705 People v Fernandez

December 13, 1994 G.R. No. 113474 Puno, J.

Article 3, Section 2 Sigrid B. Adarlo
Petitioners: Respondents:
People of the Philippines Alfredo Fernandez
Doctrine:
Upon voluntarily submission to the search, one is precluded from questioning the admissibility
of the evidence.

Facts:
1. Version of the Prosecution: During the fiesta of Brgy. Tanabag, Puerto Princesa City,
Marianito Merced, along with his brother Isagani, and others were drinking at the lawn
of Alfedo Fernandez (accused).
2. While drinking, Isagani saw Fernandez (with a gun concealed in his jacket) descend from
his room, went behind Marianito and shot him.
3. Isagani ran, hid in the bushes and eventually reported the shooting incident to Brgy.
Capt. Asebuque. Brgy. Tanod Nollan arrived to witness the shooting.
4. After the incident, Fernandez fled and hid in the forest. He then went to his sister-in-
law’s house and stayed there.
5. Four days later, Patrolman Pamintuan received a confidential report regarding where
Fernandez was hiding. Acting on the confidential information, three patrolmen rushed
to the house indicated, cordoned the area, and identified themselves as police men.
6. Fernandez gave himself up and the owner of the house surrendered Fernandez’s
suitcase to the police, without any objection from him.
7. The suitcase contained a homemade shotgun, an empty shell and one live ammunition.
Fernandez did not have a license to carry the firearm found.
8. Version of Fernandez: On the day of the shooting, Fernandez stated that he was ill with
malaria and he was with his wife in their bedroom.
9. After a while, Isagani and Marianito arrived at their house and started drinking gin.
There was a then a gunshot and his wife took their youngest son with her, leaving him
their three other sons.
10. Fearing that he would be implicated, he hid and eventually went to his sister-in-law’s
house.
11. The trial court found Fernandez guilty of Homicide and Illegal Possession of Firearms.
The CA likewise found him guilty.

Issue/s: Ruling:
1. WON the evidence obtained were admissible 1. YES
2. WON Fernandez’s arrest was valid 2. YES
Rationale/Analysis/Legal Basis:
1. The rule on searches and seizures must be with a warrant is not absolute.
When the patrolmen cordoned the house where Fernandez was hiding, they did not
have a warrant of arrest. However, Fernandez gave himself up to the police officers.
When his luggage was surrendered to the patrolmen, he acquiesced with its search and
there they found the firearms. He then signed and acknowledged a Receipt certifying
that the firearm obtained was confiscated from him. He had waived his constitutional
right against an unreasonable search and seizure when he had agreed for his luggage
to be searched. As such, the products from a lawful search is admissible in evidence.