Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 62 views

    Lapi Vs People - GR NO. 210731 - FEB 13, 2019

    Uploaded by

    Kristel Alyssa Maranan
    This case involves the warrantless arrest of Simeon M. Lapi for illegal drug possession. PO2 Villeran witnessed Lapi engaged in a pot session through the window of a house. PO2 Villeran entered and arrested Lapi and the others. Lapi was charged and found guilty by the RTC and CA. The Supreme Court denied Lapi's petition, finding that (1) it will not review questions of fact, and the lower courts did not overlook any facts; and (2) Lapi's failure to question the validity of his arrest before trial waived any objection, and the evidence was sufficient to find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lapi Vs People - GR NO. 210731 - FEB 13, 2019

    Uploaded by

    Kristel Alyssa Maranan
    62 views2 pages
    This case involves the warrantless arrest of Simeon M. Lapi for illegal drug possession. PO2 Villeran witnessed Lapi engaged in a pot session through the window of a house. PO2 Villeran entered and arrested Lapi and the others. Lapi was charged and found guilty by the RTC and CA. The Supreme Court denied Lapi's petition, finding that (1) it will not review questions of fact, and the lower courts did not overlook any facts; and (2) Lapi's failure to question the validity of his arrest before trial waived any objection, and the evidence was sufficient to find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

    Original Description:

    25

    Original Title

    25

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves the warrantless arrest of Simeon M. Lapi for illegal drug possession. PO2 Villeran witnessed Lapi engaged in a pot session through the window of a house. PO2 Villeran entered and arrested Lapi and the others. Lapi was charged and found guilty by the RTC and CA. The Supreme Court denied Lapi's petition, finding that (1) it will not review questions of fact, and the lower courts did not overlook any facts; and (2) Lapi's failure to question the validity of his arrest before trial waived any objection, and the evidence was sufficient to find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    62 views2 pages

    Lapi Vs People - GR NO. 210731 - FEB 13, 2019

    Uploaded by

    Kristel Alyssa Maranan
    This case involves the warrantless arrest of Simeon M. Lapi for illegal drug possession. PO2 Villeran witnessed Lapi engaged in a pot session through the window of a house. PO2 Villeran entered and arrested Lapi and the others. Lapi was charged and found guilty by the RTC and CA. The Supreme Court denied Lapi's petition, finding that (1) it will not review questions of fact, and the lower courts did not overlook any facts; and (2) Lapi's failure to question the validity of his arrest before trial waived any objection, and the evidence was sufficient to find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    LAPI VS PEOPLE |

    GR NO. 210731 |
    FEB 13, 2019

    FACTS:

    PO2 Villeran, a member of Bacolod City Anti-Illegal Drug Special Operation Task Group, was
    included in a stake-out operation in Bacolod City when he heard noises from one of the houses. He
    peeped through its window and saw Lapi, among others, having a pot session. PO2 Villeran entered the
    house through the kitchen door and peeked into the adjacent room. He saw the pot session was ongoing,
    thus he entered the room and introduced himself as a police officer. Having been arrested and their
    paraphernalia seized, the men were then brought to the City Anti-Illegal Drug Special Operation Task
    Group Office, where a police blotter was filed and later charged with violation of Sec15, RA 9165.
    Petitioner asserts that while he failed to question the validity of his arrest before entering his plea, his
    warrantless arrest was illegal from the start. Hence, any evidence obtained cannot be used against him.

    RTC held him guilty, who was caught in flagrante delicto of the crime charged, which was
    affirmed by the CA.

    ISSUE:

    I. whether or not the Petition should be denied for raising questions of fact
    II. Whether or not the warrantless arrest against petitioner Simeon M. Lapi was valid

    RULING: DENIED!

    I. This Court is not a trier of facts. 37 A petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the
    Rules of Court must, as a general rule, only raise questions of law.38 Parties may only raise
    issues that can be determined without having to review or reevaluate the evidence on record.

    In criminal cases, however, the accused has the constitutional right to be presumed
    innocent until the contrary is proven.41 To prove guilt, courts must evaluate the evidence
    presented in relation to the elements of the crime charged.42 Thus, the finding of guilt is
    essentially a question of fact.

    This Court is not precluded from reviewing the factual findings of the lower courts,
    or even arriving at a different conclusion, "if it is not convinced that [the findings] are
    conformable to the evidence of record and to its own impressions of the credibility of the
    witnesses."46 The lower courts' factual findings will not bind this Court if facts that could
    affect the result of the case "were overlooked and disregarded[.]"47
    An examination of the factual findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeals
    shows no error that requires this Court's review. On this ground, the Petition can be outright
    dismissed.

    II. Even if this Court reviews the substantial merits of this case, the Petition is still denied. The
    Court of Appeals did not err in affirming the trial court's finding of guilt beyond reasonable
    doubt.

    Here, however, petitioner admits that he failed to question the validity of his arrest
    before arraignment. 56 He did not move to quash the Information against him before entering
    his plea. 57 He was assisted by counsel when he entered his plea. 58 Likewise, he was able to
    present his evidence.

    Herein, accused-appellant went into arraignment and entered a plea of not guilty.
    Thereafter, he actively participated in his trial. He raised the additional issue of irregularity of
    his arrest only during his appeal to this Court. He is, therefore, deemed to have waived such
    alleged defect by submitting himself to the jurisdiction of the court by his counsel-assisted
    plea during his arraignment; by his actively participating in the trial and by not raising the
    objection before his arraignment.

    Petitioner does not deny that his drug test yielded positive for illegal drugs. What he
    questions is the alleged illegality of his arrest.

    You might also like