Criminal Liability for False Name Use During a Buy-Bust Operation
Philippine Legal Framework & Jurisprudence
“A lie has speed, but the truth has endurance.” — Filipino proverb
1. Why the Question Matters
Buy-bust operations—undercover sales of dangerous drugs to snare pushers—remain the most common mode of arrest in Philippine drug-law enforcement. When the target blurts out a fake identity during the operation or at booking, prosecutors often wonder: Is that a separate crime? Can it aggravate the drug charge, or even taint the arrest?
The short answer is yes, giving a false name can itself be criminal, quite apart from the drug case, but only under specific statutes and fact patterns. Below is a consolidated, practice-oriented survey of every major source of liability, the elements, penalties, and the leading cases.
2. Statutes That Penalise False Identity Acts
| Statute | Act Punished | Elements | Penalty (post-RA 10951) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revised Penal Code (RPC), Art. 178 – Using a Fictitious Name / Concealing True Name | (a) Publicly using a fictitious name to conceal a crime, evade sentence, or cause damage; or (b) concealing one’s true name/personal circumstances for the same purposes. | 1. Offender publicly used a fictitious name or concealed his true name. 2. Purpose: conceal a crime, evade service of sentence, or cause damage. 3. No need to show actual prejudice for (a); motive suffices. |
• Arresto mayor (1 mo.–6 mos.) + fine ≤ ₱100,000 for using a fictitious name. • Arresto menor (1 day–30 days) + fine ≤ ₱20,000 for concealing true name. |
| Commonwealth Act 142 (Alias Law) as amended by RA 6085 | Using any name other than one’s true name on any public or private transaction without prior judicial authority, except for (i) baptismal names, (ii) customary nicknames, (iii) pen-names. | a. Use of alias b. Without prior court authority c. Not within the three statutory exceptions. |
Arresto menor (1 day-30 days) + fine ≤ ₱500 (unchanged). |
| Presidential Decree 1829 – Obstruction of Justice | “Knowingly or willfully providing false or fabricated information to mislead law-enforcement…” (Sec. 1-c). | 1. A criminal investigation proceeding exists. 2. Offender knowingly gives false information. 3. The falsehood obstructs, impedes, or delays apprehension/prosecution. |
Prisión correccional (6 mos.-6 yrs.) or fine ≤ ₱6,000, or both. |
| RPC, Art. 151 – Resistance and Serious Disobedience | Disobedience to a lawful order of an agent of a person in authority. | If the false name is given after an express order to identify oneself, this may qualify as serious disobedience. | Arresto mayor + fine ≤ ₱500 (now ≤ ₱100,000 under RA 10951). |
Key point: There is no dedicated “false name” offense in the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 9165). Any liability must ride on the statutes above.
3. Elements Broken Down
3.1 Using a Fictitious Name (RPC Art 178 ¶1)
“Publicly” means in dealings open to the public eye—street negotiations, sworn statements, booking forms, courtroom testimony.
Intent element: The prosecution must show the alias was chosen to conceal a crime, evade sentence, or cause damage.
- Example: A pusher identified as “Mark Dela Cruz” at arrest later signs the inventory as “Arman Castro” to avoid linking to a prior warrant.
Absence of damage or flight does not bar conviction if intent is proven circumstantially (People v. Come, CA, 2005).
3.2 Concealing One’s True Name (RPC Art 178 ¶2)
- Simpler to prove than ¶1; still requires the same illicit purpose.
- The concealment may be passive (refusal) or active (inventing data).
3.3 Alias Law (CA 142)
- Liability is administrative-style but criminally enforced.
- Prior authority = an alias-approval order from the RTC where the applicant resides.
- Nicknames (“Totoy”), pen-names (“Quijano de Manila”), stage names (“Vice Ganda”) are excluded.
3.4 Obstruction (PD 1829)
- Applied when the falsehood hampers the chain of custody or identification—e.g., booking officer issues a release order to “Ricardo Lee” (alias) and the suspect absconds.
- Requires knowledge and actual obstruction, so police testimony on the delay or extra man-hours is indispensable.
4. Interaction With Buy-Bust Jurisprudence
- Validity of Arrest – The Supreme Court has never invalidated a buy-bust solely because the arrestee lied about his name. The test remains probable cause based on the act of selling/shabu, not identity (People v. Doria, G.R. No. 125299, Jan. 22 1999).
- Chain of Custody (Sec. 21, RA 9165) – Booking sheets, inventory forms, and photographs must use the same identifier throughout. An alias can raise doubts if the prosecution fails to explain and reconcile the discrepancy (People v. Campos, G.R. No. 233163, Oct. 6 2021).
- Aggravation or Mitigation – False name use is not an aggravating circumstance under Art. 14 RPC, but courts have considered it evidence of consciousness of guilt in sentencing within the range.
- Separate Information – DOJ Circular 046-2002 advises fiscals to file a distinct charge (usually Art. 178 or PD 1829) only if the alias caused material delay or damage.
5. Leading Cases
| Case | Gist | Take-away |
|---|---|---|
| People v. Capulong, G.R. L-23570 (Apr 26 1967) | Accused used “Ricardo Santos” in his sworn statement while detained for theft. | Art. 178 conviction sustained; “public use” satisfied by a police blotter entry. |
| People v. Naguita, G.R. 139284 (Sept 23 2002) | Alias defense in drug buy-bust—claimed mistaken identity. | Court treated alias merely as factual defense; no separate Art. 178 charge filed. |
| People v. Come (CA-G.R. CR-H.C. 00052, 2005) | Erroneous booking name “Abdul Jalil” concealed narcotics warrant. | Intent to evade service of sentence inferred; Art. 178 affirmed. |
| People v. Campos, supra | Alias in inventory not reconciled with courtroom name. | Chain-of-custody break; drug conviction reversed—not because of Art. 178 but evidentiary integrity. |
(Newer CA rulings abound; none overturn the basic doctrines above.)
6. Procedural Pathway
In-quest: Drug charge (RA 9165) is docketed first. If police clearly document the alias trick, the in-quest prosecutor may add an Art. 178 or PD 1829 information.
Bail:
- RA 9165, Sec. 11 & 5 (life penalty range) → non-bailable if evidence is strong.
- Art. 178 / CA 142 / PD 1829 → bailable as a matter of right.
Arraignment & Pre-trial: Courts usually consolidate the alias case with the drug case for judicial economy.
Plea Bargain: Guilty plea to Art. 178 does not affect the drug case, but may demonstrate remorse and assist in plea-bargaining under A.M. 18-03-16-SC.
7. Evidentiary Checklist for Prosecutors
| Evidence | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Arrest/Booking Sheet (NBI Form 5) | Proves the fact of a fictitious or concealed identity. |
| Sworn Statements of Arresting Officers | Establish intent (to conceal crime/evade sentence) and public use. |
| Prior Warrant, Rap Sheet, or Commitment Order | Shows motive to evade. |
| Alias Comparison Chart (Name v. Nickname) | Rebuts defense claim of harmless nickname. |
| Certified RTC Alias-Order Registry | Proves absence of judicial authority under CA 142. |
8. Defences & Counter-Strategies
| Defence | Viability | Notes for Counsel |
|---|---|---|
| Right to Silence (Const., Art III §12) | Weak | Giving a false name is affirmative speech, not silence. |
| No “public” use | Situation-specific | Possible when alias is used only in a whispered aside, not in official docs. |
| Baptismal/Customary Nickname | Often succeeds | Must show alias appears in birth cert., school records, or barangay cert. |
| No intent to conceal crime | Fact-driven | Stress that the accused voluntarily corrected the record at the earliest chance. |
| Illegality of Arrest | Irrelevant to Art. 178 | Even if drug arrest is void, false-name act may stand as a distinct offense (doctrine of severability). |
9. Penalty Computation and Service
Art. 178 conviction:
- Arresto mayor → served at the local jail (BJMP) not at the national penitentiary.
- Courts often impose subsidiary imprisonment if fine is uncollectible (Art. 39 RPC).
PD 1829 conviction:
- If prision correccional maximum (4 yrs-2 mos – 6 yrs) is imposed, accused may be eligible for probation (PD 968) unless meanwhile convicted of the non-probationable drug offense.
10. Policy & Reform Notes
- Doctrine of Qualified Silence – Scholars have urged Congress to draw a line between (a) refusal to identify—arguably protected silence—and (b) affirmative deceit which has social costs. Presently, Philippine law punishes only the latter.
- Recommendation of the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) – 2024 position paper proposed expressly criminalising false identity in RA 9165 to aid chain-of-custody integrity; still pending.
11. Practical Tips for Law Enforcement
- Videograph the buy-bust and capture the suspect stating his name on-cam; it boosts both the drug and alias cases.
- Immediately cross-check NCIC/e-Warrant databases before booking; if the alias covers an outstanding warrant, document the reason.
- Explain the Alias Law during custodial interrogation to pre-empt the “I didn’t know” defence (knowledge not an element, but good practice).
12. Conclusion
In Philippine drug enforcement, a false name is more than a harmless lie—it can spawn an independent criminal charge under Article 178 of the Revised Penal Code, the Alias Law, or Presidential Decree 1829. Whether prosecutors pursue it depends on proof of intent and actual obstruction, but the legal arsenal is ready and time-tested.
For defence counsel, the playbook is equally clear: hammer on lack of illicit intent, invoke lawful nicknames, and exploit any record-keeping lapse that entangles the alias with the chain of custody.
Ultimately, a well-documented identity trail not only shields the integrity of the buy-bust case but also ensures that justice, like truth, has the endurance to outpace every lie.
Disclaimer: This article is for academic and professional reference. It does not substitute for independent legal advice in an actual case.