GR 105834; (February, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 105834 February 13, 1995
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JEAN BALINGAN Y BOBBONAN alias “SUSAN”, “JANE” and “JUANA”, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On August 31, 1988, the Narcotics Intelligence Division of the Baguio City Police Station received a tip from an unnamed male informant that accused-appellant Jean Balingan y Bobbonan was going to transport marijuana to Manila. A surveillance team was formed and deployed. The team observed appellant leave her residence at Brookside, board a taxicab while wearing a pink dress and carrying a gray luggage bag with orange/yellow belts, and eventually board a Dangwa bus (plate NTU-153) bound for Manila. The bus was stopped at a police checkpoint on Kennon Road. Police Lt. Manuel Obrera boarded the bus, identified himself to appellant, asked permission to check her luggage, and upon her non-response, opened the gray bag from the overhead luggage compartment above her seat. The bag contained four bundles of suspected marijuana flowering tops. Appellant resisted arrest. Laboratory tests confirmed the contents were marijuana. Appellant denied the charge, testifying she was on an errand for her employer, carrying only a purse and handkerchief, and that the police falsely accused her of owning the gray bag.
ISSUE
The main issues are: (1) whether the prosecution proved appellant’s guilt for illegal transportation of marijuana beyond reasonable doubt; and (2) whether the warrantless search of the bag and seizure of the marijuana were constitutional.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution proved appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of Lt. Obrera, found credible by the trial court, established that appellant had physical possession of the gray bag from her house until the bus, and the bag contained marijuana. The warrantless search was valid. The search occurred on a moving, public bus. Following the precedent in People vs. Lo Ho Wing, a warrantless search of a moving vehicle is permissible when there is probable cause. Here, probable cause was established by the informant’s tip and the subsequent surveillance confirming appellant’s suspicious movements with the bag. The marijuana is admissible as evidence. The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P20,000.00 imposed by the Regional Trial Court was affirmed.