People v.

Ara
GR No. 185011
December 23, 2009
FACTS:
This petition seeks to appeal the decision of the CA, affirming the decision of RTC
Davao, convicting the accused-appelants of violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs act
of 2002.
The accused-appellants Sangki Ara, Mike Talib and Jordan Musa were charged with
trading, transporting and delivering 26.6563 grams of shabu, with the aggravating circumstance
of it being done within 100 meters from the school of St. Peters College. They were
apprehended due to a buy-bust operation conducted by the police officers. A confidential
informant reported that 3 suspected drug pushers had contacted him for a deal involving shabu,
setting the meeting place at St. Peters College. A team was immediately composed, with one of
the officers to act as the poseur-buyer. The team proceeded to the school wherein the car of the
accused was park, and the transaction happened inside the car. The accused Talib, SPO3 Ara and
Musa were all inside the car, when accused Ara took out several sachets with crystalline granules
to be given to the poseur-buyer. When the arranged signal to the buy-bust team was given,
accused Musa tried to drive away the car but the PO1 Ayao, the poseur-buyer, had the chance to
turn off the car engine. Sachets of shabu were recovered from each of the three accused which
were sent to the PNP Crime laboratory which confirmed that it is indeed shabu.
The defense offered that SPO3 Ara had been in the PNP service for 32 years with a
spotless record, and Musa is his son-in-law. On the day that they were apprehended Ara was
picked up by Musa, for they planned to go to Davao City. Upon boarding the Car Ara was
surprised that Talib was there, but Musa explained that he was hitching a ride. To his surprise
PO1 Ayao came out of nowhere pointing a gun at him. The defense stated that the accused were
framed and the shabu recovered were just planted as evidence. Despite the defense, the RTC
found the accused-appellants guilty which was confirmed by the CA, ruling that all the elements
for the crime were sufficiently established and the arrest was in flagrante delicto so there was no
need for a warrant.
ISSUES:
1. Whether the buy-bust conducted was valid.
HELD:
1. Yes.
The accused-appellants contend that their arrest was without probable cause, claiming that
the team had more than a month to apply for a warrant but they failed to do so. The Court stated
that buy-bust operations have long been established as a legitimate method for catching
offenders, apprehending a criminal in the act of commission of an offense. The period of
planning for the operation cannot be dictated to the police officers for they have the sufficient
expertise to determine for themselves the right way to execute the plan. The Court found the
argument of the appellants untenable, when they stated that the police had all the time they
needed to secure a warrant. The arrest was in flagrante delicto, which is one of the instances
wherein a warrant can be dispensed with. It is when in the presence of an officer or a private
person a person had committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit and offense.
Prepared by: Jo-Anne D. Coloquio

There was also probable cause for the information was sufficiently given by the Confidential
Informant who stated that he has a deal with 3 suspected drug pushers for shabu. The accusedappellants had just committed a crime when Ara sold shabu to the poseur-buyer, and the guilt
was further strengthened by the fact that Musa attempted to drive away the vehicle. The Court
further stated that there was no evidence presented by the defense which can establish an illmotive for the apprehending officers to frame the accused, for they never knew the accused nor
did they have anything to do with them previous to the arrest. They had no reason to frame Ara
much less Musa and Talib. The Court concluded then that since the operation was a legitimate
form of entrapment, the pieces of evidence seized are admissible sufficiently justifying their
conviction.

Prepared by: Jo-Anne D. Coloquio