Despite waiver of illegal arrest, evidence still inadmissible

Can the Supreme Court still declare evidence illegally obtained inadmissible despite the failure of the accused to object thereto? The answer seems to be yes.

In Marvin Porteria v. People (G.R. No. 233777, March 20, 2019), the Supreme Court said that the waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does not carry the admissibility of evidence seized during the illegal warrantless arrest.

When there is an irregularity in the arrest of an accused, the accused must object to the validity of his arrest before arraignment. Otherwise, the objection is deemed waived.[1] Here, Marvin may no longer raise the issue regarding the validity of his arrest, especially after participating in the proceedings before the trial court. Nonetheless, this does not preclude the Court from ruling against the admissibility of the evidence obtained from the illegal warrantless arrest.[2]

As such, the OR and CR allegedly found in the bag of Marvin after he was arrested for illegal possession of firearms are inadmissible. The Court cannot consider the documents supposedly seized from Marvin's possession as part of the circumstantial evidence for the prosecution.

[1] People v. Divina, 558 Phil. 390, 395 (2007).

[2] Homar v. People, 768 Phil. 195, 203 (2015).