Scribd
Upload
64 views3 pages

Crim Pro Notes

This document outlines the legal standards for warrantless searches and seizures under Philippine law. It discusses several exceptions where warrantless searches are allowed, including searches incident to a lawful arrest, seizures of evidence in plain view, searches of moving vehicles, and consented searches. For a warrantless arrest or search to be valid, the arresting officer must have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed based on facts within their personal knowledge. The document also states that an individual's silence cannot be interpreted as consent to a search unless they were clearly informed of their constitutional rights and provided consent freely without coercion.

Uploaded by

Shari Sabrina Abordo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
64 views3 pages

Crim Pro Notes

This document outlines the legal standards for warrantless searches and seizures under Philippine law. It discusses several exceptions where warrantless searches are allowed, including searches incident to a lawful arrest, seizures of evidence in plain view, searches of moving vehicles, and consented searches. For a warrantless arrest or search to be valid, the arresting officer must have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed based on facts within their personal knowledge. The document also states that an individual's silence cannot be interpreted as consent to a search unless they were clearly informed of their constitutional rights and provided consent freely without coercion.

Uploaded by

Shari Sabrina Abordo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

PEOPLE VS COGAED, JULY 30 , 2014

The known jurisprudential instances of reasonable warrantless searches and seizures


are:

1. Warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest. . . ;

2. Seizure of evidence in "plain view," . . . ;

3. Search of a moving vehicle. Highly regulated by the government, the vehicle’s inherent
mobility reduces expectation of privacy especially when its transit in public thoroughfares
furnishes a highly reasonable suspicion amounting to probable cause that the occupant
committed a criminal activity;

4. Consentedwarrantless search;

5. Customs search;

6. Stop and frisk; and

7. Exigent and emergency circumstances.  (Citations omitted)


62

Searches incidental to a lawful arrest

-require that a crime be committed in flagrante delicto, and the search conducted within
the vicinity and withinreach by the person arrested is done to ensure that there are no
weapons, as well as to preserve the evidence.

 "stop and frisk"searches are conducted to prevent the occurrence of a crime. For
instance, the search in Posadas v. Court of Appeals  was similar "to a ‘stop and frisk’
65

situation whose object is either to determine the identity of a suspicious individual or to


maintain the status quomomentarily while the police officer seeks to obtain more
information."  This court stated that the "stop and frisk" search should be used "[w]hen
66

dealing with a rapidly unfolding and potentially criminal situation in the city streets where
unarguably there is no time to secure . . . a search warrant."

For warrantless searches, probable cause was defined as "a reasonable ground of
suspicionsupported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a
cautious man to believe that the person accused is guilty of the offense with which he is
charged."

"stop-and-frisk" serves a two-fold interest: (1) the general interest of effective crime
[A]
prevention and detection, which underlies the recognition that a police officer may, under
appropriate circumstances and in an appropriate manner, approach a person for
purposes of investigating possible criminal behavior even without probable cause; and
(2) the more pressing interest of safety and self-preservationwhich permit the police
officer to take steps to assure himself that the person with whom he deals is not armed
with a deadly weapon that could unexpectedly and fatally be used against the police
officer.
99

Rule 126, Section 13 of the Rules of Court allows for searches incidental to a lawful
arrest. For there to be a lawful arrest, there should be either a warrant of arrest or a
lawful warrantless arrest as enumerated in Rule 113, Section 5 of the Rules of Court:
Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. – A peace officer or a private person may,
withouta warrant, arrest a person:

(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;

(b) When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested
has committed it; and

(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while
his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to
another.

As in People v. Chua, for a warrantless arrest of in flagrante delictoto be affected, "two


elements must concur: (1) the person to bearrested must execute anovert act indicating
that he has just committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
(2) such overt act is done inthe presence or within the view of the arresting officer."  Both
130

elements were missing when Cogaed was arrested.  There were no overt acts within
131

plain view of the police officers that suggested that Cogaed was in possession of drugs at
that time.

The prosecution and the police carry the burden of showing that the waiver of a
constitutional right is one which is knowing, intelligent, and free from any coercion.

For a valid waiver by the accused of his or her constitutional right, it is not sufficient that
the police officerintroduce himself or herself, or be known as a police officer.  The police
1âwphi1

officer must also inform the person to be searched that any inaction on his orher part will
amount to a waiver of any of his or her objections that the circumstances do not amount
to a reasonable search. The police officer must communicate this clearly and in a
language known to the person who is about to waive his or her constitutional rights.
There must be anassurance given to the police officer that the accused fully understands
his or her rights. The fundamental nature of a person’s constitutional right to privacy
requires no less.

As this court previously stated:


Appellant’s silence should not be lightly taken as consent to such search. The implied
acquiescence to the search, if there was any, could not have been more than mere passive
conformity given under intimidating or coercive circumstances and is thus considered no
consent at all within the purview of the constitutional guarantee. 132 (Citations omitted)
Cogaed’s silence or lack of aggressive objection was a natural reaction to a coercive
environment brought about by the police officer’s excessive intrusion into his private space.
The prosecution and the police carry the burden of showing that the waiver of a
constitutional right is one which is knowing, intelligent, and free from any coercion. In all
cases, such waivers are not to be presumed.

The second situati on is oft en described as the “ hot pursuit” arrest. For
this rule to apply, it is required that: (a) an off ense has just been
committ ed; and (b), the arresti ng offi cer has probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to
be arrested has committ ed it. (Pesti los vs. Generoso, G.R. No. 182601, 10
November 2014). Law enforcers need not personally witness the
commission of a crime, but they must have personal knowledge of facts
and circumstances indicati ng that the person sought to be arrested
committ ed it. (Veridiano vs. People, G.R. No. 200370, 07 June 2017 ) Also,
there must be no appreciable lapse of ti me between the arrest and the
commission of the crime. Otherwise, a warrant of arrest must be secured.

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