized items were preserved.
• Admissibility of Evidence: Respondent argued that the seized items were admissible in evidence.
• Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Respondent maintained that the guilt of the accused-appellants was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

• Probable Cause for Warrantless Search: Whether a solitary tip from a confidential informant constitutes probable cause to justify a warrantless search and seizure of a moving vehicle.
• Chain of Custody: Whether the prosecution established the chain of custody of the seized drugs in compliance with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165.
• Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Whether the accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of transporting dangerous drugs.

• Probable Cause for Warrantless Search: No. A solitary tip from a confidential informant does not constitute probable cause to justify a warrantless search and seizure, rendering the seized drugs inadmissible.
• Chain of Custody: No. The apprehending officers failed to comply with the chain of custody rule under Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, as the inventory was not done in the presence of the accused or a media/NPS representative, and the forensic examination certificate was issued beyond 24 hours.
• Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt: No. Without the admissible corpus delicti and with broken chain of custody, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused-appellants beyond reasonable doubt.

• Probable Cause for Warrantless Search: The Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches and seizures. While warrantless searches of moving vehicles are permissible in exceptional circumstances, probable cause must still be satisfied. Probable cause cannot be exclusively premised on an initial and unverified tip from a confidential informant, as a tip is hearsay and does not amount to facts and circumstances leading a reasonably discreet person to believe an offense was committed. In this case, the checkpoint, the flagging down of the van, and the search were triggered solely by a solitary tip. There were no other attendant circumstances or suspicious behavior by the Macaronas. Thus, there was no probable cause, making the warrantless search unlawful and the seized drugs inadmissible.
• Chain of Custody: Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165, as amended, requires the physical inventory and photograph of seized items immediately after seizure in the presence of the accused, an elected public official, and a representative of the National Prosecution Service or the media. Here, only the barangay officials were present and signed the inventory; the accused did not sign, and the required media or NPS representative was absent. Furthermore, the forensic chemist issued the examination results more than 48 hours after receipt of the seized substances, violating the 24-hour rule. These procedural lapses failed to establish the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti.
• Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt: The corpus delicti in dangerous drugs cases pertains to the confiscated drugs. Because the seized drugs were excluded as evidence due to the illegal search, and the chain of custody was broken, the prosecution was left without the corpus delicti. Without the corpus delicti, the authorship of the crime cannot be ascertained, warranting an acquittal.

• Probable Cause in Warrantless Searches — Probable cause that justifies a warrantless search and seizure cannot be exclusively premised on an initial and unverified tip from a confidential informant. It requires a myriad of suspicious circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious person to believe that a crime has been committed and the item sought is in the possession of the accused. The Court applied this by ruling that the solitary tip about the Macaronas transporting drugs did not justify the warrantless search at the checkpoint.
• Chain of Custody Rule — The integrity and evidentiary value of the corpus delicti must be established by demonstrating strict compliance with the chain of custody of seized drugs under Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165. This requires physical inventory and photography immediately after seizure in the presence of the accused, an elected public official, and a representative of the NPS or media. The Court found non-compliance as the inventory lacked the presence and signature of the accused and a media/NPS representative, and the forensic certification was issued beyond 24 hours.

• "Probable cause, which justifies the conduct of a warrantless search and seizure, cannot be based exclusively on an initial tip relayed by a confidential informant. Rather, it must be premised on a myriad of suspicious circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious person to believe that a crime has been committed and the item sought is in the possession of the accused." — This is the opening paragraph of the decision, stating the core ratio decidendi regarding the insufficiency of a solitary tip for probable cause.
• "Any alleged contraband seized pursuant to a warrantless search exclusively based on a solitary tip is inadmissible. In the absence of the corpus delicti, the accused must be acquitted." — This establishes the direct legal consequence of an illegal search based on a solitary tip, linking the inadmissibility of evidence to the necessity of acquittal.

• People vs. Sapla, G.R. No. 244045, June 16, 2020 — Controlling precedent followed, which explained that probable cause for a warrantless search cannot be exclusively premised on an unverified tip from a confidential informant.
• People vs. Yanson, G.R. No. 238453, July 31, 2019 — Followed, an analogous case where the Court held that a solitary tip hardly suffices as probable cause for an intrusive warrantless search of a moving vehicle.
• People vs. Saragena, 817 Phil. 117 (2017) — Followed, explaining the requirements of Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 regarding the presence of the accused, an elected public official, and an NPS or media representative during the inventory and photography of seized items.
• People vs. Ferrer, 832 Phil. 529 (2018) — Followed, where the accused was acquitted due to failure to prove that the apprehending officers inventoried and took photographs in the presence of the accused, lending credence to the claim that the inventory was never done in their presence.

• Article III, Sections 2 and 3, 1987 Constitution — Guarantees the right against unreasonable searches and seizures and provides that evidence obtained in violation thereof is inadmissible. Applied to exclude the seized drugs obtained from the unlawful warrantless search.
• Section 5, Republic Act No. 9165 — Penalizes the sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution, and transportation of dangerous drugs. The Macaronas were charged with violating this section.
• Section 21, Republic Act No. 9165, as amended by R.A. No. 10640 — Prescribes the chain of custody rule, requiring physical inventory and photography of seized items in the presence of the accused, an elected public official, and an NPS or media representative. The Court found that the apprehending officers failed to strictly comply with this provision.

Carandang, Zalameda, Rosario, and Dimaampao, JJ., concur.