THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.

LO HO WING
G.R. No. 88017
January 21, 1991

DOCTRINE: The rules governing search and seizure have over the years been steadily liberalized whenever
a moving vehicle is the object of the search on the basis of practicality. This is so considering that before a
warrant could be obtained, the place, things and persons to be searched must be described to the satisfaction
of the issuing judge—a requirement which borders on the impossible in the case of smuggling effected by the
use of a moving vehicle that can transport contraband from one place to another with impunity.

FACTS: In July 1987, the Special Operations Group, received a tip from one of its informers about an
organized group engaged in the importation of illegal drugs, smuggling of contraband goods, and gunrunning.
After an evaluation of the information thus received, a project codenamed "OPLAN SHARON 887" was
created in order to bust the suspected syndicate. the recruitment of confidential men and "deep penetration
agents' was carried out to infiltrate the crime syndicate. One of those recruited was the discharged accused,
Reynaldo Tia.

Tia was introduced to his co-accused Lim Cheng Huat by another confidential agent named George. Lim
expressed a desire to hire a male travelling companion for his business nips abroad. Tia offered his services
and was hired. Tia was introduced to Peter Lo, whom Tia found out to be the person he was to accompany to
China in lieu of Lim.

Tia regularly submitted reports of his undercover activities on the suspected criminal syndicate.

The day after they arrived in Hongkong, Upon arriving there, they checked in at a hotel, and rested for a few
hours. The pair thereafter went to a local store where appellant purchased six (6) tin cans of tea. Tia saw the
paper tea bags when the cans were opened for examination during the purchase. Appellant kept the cans of tea
in his hotel room. That evening, Tia went to appellant's room to talk to him. Upon entering, he saw two other
men with appellant. One was fixing the tea bags, while the other was burning substance on a piece of
aluminum foil using a cigarette lighter. Appellant joined the second man and sniffed the smoke emitted by the
burning substance. Tia asked the latter what they would be bringing back to the Philippines. He was informed
that their cargo consisted of Chinese drugs.

The next day, the two returned to Manila via a China Airlines flight. Appellant had with him his red traveling
bag with wheels. The plane landed at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA), Lim met the newly-
arrived pair at the arrival area. Lim talked to appellant. After Lim and appellant finished their conversation, the
latter hailed a taxicab. Appellant and Tia boarded the taxicab after putting their luggage inside the back
compartment of the vehicle. Lim followed in another taxi cab.

Meanwhile, a team composed of six operatives headed by Captain Palmera was formed to act on the tip given
by Tia. On the expected date of arrival, the team proceeded to the NAIA. Captain Palmera notified the
NARCOM Detachment at the airport for coordination.

Upon seeing appellant and Tia leave the airport, the operatives who first spotted them followed them. Along
Imelda Avenue, the car of the operatives overtook the taxicab ridden by appellant and Tia and cut into its path
forcing the taxi driver to stop his vehicle. Meanwhile, the other taxicab carrying Lim sped away in an attempt
to escape.
Three pieces of luggage were retrieved from the back compartment of the vehicle. The operatives requested
from the suspects permission to search their luggage. A tin can of tea was taken out of the red traveling bag
owned by appellant. Sgt. Roberto Cayabyab, one of the operatives, pried the lid open, pulled out a paper tea
bag from the can and pressed it in the middle to feel its contents. Some crystalline white powder resembling
crushed alum came out of the bag. The sergeant then opened the tea bag and examined its contents more
closely. Suspecting the crystalline powder to be a dangerous drug, he had the three traveling bags opened for
inspection. From the red traveling bag, a total of six (6) tin cans were found, including the one previously
opened. Tia and appellant were taken to the CIS Headquarters in Quezon City for questioning.

Tests conducted on a sample of the crystalline powder inside the tea bag yielded a positive result that the
specimen submitted was methamphetamine. Samples from each of the fifty-six (56) tea bags were similarly
tested. The tests were also positive for methamphetamine. Hence, the three suspects were indicted.

Appellant contends that the warrantless search and seizure made against the accused is illegal for being
violative of Section 2, Article III of the Constitution. The fact that the search and seizure in question were
made on a moving vehicle, appellant argues, does not automatically make the warrantless search herein fall
within the coverage of the well-known exception to the rule of the necessity of a valid warrant to effect a
search because, as aforementioned, the anti-narcotics agents had both time and opportunity to secure a search
warrant

ISSUE: Whether the search and seizure on the accused was valid?

RULING: Yes. As correctly averred by appellee, that search and seizure must be supported by a valid warrant
is not an absolute rule. There are at least three (3) well-recognized exceptions thereto, these are: [1] a search
incidental to an arrest, [2] a search of a moving vehicle, and [3] seizure of evidence in plain view .The
circumstances of the case clearly show that the search in question was made as regards a moving vehicle.
Therefore, a valid warrant was not necessary to effect the search on appellant and his co-accused.

the rules governing search and seizure have over the years been steadily liberalized whenever a moving vehicle
is the object of the search on the basis of practicality. This is so considering that before a warrant could be
obtained, the place, things and persons to be searched must be described to the satisfaction of the issuing judge
—a requirement which borders on the impossible in the case of smuggling effected by the use of a moving
vehicle that can transport contraband from one place to another with impunity.

We might add that a warrantless search of a moving vehicle is justified on the ground that "it is not practicable
to secure a warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the
warrant must be sought."

it was firmly established from the factual findings of the trial court that the authorities had reasonable ground
to believe that appellant would attempt to bring in contraband and transport it within the country. The belief
was based on intelligence reports gathered from surveillance activities on the suspected syndicate, of which
appellant was touted to be a member. they were also certain as to the expected date and time of arrival of the
accused from China. But such knowledge was clearly insufficient to enable them to fulfill the requirements for
the issuance of a search warrant.

The discharge of accused Tia was based on Section 9, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court, which reads in part:

Sec. 9. Discharge of the accused to be state witness. — When two or more persons are jointly charged
with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case, the court
may direct one or more of the accused to be discharged with their consent so that they may be
witnesses for the state
The discharge of an accused is left to the sound discretion of the lower court.  The trial court has the exclusive
1âwphi1

responsibility to see that the conditions prescribed by the rule exist. appellant does not allege that any of the
conditions for the discharge had not been met by the prosecution. Therefore, the discharge, as ordered by the
trial court, stands.