Scribd
Upload
842 views1 page

Umil Vs Ramos

This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the arrest of Rolando Dural, a member of the NPA liquidation squad responsible for killing two CAPCOM soldiers. Dural claimed his arrest was illegal as it was made without a warrant. However, the Supreme Court ruled the arrest was legal. For crimes of subversion and rebellion, arrests can be made without a warrant as these are considered continuing crimes. Additionally, an information was filed before Dural's arrest for inciting sedition. The arrests were also found to be the result of NPA surveillance, not "fishing expeditions". The Court determined arrests of rebels can be made to quell rebellions rather than just for prosecution, so the usual arrest procedure requiring

Uploaded by

Patatas Sayote
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
842 views1 page

Umil Vs Ramos

This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the arrest of Rolando Dural, a member of the NPA liquidation squad responsible for killing two CAPCOM soldiers. Dural claimed his arrest was illegal as it was made without a warrant. However, the Supreme Court ruled the arrest was legal. For crimes of subversion and rebellion, arrests can be made without a warrant as these are considered continuing crimes. Additionally, an information was filed before Dural's arrest for inciting sedition. The arrests were also found to be the result of NPA surveillance, not "fishing expeditions". The Court determined arrests of rebels can be made to quell rebellions rather than just for prosecution, so the usual arrest procedure requiring

Uploaded by

Patatas Sayote
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Umil vs Ramos, supra

(Consolidated cases)

Contention of the State

Umil v Ramos (specifically)

CAPCOM got a tip that a member of the NPA Sparrow Unit (liquidation squad) was being treated for a
gunshot wound at the St. Agnes Hospital, Roosevelt Avenue, Q.C. Upon verification, it was found that
the wounded person was Rolando Dural, a member of the NPA liquidation squad, responsible for the
killing of 2 CAPCOM soldiers. Dural was positively identified by eyewitnesses as the gunman who went
on top of the hood of the CAPCOM mobile patrol car, and fired at the CAPCOM soldiers seated inside.
Dural was then transferred to another facility, under CAPCOM supervision (basically, he was arrested).

Defense of the Accused

Dural claims that his arrest was illegal because it was made without a warrant of arrest as required by
law.

Ruling of the Supreme Court

The arrest was legal since subversion is a form of a continuing crime (including Umil vs Ramos Case) –
together with rebellion, conspiracy or proposal to commit rebellion/subversion, and crimes committed
in furtherance thereof or in connection therewith. On the inciting to sedition case, the arrest was legal
since an information was filed prior to his arrest. Lastly, the arrests were not fishing expeditions but a
result of an in-depth surveillance of NPA safe houses pinpointed by none other than members of the
NPA.

The arrest of persons involved in the rebellion whether as its fighting armed elements, or for committing
non-violent acts but in furtherance of the rebellion, is more an act of capturing them in the course of an
armed conflict, to quell the rebellion, than for the purpose of immediately prosecuting them in court for
a statutory offense. The arrest, therefore, need not follow the usual procedure in the prosecution of
offenses which requires the determination by a judge of the existence of probable cause before the
issuance of a judicial warrant of arrest and the granting of bail if the offense is bailable. Obviously, the
absence of a judicial warrant is no legal impediment to arresting or capturing persons committing overt
acts of violence against government forces, or any other milder acts but equally in pursuance of the
rebellious movement. If killing and other acts of violence against the rebels find justification in the
exigencies of armed hostilities which is of the essence of waging a rebellion or insurrection, most
assuredly so in case of invasion, merely seizing their persons and detaining them while any of these
contingencies continues cannot be less justified”

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy