Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. CARLOS TRANCA Y ARELLANO

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 197728 2015-09-16	SPS. ARMANDO AND LORNA TRINIDAD v. DONA* MARIE GLENN IMSON PERALTA, J.
Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeking the reversal and setting aside of the Decision[1] and Resolution of the Court of Appeals (CA), dated December 22, 2010 and June 23, 2011,[2] respectively, in CA-G.R. SP No. 110357. The assailed CA Decision reversed and set aside the Decision[3] dated June 19, 2009 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City, Branch 155, while the questioned CA Resolution denied petitioners' Motion for Reconsideration.
	GR No. 186227 2011-07-20	PEOPLE v. ALLEN UDTOJAN MANTALABA PERALTA, J.
In People v. Ganguso, [18] it has been held that prior surveillance is not a prerequisite for the validity of an entrapment operation, especially when the buy-bust team members were accompanied to the scene by their informant. In the instant case, the arresting officers were led to the scene by the poseur-buyer. Granting that there was no surveillance conducted before the buy-bust operation, this Court held in People v. Tranca, [19] that there is no rigid or textbook method of conducting buy-bust operations. Flexibility is a trait of good police work. The police officers may decide that time is of the essence and dispense with the need for prior surveillance. [20]
	GR No. 186134 2010-05-06	PEOPLE v. JOEL ROA Y VILLALUZ PEREZ, J.
In People v. Ganguso,[38] it has been held that prior surveillance is not a prerequisite for the validity of an entrapment operation, especially when the buy-bust team members were accompanied to the scene by their informant. In the instant case, the arresting officers were led to the scene by the poseur-buyer. Granting that there was no surveillance conducted before the buy-bust operation, this Court held in People v. Tranca,[39] that there is no rigid or textbook method of conducting buy-bust operations. Flexibility is a trait of good police work. The police officers may decide that time is of the essence and dispense with the need for prior surveillance. (Emphasis supplied.)
	GR No. 187503 2009-09-11	PEOPLE v. TECSON LIM Y CHUA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In People v. Beriarmente[44] citing People v. Tranca,[45] this Court has held that there is no rigid or textbook method of conducting buy-bust operations. It is of judicial notice that drug pushers sell their wares to any prospective customer, stranger or not, in both public and private places, with no regard for time. They have become increasingly daring and blatantly defiant of the law. Thus, the police must be flexible in their operations to keep up with the drug pushers. Practice buy-bust operations will not only hinder police efforts to apprehend drug pushers, but would even render them inutile, as these would only forewarn the drug pushers.[46]
	GR No. 179036 2008-07-28	PEOPLE v. CARLITO MATEO Y PATAWID CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Prior surveillance is not a pre-requisite for the validity of an entrapment operation, especially when the buy-bust team members were accompanied to the scene by their informant.[31] In the instant case, the arresting officers were led to the scene by poseur-buyer MADAC Operative Fariñas. It has also been ruled in People v. Tranca[32] that there is no rigid or textbook method of conducting buy-bust operations. Flexibility is a trait of good police work. The police officers may decide that time is of the essence and dispense with the need for prior surveillance.