Manalili vs Court of Appeals (October 9, 1997) Ponente: Panaganiban Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the Court

of Appeals Facts: Pat. Romeo Espiritu and Pat. Anger Lumabas were patrolling the vicinity of the Kalookan City Cemetery due to reports of drug addicts roaming the area. They chanced upon a male (who turned out to be petitioner Alain Manalili y Dizon) who seemed to be high on drugs in front of the cemetery. He was observed to have reddish eyes and to be walking in a swaying manner. When Manalili tried to avoid the policemen, the latter approached him and asked what he was holding in his hands. Manalili tried to resist, but the policemen were persistent until he yielded his wallet which they examined and found to contain crushed marijuana residue. Further examination by the Forensic Chemistry Section of the NBI confirmed the findings. Trial court convicted Manalili of violation of Section 8, Article II, of RA 6425. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court. (In his defense, Manalili claimed that he was not walking; that he was riding a tricycle until the three policemen ordered the driver of the tricycle to stop because the driver and passenger were allegedly under the influence of marijuana. He claimed that he was searched and his pants were turned inside-out but nothing was found. To some extent he implied that the marijuana sample found in his entity was framed up by the policemen.) Issue: WON the evidence seized during a stop-and-frisk operation is admissible. Held: Yes Ratio: The general rule is that a search and seizure must be validated by a previously secured judicial warrant. However, this is not absolute and exceptions have been contemplated by the law: 1. Search incidental to a lawful rrest 2. Search of moving vehicles 3. Seizure in plain view 4. Customs search 5. Waiver by the accused themselves of their right against unreasonable search and seizure. In the cited cases, the search and seizure may be made only with probable cause as essential requirement. Probable cause (in relation to search and seizure): Existence of such facts and circumstances which could lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the item, article, or object sought in connection with said offense or subject to seizure and destruction by law is in the place to be searched. A stop-and-frisk operation is another exception to the general rule. In this case, probable cause was established with Manalilis suspicious behaviour.