1.

People vs Ruben Burgos

G.R. No. L-68955, September 4, 1986 Gutierrez, Jr. J.

FACTS:

Defendant is charged with illegal possession of firearm in furtherance of subversion. He was

found guilty by the RTC of Digos, Davao del Sur. From the information filed by the police
authorities upon the information given by Masamlok, allegedly a man defendant tried to recruit
into the NPA, the police authorities arrest defendant and had his house searched. Subsequently,
certain NPA-related documents and a firearm, allegedly issued and used by one Alias
Cmdr. Pol of the NPA, are confiscated. Defendant denies being involved in any subversive
activities and claims that he has been tortured in order to accept ownership of subject firearm
and that his alleged extrajudicial statements have been made only under fear, threat and
intimidation on his person and his family. He avers that his arrest is unlawful as it is done
without valid warrant, that the trial court erred in holding the search warrant in his house for the
firearm lawful, and that the trial court erred in holding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt for
violation of PD 9 in relation to GOs 6and 7.

ISSUE: Whether defendant’s arrest, the search of his home, and the subsequent confiscation of a
firearm and several NPA-related documents are lawful.

HELD: No.

The trial court justified the warrantless arrest under Rule 113 Sec 6 of the Rules of Court: when
the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is about to commit an offense
in his presence; when an offense has in fact been committed, and he has reasonable ground to
believe that the person to be arrested has committed it; when the person to be arrested is a
prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment
or temporarily confined while his case is pending or has escaped while being transferred from
one confinement to another.

There is no such personal knowledge in this case. Whatever knowledge was possessed by the
arresting officers, it came in its entirety from the information furnished by Cesar Masamlok. The
location of the firearm was given by the
appellant’s wife. Moreover, at the time of defendant’s arrest, he wasn’t in actual possession of
any firearm or subversive document, and was not committing any “subversive” act—he was
plowing his field.It is not enough that there is reasonable ground to believe that the person to be
arrested has committed a crime in a warrantless arrest.

Therefore, defendant’s arrest, the search of his home, and the subsequent confiscation of a
firearm and several NPA-related documents are unlawful.