Ordinarily, an information that charges multiple offenses merits a quashal, but petitioner and Valerio failed

to raise this issue during arraignment. Their failure constitutes a waiver, and they could be convicted of as
[17]
many offenses as there were charged in the information. This accords propriety to the diverse
convictions handed down by the courts a quo.

Further, the charge of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition under paragraph 2, Section 1 of P.D.
No. 1866, as amended by R.A. No. 8294, including the validity of the search warrant that led to their
confiscation, is now beyond the province of our review since, by virtue of the CA's Decision, petitioner and
Valerio have been effectively acquitted from the said charges. The present review is consequently only
with regard to the conviction for illegal possession of a part of a firearm.

The Issues

Petitioner insists on an acquittal and avers that the discovery of the two (2) receivers does not come
within the purview of the plain view doctrine. She argues that no valid intrusion was attendant and that no
evidence was adduced to prove that she was with Valerio when he threw the receivers. Likewise absent
is a positive showing that any of the two receivers recovered by the policemen matched the .45 caliber
pistol allegedly seen tucked in the waistband of her shorts when the police elements arrived. Neither is
there any proof that petitioner had knowledge of or consented to the alleged throwing of the receivers.

Our Ruling