Make this your preferred source to get more updates from this publisher on Google.
The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that a warrant authorizing the search for illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia cannot be used to obtain evidence of credit card hacking, absent an exception recognized by law.
In a decision, the SC Third Division acquitted an individual of violating the Access Devices Regulation Act of 1998, which prohibits the possession of counterfeit access devices, including fake credit cards.
“A violation of Republic Act No. 8484 is unrelated to drug offenses. Thus, the seizure of any evidence for such a violation would have to fall within any of the exceptions recognized by law, which is absent here,” it said.
The case stemmed from an operation against the individual after the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) received information that he was involved in illegal drug activities, computer hacking, and credit card hacking.
The NBI later applied for and obtained a search warrant for drug offenses.
During the warrant’s execution, agents seized several credit cards placed inside a bag, including two credit cards that were later confirmed to be fake because their numbers did not match the records of the original account holder.
According to the SC, only items described in a search warrant may be seized.
Items that are not described in a warrant cannot be seized unless justified by a recognized exception, the court said.
The SC said the plain view doctrine, which allows the seizure and presentation as evidence of objects that are in “plain view,” could not apply.
It said that because the credit cards were placed inside a non-transparent bag, their incriminating character, if at all, was not in plain view.
“Even after opening, and even assuming that the bag was open to begin with, a mere deck of credit cards is not, by itself, a contraband. Were it not for the tip they received beforehand, the law enforcement officers could not have perceived that the credit cards themselves were counterfeit,” it said.
The court also noted that authorities did not apply for a search warrant for access device fraud or related cybercrime activities despite being aware that the individual was engaged in such activities.
“Despite this, they did not act on the information regarding [his] hacking and credit card fraud activities by forwarding it to the proper division or applying for a search warrant covering possible violations of Republic Act No. 8484 or any cybercrime,” it said.
Meanwhile, the SC said the individual’s conviction could not be sustained following the exclusion of the credit cards as evidence.
“Thus, to successfully sustain a conviction for the possession and use of a counterfeit access device, the prosecution must present not only the access device but also any evidence that proves that the access device is counterfeit,” it said.
“With the exclusion in evidence of the two American Express credit cards, the prosecution utterly failed to present the very access device itself,” it added.
The decision was penned by Associate Justice Japar Dimaampao.
It was promulgated in February 2026 and made public in September 2026. — VBL, GMA News
Click Here For The Original Source.
