PAPA vs. M AGO Facts: Martin
Alagao, head of the counter-intelligence unit of the Manila Police Department, acting upon a reliable information received on 3 November 1966 to the effect that a certain shipment of personal effects, allegedl misdeclared and undervalued, !ould be released the follo!ing da from the customs "one of the port of Manila and loaded on t!o truc#s, and upon orders of $icardo Papa, %hief of Police of Manila and a dul deputi"ed agent of the &ureau of %ustoms, conducted surveillance at gate 1 of the customs "one' (hen the truc#s left gate 1 at about )*3+ p'm' of ) November 1966, elements of the counter-intelligence unit !ent after the truc#s and intercepted them at the Agrifina %ircle, rmita, Manila' he load of the t!o truc#s, consisting of nine bales of goods, and the t!o truc#s, !ere sei"ed on instructions of the %hief of Police' .pon investigation, a person claimed o!nership of the goods and sho!ed to the policemen a /0tatement and $eceipts of Duties %ollected on nformal ntr No' 1)2-+1/, i ssued b the &ureau of %ustoms in the name of a certain &ienvenido &ienvenido Naguit' Naguit' %laiming %laiming to have been pre4udiced pre4udiced b the sei"ure and detention detention of the t!o truc#s and their cargo, cargo, $emedios Mago and 5alentin &' anopa filed !ith the %ourt of 7irst nstance 8%7 of Manila a petition /for mandamus !ith restraining order or preliminar in4unction 8%ivil %ase 62)96, praing for the i ssuance of a restraining order, e: parte, en4oining the police and customs authorities, or their agents, from opening the bales and e:amining the goods, and a !rit of mandamus for the return of the goods and the truc#s, as !ell as a 4udgment for actual, moral and e:emplar damages in their favor' ;n 1+ November 1966,
3 December 1966, Mago filed an e: parte motion to release the goods, alleging that since the inventor of the goods sei"ed did not sho! an article of prohibited importation, the same should be released as per agreement of the parties upon her posting of the appropriate bond that ma be determined b the court' ;n 2 March 1962, the
Held:
his !as !hat happened precisel in the case of t' Martin Alagao Alagao !ho, !ith his unit, made the search and sei"ure of the t!o truc#s loaded !ith the nine bales of goods in @uestion at the Agrifina %ircle' =e !as given authorit b the %hief of Police Police to ma#e the interception interception of the cargo' Martin Alagao Alagao and his companion companion policemen policemen had authorit authorit to effect effect the sei"ure !ithout an search !arrant issued b a competent court' he ariff and %ustoms %ode does not re@uire said !arrant herein' he %ode authori"es persons having police authorit under 0ection >>+3 of the ariff and %ustoms %ode to enter, pass through or search an land, inclosure, !arehouse, store or building, not being a d!elling houseB and also to inspect, search and e:amine an vessel or aircraft and an trun#, pac#age, bo: or envelope or an person on board, or stop and search and e:amine an vehicle, beast or person suspected of holding or conveing an dutiable or prohibited article introduced into the Philippines contrar to la!, !ithout mentioning the need of a search !arrant in said cases' &ut in the search of a d!elling house, the %ode provides that said /d!elling house ma be entered and searched onl upon !arrant issued b a 4udge or 4ustice of the peace'/ :cept in the case of the search of a d!elling house, persons e:ercising e:ercising police authorit authorit under the customs customs la! ma effect effect search and sei"ure sei"ure !ithout a search search !arrant in the enforcement of customs la!s' =erein, Martin Alagao and his companion policemen did not have to ma#e an search before the sei"ed the t!o truc#s and their cargo' &ut even if there !as a search, there is still authorit to the effect that no search !arrant !ould be needed under the circumsta circumstances nces obtaining obtaining herein' herein' he guarant of freedom freedom from unreasonab unreasonable le searches searches and sei"ures sei"ures is construed as recogni"ing a necessar difference bet!een a search of a d!elling house or other structure in respect of !hich a search !arrant ma readil be obtained and a search of a ship, motorboat, !agon, or automobile for contraband goods, !here it is not practicable to secure a !arrant, because the vehicle can be @uic#l moved out of the localit or
4urisdiction in !hich the !arrant must be sought' =aving declared that the sei"ure b the members of the Manila Police Department of the goods in @uestion !as in accordance !ith la! and b that sei"ure the &ureau of %ustoms had ac@uired 4urisdiction over the goods for the purposes of the enforcement of the customs and tariff la!s, to the e:clusion of the %ourt of 7irst nstance of Manila'
