Supreme Court cautions law enforcers against carrying out ‘whimsical’ arrests

The Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutional guarantee against warrantless arrests after it ordered the release of a man who was charged with drug possession following his arrest for breach of peace when he made a lot of noise in the street in 2007.

According to the high court’s Second Division, the arrest of Ramon Martinez Goco was invalid because nobody complained about his actions. In addition, shouting in a place that is already noisy cannot be regarded as a breach of the peace, it pointed out.

“It cannot be said that the act of shouting in a thickly populated place, with many people conversing with each other on the street, would constitute [a violation of the law]. The words he allegedly shouted could not have tended to disturb the peace or [incite] a riot considering that at the time of the incident, Balingkit Street [in Malate, Manila] was still teeming with people and alive with activity,” the court said in its Feb. 13 decision penned by Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe.

Drug charge dropped

Consequently, the court also acquitted Goco of the charge of drug possession as it noted that any evidence obtained from a warrantless arrest could not be used against a suspect.

Goco was arrested by Police Officers 2 Roberto Soque, Alejandro Cepe and PO3 Edilberto Zeta in December 2007 after they heard him shouting in the street. He was brought to the  police precinct where they allegedly found a sachet of shabu or methamphetamine hydrochloride in his pocket, leading to his detention and being charged with drug possession.

In April 2009, a Manila court found him guilty and sentenced him from 12 to 17 years in jail with a fine of P300,000. This was despite his defense that Soque had demanded P20,000 in exchange for his release and when he failed to pay up, the police charged him with drug possession.

In June 2011, the Court of Appeals affirmed Goco’s conviction, prompting him to elevate his case to the Supreme Court.

In ruling that there was no probable cause to justify Goco’s warrantless arrest, the high court said that law enforcers should not be “whimsical” in depriving a person of liberty.

It cited Soque’s own testimony before the lower court that Balingkit Street at the time of Goco’s arrest was teeming with people who were talking in loud voices outside their houses.

“As law enforcers, it is largely expected of them to conduct a more circumspect assessment of the situation at hand. The determination of probable cause is not a blanket-license to withhold liberty or to conduct unwarranted fishing expeditions. It demarcates the line between legitimate human conduct on the one hand and ostensible criminal activity, on the other,” the court said.