What is the decision rendered to the case of Doria vs People of the Philippines?

Answer 1

If you are referring to the case of People v. Florencio Doria, which was decided first in 1995, appealed, and then decided in 1999, this was a case about an alleged drug dealer (Doria)and his accomplice (Violeta Gaddao). The issue was whether the police could perform a warrantless search of a home and use what they found as evidence to convict the defendant(s). In the original case, a confidential informant told the Philippine National Police Narcotics Command that the two were selling drugs (marijuana); the police decided to initiate a buy and then bust them. A police officer posing as a buyer asked Doria for 1 kilo of marijuana, and gave him marked bills as payment; they would later be used to prove he had in fact sold the drugs and received the agreed-upon sum.

Doria took the money and went to get the drugs for the "buyer." Upon completion of the transaction, he was arrested, but when the police searched him, he no longer had the money with him-- Doria said he had left it with his associate. The police went to the associate's home, and without a warrant, they went inside, at which time, they saw a carton underneath a table; it looked as if it contained drugs (testing proved that it was in fact a large quantity of marijuana). Doria would later deny that the drugs belonged to him, and there was no proof that they did, beyond circumstantial evidence. But when the case went to trial, Doria was convicted not only as an individual drug dealer but as a part of an organized crime group (since he had an associate). The punishment for such an offense was death; his associate also received a similar harsh sentence.

Under the Philippine law, a warrantless search is allowed if a defendant is in the act of committing a crime, and the court found that Doria was doing that. Doria and Gaddao appealed, however, and upon examination of the facts, the courts threw out the death sentences, saying (1) there was no good reason to search Gaddao's home without a warrant (she had not been seen committing any crime, and there was no evidence the carton of drugs belonged to her, nor that she was selling them) and (2) While Doria was in fact selling drugs to an undercover officer, all the rest of what happened occurred as a result of the unlawful search of his associate's home. Thus, Doria was convicted of selling drugs and given a hefty fine, but his death sentence as a member of a criminal enterprise was overturned. Instead, he was given "reclusion perpetua," or life in prison. (It should be noted that under Philippine law, life imprisonment does not have any definite extent or duration of imprisonment; prisoners serving life imprisonment can have parole at any time.) I enclose a link to the transcript of this case as well as to the appeal.