FACTS:
A checkpoint was put up and all vehicles that went through it were stopped and checked. The officers flagged down the car driven by the accused and asked permission to inspect the vehicle to which he acceded. When they peered into the rear of the vehicle, they saw a travelling bag which was partially covered by the rim of a spare tire under the passenger seat on the right side of the vehicle. The officers again asked permission to see the contents of the bag. appellant consented to the request. Inside, the officers found forty-one plastic packets of different sizes containing pulverized substances which was later identified as marijuana.
ISSUE(S):
Whether or not the search and seizure was unreasonable and a violation of the appellant’s Constitutional right.
HELD:
NO. Accused was not subjected to any search which may be stigmatized as a violation of his Constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures. He willingly gave prior consent to the search and voluntarily agreed to have it conducted on his vehicle and travelling bag. Thus, the accused waived his right against unreasonable searches and seizures. Since in the course of the valid search forty-one (41) packages of drugs were found, it behooved the officers to seize the same; no warrant was necessary for such seizure.
The decision of the lower court finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged is AFFIRMED.
