Trinidad v. People

 

Trinidad v. People

G.R. No. 239957

February 18, 2019

FACTS:

                RTC and CA convicted Jesus Trinidad y Bersamin of the crime of Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition. RA 10591 Sec. 28 (a) in relation to Sec. 28 (e) (1), Art. V. The police conducted a buy bust operation which consummated to sale of illegal drugs and while frisking Trinidad, they discovered a .38 caliber revolver loaded with 6 live ammunitions, .22 caliber rifle loaded with 7 live ammunitions and two magazines. In his defense, he was acquitted in the crime of Illegal Sale and Possession of Dangerous Drugs. Then formally offered in evidence the said acquittal ruling which was objected by the public prosecutor for being immaterial and irrelevant to the present case. The RTC admitted said evidence only as part of Trinidad’s testimony.

ISSUE:

                Whether or not the CA correctly upheld Trinidad’s conviction for the crime charged.

HELD:

                Sec. 2 of Art. III of the 1987 Constitution mandates that a search and seizure must be carried out through or on the strength of a judicial warrant predicated upon the existence of probable cause, absent which, such search and seizure becomes ‘unreasonable’ within the meaning of said constitutional provision. Sec. 3(2) provides that evidence obtained from unreasonable searches and seizures shall be inadmissible in evidence for any purpose in any proceeding. The resolution in the drugs cases is immaterial in this case as they involve different crimes and the “the ground for the acquittal is neither unlawful arrest nor unlawful search or seizure, but the procedural flaw in the chain of custody of the dangerous drug.” The general rule is that the courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of the contents of the records of other cases. However, this rule admits of exceptions, such as when the other case has a close connection with the matter in controversy in the case at hand. The drugs caes and this caes are so interwoven and interdependent of each other since, the drugs, as well a the subject firearms and ammunition, were illegally seized in a singular instance that is, the buy-bust operation. Hence, the Court may take judicial notice of the circumstances attendant to the buy-bust operation as found by the court which resolved the drugs cases. In the drugs cases, the finding of unreasonableness of search and seizure of the drugs was mainly based on the failure of PO1 Sanoy’s testimony to establish the legitimacy of the buy-bust operation against Trinidad as said testimony was found to be highly doubtful and incredible. This circumstance similarly obtains here as in fact, the testimonies of both PO1 Nidoy and PO1 Sanoy in this case essentially just mirror on all material points the latter’s implausible narration in the drugs cases. In view of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the subject firearms and ammunition are also inadmissible in evidence for being recovered from the same unreasonable search and seizure as in the drugs cases. Since the confiscated firearms and ammunition are the very corpus delicti of the crime charge in this case, Trinidad’s acquittal is in order. Wherefore, petition is granted. Jesus Bersamin is acquitted of the crime charged.