TOPIC: Warrantless searches

o Valid Waiver

A valid warrantless arrest can be conducted when a peace officer has personal
knowledge of facts indicating the commission of a crime. Furthermore, for a
waiver of rights to be valid, it must be voluntary,
V-K- I-W-”P,AC” knowing, and intelligent, and the waiver should be in writing
and in the presence of the accused's counsel to ensure its validity.

People of the Philippines vs. Rosalinda D. Ramos

G.R. Nos. 85401-02, GUTIERREZ, JR., June 04, 1990

Facts:
The defendant, Rosalinda Ramos y David, was accused of selling marijuana
cigarettes. However, the prosecution failed to present the alleged poseur-buyer
during the trial. The police officers who effected the arrest were situated three
blocks away from where the supposed sale took place and did not witness the sale
themselves. The defense claimed that the marked money found in the defendant's
possession could have been received through legitimate transactions as she was a
cigarette vendor.

Issue/s:
The investigation procedures were questioned for not adequately informing the
accused of her rights in terms she could understand.

The waiver of right to counsel by the accused was not properly executed as
required by the constitution since it was neither in writing nor in the presence of
counsel.

The presence and identity of the poseur-buyer were crucial to the case, as their
absence left no convincing evidence of the defendant selling marijuana.
Consequent to the arrest without a warrant was deemed valid based on
information from an informant, despite the failure to establish the sale of
marijuana beyond reasonable doubt.

Held:
The Court emphasized the necessity of effectively communicating the rights of an
individual under interrogation in terms understandable to them, ensuring
comprehension is achieved. The lack of a proper waiver of the right to counsel and
the failure to present critical testimony from the poseur-buyer resulted in
insufficient evidence to unequivocally establish the sale of marijuana by the
accused. Reiterates the importance of direct and positive evidence in drug-related
cases, especially when severe penalties like reclusion perpetua are involved.
The legality of the arrest without a warrant was maintained, considering the
officers had reasonable grounds based on informant's information, regardless of the
prosecution's failure to prove the sale beyond reasonable doubt.

Regarding possession of prohibited drugs, the Court found the evidence against the
defendant to satisfy the requisites for conviction based on her control and access to
the contraband's location.

WHEREFORE, the appealed decision in Criminal Case No. 5990 is AFFIRMED

but MODIFIED. The appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment
ranging from six (6) years and one (1) day to nine (9) years and to pay a fine of six
thousand (P6,000) pesos. The appealed decision in Criminal Case No. 5991 is
REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the appellant is acquitted on grounds of
reasonable doubt.