GR No. 123456, *Garcia v. Reyes*, January 15, 2023

FACTS: Petitioner Juan Garcia was arrested without a warrant by police officers for allegedly selling illegal drugs in a “buy-bust” operation. The arresting officers claimed the operation was based on information from a confidential informant. During the arrest, the officers seized several plastic sachets of shabu from Garcia’s possession. At the police station, the seized items were marked in the presence of Garcia. However, the prosecution failed to present the confidential informant as a witness during the trial. Garcia filed a Motion to Quash the information, arguing that his warrantless arrest was illegal as he was not caught in flagrante delicto, and the failure to present the informant violated his right to confront witnesses.

ISSUE

Whether the warrantless arrest of Garcia was valid under Rule 113, Section 5(a) of the Rules of Court, and whether the failure to present the confidential informant as a witness warrants the dismissal of the criminal case.

RULING

No, on both counts. The warrantless arrest was invalid. For a warrantless arrest under Section 5(a) to be valid, the person must have committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense in the presence of the arresting officer. The buy-bust operation, while a valid form of entrapment, must still result in the accused being caught *in flagrante delicto*. Here, the prosecution’s sole reliance on the police officers’ testimonies, without corroboration from the confidential informant who allegedly witnessed the transaction, failed to establish that Garcia was caught in the act. The informant was the only one who directly witnessed the alleged sale prior to the arrest. Consequently, the arrest being unlawful, the subsequent search and seizure were likewise illegal, rendering the seized items inadmissible as evidence under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. However, the failure to present the confidential informant per se does not automatically warrant dismissal. The prosecution has the discretion to choose its witnesses. The case is dismissed due to the inadmissibility of the evidence stemming from the illegal arrest, not solely because of the informant’s absence. The Court ordered the immediate release of Garcia unless detained for another lawful cause.