People vs.

De Gracia
G. R. Nos. 102009-10, Jul 6, 1994

Facts:
Reform the Armed Forces Movement-Soldiers of the Filipino People (RAM-SFP)
staged coup d’état in December 1989 against the Government. Efren Soria of
Intelligence Division, NCR Defense Command, together with his team, conducted
a surveillance of the Eurocar Sales Office in EDSA, QC on early morning of
December 1, 1989, which surveillance actually started November 30, 1989 at
around 10:00 PM. Such surveillance was conducted pursuant to an intelligence
report that the said establishment was being occupied by the elements of the
RAM-SFP as communication command post. Near the Eurocar office, there were
crowd watching the on-going bombardment near Camp Aguinaldo when a group
of 5 men disengaged themselves and walked towards their surveillance car. Maj.
Soria ordered the driver to start the car and leave the area. However, as they
passed the area, then 5 men drew their guns and fired at them, which resulted to
the wounding of the driver. Nobody in the surveillance team retaliated for they
were afraid that civilians might be caught in the crossfire. Thereafter, on the
morning of December 5, 1989, a search team raided the Eurocar Sales Office and
confiscated 6 cartons of M-16 ammunition, 5 bundles of C-4 dynamites, M-shells
of different calibers, and molotov. Obenia, who first entered the establishment,
found De Gracia in the office of a certain Col. Matillano, holding a C-4 and
suspiciously peeping though door. No search warrant was secured by the raiding
team because, according to them, there was so much disorder considering that
the nearby Camp Aguinaldo was being mopped up by the rebel forces and there
was simultaneous firing within the vicinity of the Eurocar office, aside from the
fact that the courts were consequently closed.

Issue:
Whether or not there was a valid search and seizure in this case.

Ruling:
De Gracia was found guilty of illegal possession of firearms in furtherance of
rebellion.
He was acquitted of attempted homicide. The court held that intent to possess is
not an essential element of the offense of illegal possession of firearms. It is
sufficient that the accused had physical or constructive possession of the
firearms. The court also ruled that there was a valid warrantless search and
seizure in this case, considering the urgency and exigency of the situation during
the coup d'etat. Finally, the court found that De Gracia's possession of the
firearms and explosives was for the purpose and in furtherance of rebellion.