The Court of Appeals (CA) has affirmed the legality of search warrants issued against former lawmaker Arnolfo Teves Jr., rejecting his bid to suppress evidence seized during a 2023 raid on his residence in Negros Oriental.

In a ruling promulgated on 8 April 2026, the CA’s Third Division dismissed Teves’ petition for certiorari, finding no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court that earlier upheld the warrants and admitted the seized items as evidence.

The appellate court said the issuing judge’s determination of probable cause was entitled to “great deference,” and could only be overturned in cases of clear and serious misappreciation of facts, something it found “absent in the case.”

The case stemmed from a 10 March 2023 operation at Teves’ property in Barangay Malabugas, Bayawan City, where law enforcement executed two search warrants linked to alleged violations of firearms and explosives laws.

Authorities recovered a significant cache of weapons and ammunition, including M14 and M16 rifles, an M203 grenade launcher, hand grenades, and thousands of rounds of assorted ammunition reportedly hidden in different parts of the house.

Trial court rulings upheld

The CA affirmed earlier orders issued by the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 12, which in August 2025 denied Teves’ omnibus motion to quash the search warrants and suppress the evidence seized, except for items found inside a parked vehicle.

The trial court later denied his motion for reconsideration in October 2025, prompting Teves to elevate the matter to the appellate court under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

Teves’ arguments rejected

Teves had argued that the warrants were invalid, claiming they were issued without probable cause and were based on allegedly false testimony from witness Gemuel Hobro, who claimed to have worked for the Teves family as part of a so-called “liquidation squad.”

He also contended that the search exceeded its authorized scope, insisting that police should have limited their inspection to specific rooms marked in a sketch, rather than the entire residence.

However, the CA rejected these claims, noting that Hobro had been personally examined by the issuing judge, making his testimony direct rather than hearsay. 

The court added that minor inconsistencies in his background did not affect the material facts supporting the issuance of the warrants.

“These alleged inconsistencies, however, did not refer to the material facts and requisites pertinent to the issuance of a search warrant,” the ruling stated.

Scope of search deemed lawful

On the issue of the search area, the appellate court ruled that the warrants covered the entire residential structure and were not limited to specific rooms, explaining that markings on the sketch map were used only to identify the correct premises.

The CA further held that law enforcement officers were not shown to have prior knowledge of where the illegal items were stored inside the house, including cabinets later found to contain firearms and ammunition.

With its ruling, the appellate court effectively sustained the validity of both the search warrants and the evidence obtained from the 2023 raid, keeping them admissible for use in the ongoing proceedings against Teves.