DISPOSITIVE:

“WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is DENIED.  The Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 132942, dated May 12, 2014 and August 11, 2014 respectively are hereby AFFIRMED.

So Ordered.”

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

PETITIONER DIAZ QUESTIONED THE LEGALITY OF THE SEARCH WARRANT BECAUSE IT DID NOT STATE THE NO. OF HER HOUSE WHICH IS NO. 172. SHE SAID THERE SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT DEFINITENESS. IS HER CONTENTION CORRECT?

NO. THERE WERE SKETCHES DRAWN AS WELL AS FLOOR PLAN CLEARLY INDICATING THE PLACE OF PETITIONER. THE RULE IS THAT A DESCRIPTION OF THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED IS SUFFICIENT IF BY SUCH A DESCRIPTION THE OFFICER CAN ASCERTAIN AND IDENTIFY THE PLACE.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

scd-2020-0020-merlina-r.-diaz-vs.-people-of-the-philippines-2Download

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.