Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 24

(n/b see syllabus for citation) Topic

ABOY 1 Philippine Blooming Mills Employees' Fundamental Powers of


ABOY 2 Organization v. Philippine
Simon v. Commission Blooming
on Human Rights, the State & protection
Fundamental of
Powers of
ABOY 3 et al.,
Philippine Association of Service the State
Police Power
ABOY 4 Exporters v. Drilon
Ichong v. Hernandez Police Power / Equal
ABOY 5 Lutz v. Araneta Protection of the Law
Police Power
ABOY 6 Association of Small Landowners v. Police Power
ABOY 7 Secretary of Agrarian Reform
Lozano v. Martinez Police Power
ABOY 8 DECS v. San Diego Police Power
ABOY 9 Ynot v. ICA Police Power /
ABOY 10 City Govt of Quezon City v. Ericta Substantive
Police PowerDue/ Power of
ALDEP 11 City of Manila v. Chinese Cemetery of Eminent
Power ofDomain
Eminent
ALDEP 12 Manila
Moday c. Court of Appeals Domainof(Exercise
Power Eminent of
ALDEP 13 Republic v. Castellvi Domainof(Exercise
Power Eminent of
ALDEP 14 Napocor v. Jocson Domainof(Taking)
Power Eminent
ALDEP 15 Napocor v. San Pedro Domainof(Taking)
Power Eminent
ALDEP 16 U.S. v. Causby Domainof(Taking)
Power Eminent
ALDEP 17 Heirs of Juancho Ardona v. Reyes Domain (Taking)
Power of Eminent
ALDEP 18 Sumulong v. Guerrero Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
ALDEP 19 Province of Camarines Sur v. CA Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 20 Manosca v. Court of Appeals Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 21 Estate of Jimenez v. PEZA Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 22 Reyes v. NHA Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 23 Didipio v. Earth Savers v. Gozun Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 24 Barangay v. Court of Appeals Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 25 Manapat v. Court of Appeals Domain
Power of(Public
Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 26 City of Manila v. Estrada Domainof(Public
Power Eminent Use)
BAG-AYAN 27 Manila Railroad v. Paredes Domainof(Just
Power Eminent
BAG-AYAN 28 Municipality of Daet v. CA Domainof(Just
Power Eminent
BULOSAN 29 EPZA v. Dulay Domainof(Just
Power Eminent
BULOSAN 30 Maddumba v. GSIS Domainof(Just
Power Eminent
BULOSAN 31 Meralco v. Pineda Domainof(Just
Power Eminent
BULOSAN 32 NPC v. CA Domain (Just
Power of Eminent
BULOSAN 33 Ansaldo v. Tantuico Domain
Power of(Just
Eminent
BULOSAN 34 NAPOCOR v. Tiangco Domain (Just
Power of Eminent
BULOSAN 35 Wycoco v. Judge Caspillo Domain
Power of(Just
Eminent
BULOSAN 36 Mactan v. Urgello Domain (Just
Power of Eminent
BULOSAN 37 Manotoc v. NHA Domain
Power of(Just
Eminent
CENIDOZA 38 Republic v. De Knecht Domain (Judicial
Power of Eminent
CENIDOZA 39 Militante v. CA Domain
Power of(Judicial
Eminent
CENIDOZA 40 City of Baguio v. Nawasa Domain (Judicial
Power of Eminent
Domain (Judicial
CENIDOZA 41 Zamboanga de Norte v. City of Power of Eminent
CENIDOZA 42 Zamboanga
Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works Domain
Power of(Judicial
Taxation
CENIDOZA 43 Punsalan v. Mun. Board of Manila Power of Taxation
CENIDOZA 44 Lladoc v. CIR Power of Taxation
CENIDOZA 45 Abra Valley College v. Aquino Power of Taxation
CENIDOZA 46 MMDA v, Viron Transportation Art. III, Sec 1
CRUZ 47 Taada v. Tuvera Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 48 PITC v. Angeles (Publication
Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 49 Republic v Extelcom (Publication
Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 50 Banco Espaol v. Palanca (Publication
Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 51 Galvez v. Court of Appeals (Judicial
Procedural Proceedings)
Due Process
CRUZ 52 State Prosecutors v. Muros (Judicial Proceedings)
Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 53 Carvajal v. Court of Appeals (Judicial Proceedings)
Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 54 Webb v. De Leon (Judicial Proceedings)
Procedural Due Process
CRUZ 55 P. v. Teehankee (Judicial Proceedings)
Procedural Due Process
DAVID 56 Ang Tibay v. CIR (Judicial Proceedings)
Procedural Due Process
DAVID 57 Office of the Court Administrator v. (Administrative
Procedural Dueand
Process
DAVID 58 Pascual
Valenzuela v. Bellosillo (Administrative and
Procedural Due Process
DAVID 59 Fabella v. CA (Administrative
Procedural Dueand Process
DAVID 60 Sec. of Justice v. Lantion (Administrative and
Procedural Due Process
DAVID 61 Govt of the U.S. v. Purganan (Administrative
Procedural Dueand Process
DAVID 62 Govt of HK v. Olaila (Administrative
Due Process and
DAVID 63 Guzman v. NU (Administrative
Procedural Dueand Process
DAVID 64 Alcuaz v. PSBA (Adcademic Discipline)
Procedural Due Process
DELA ROSA 65 ADMU v. Capulong (Adcademic
Procedural Due Discipline)
Process
DELA ROSA 66 U.P. v. Ligot-Telan (Adcademic Discipline)
Procedural Due Process
DELA ROSA 67 Lao Gi v. CA (AdcademicDue
Procedural Discipline)
Process
DELA ROSA 68 Domingo v. Sheer (Deportation
Procedural Due Process
DELA ROSA 69 Philcomsat v. Alcuaz (Deportation
Procedural Due Process
DELA ROSA 70 Radiocom v. NTC (Fixing Rates
Procedural and
Due Process
DELA ROSA 71 Globe Telecom v. NTC (Fixing Rates
Procedural and
Due Process
DELA ROSA 72 Corona v. UHPAP (Fixing Rates
Procedural and
Due Process
DELA ROSA 73 CB v. CA (Fixing Rates and
Procedural Due Process
FAN 74 Rural Bank v. CA (Closure
Procedural Proceedings)
Due Process
FAN 75 Phil. Merchants v. CA (Closure Proceedings)
Procedural Due Process
FAN 76 Agabon v. NLRC (Closure
Procedural Proceedings)
Due Process
FAN 77 Jaka Food Processing v. Pacot (Termination
Procedural Due Process
FAN 78 U.S. v. Toribio (Termination
Substantive Due
FAN 79 Churchill v. Rafferty Process
Substantive Due
FAN 80 P. v. Fajardo Process
Substantive Due
FAN 81 Rubi v. Prov. Board of Mindoro Process
Substantive Due
Process
FAN 82 Ermita-Manila Hotel 7 Motel Operator v. Substantive Due
FRESCO 83 City of Manila
Agustin v. Edu Process
Substantive Due
FRESCO 84 Maranaw Hotel v. NLRC Process
Substantive Due
FRESCO 85 Magtajas v. Pryce Properties Process
Substantive Due
FRESCO 86 Dans v. P. Process
Substantive Due
FRESCO 87 Ople v. Torres Process
Substantive Due
FRESCO 88 P. v. Cayat Process
Equal Protection of the
FRESCO 89 Villegas v. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho Law
Equal Protection of the
FRESCO 90 Dumlao v. COMELEC Law
Equal Protection of the
FRESCO 91 Ormoc Sugar Central v. Ormoc City Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 92 Basco v. PAGCOR Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 93 Binay v. Domingo Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 94 NPC v. De Guzman Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 95 Himagan v. P. Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 96 Tablarin v. Gutierrez Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 97 Lim v. Pacquing Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 98 Philippine Judges Association v. Prado Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 99 Sison v. Ancheta Law
Equal Protection of the
GARABILES 100 Nolasco v. COMELEC Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 101 Telebap v. COMELEC Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 102 Tiu v. CA Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 103 Lacson v. Executive Secretary Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 104 Soriano v. CA Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 105 Loong v. COMELEC Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 106 International School v. Quisimbing Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 107 De Guzman v. COMELEC Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 108 Dimaporo v. HRET Law
Equal Protection of the
HWANG 109 Dimayuga v. OMB Law
Equal Protection of the
JOVELLANO 110 Central Bank Employees Assoc. v. BSP Law Protection of the
Equal
S
JOVELLANO 111 Coconut Oil Refiners v. Torres Law Protection of the
Equal
S
JOVELLANO 112 Beltran v. Secretary of Health Law Protection of the
Equal
S
JOVELLANO 113 BAT v. Camacho Law Protection of the
Equal
S
JOVELLANO 114 Brown v. Secretary of Education Law
Equal Protection of the
S
JOVELLANO 115 Valmonte v. General de Villa (1) Law
When is a search a
S
JOVELLANO 116 Valmonte v. General de Villa (2) "search"?
When is a search a
S
JOVELLANO 117 Guazon v. De Villa "search"?
When is a Search a
S
JOVELLANO 118 Alvero v. Dizon "Search"?
Purpose and Importance
S
MALDIA 119 P. v. Andre Marti of
To Guaranty
Whom Directed
MALDIA 120 Bache and Co. v. Ruiz Who May Invoke the
MALDIA 121 Stonehill v. Diokno Right?
Who May Invoke the
MALDIA 122 Alvarez v. CFI Right?
Conditions of a Valid
Warrant (Existence of a
MALDIA 123 Burgos v. Chief of Staff Conditions of a Valid
MALDIA 124 Roberts v. CA Warrant (Existence
Conditions of a Validof a
MALDIA 125 P. v. Chua Ho San Warrant
Conditions of a Validof a
(Existence
MALDIA 126 P. v. Molina Warrant (Existence
Conditions of a Validof a
MALDIA 127 P. v. Salunguit Warrant (Existence
Conditions of a Validof a
MALLARI 128 Microsoft Corp. v. Maxicorp. Warrant (Partially
Conditions Valid
of a Valid
MALLARI 129 Soliven v. Makasiar Warrant (Partially
Conditions Valid
of a Valid
MALLARI 130 Lim v. Felix Warrant (Personal
Conditions of a Valid
MALLARI 131 Paderanga v. Drilon Warrant (Personal
Conditions of a Valid
MALLARI 132 Abdula v. Guiani Warrant (Personal
Conditions of a Valid
MALLARI 133 P. v. Mamaril Warrant (Personal
Conditions of a Valid
MALLARI 134 P. v. de los Reyes Warrant (Personal
Conditions of a Valid
MALLARI 135 Pasion Vda. De Garcia v. Locsin Warrant (Personal
Conditions of a Valid
MALLARI 136 Yee Sue Kuy v. Almeda Warrant (Examination
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 137 Alvarez v. CFI Warrant (Examination
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 138 Mata v. Bayona Warrant (Examination
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 139 Olaes v. P. Warrant (Examination
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 140 Prudente v. Judge Dayrit Warrant
Conditions of a Valid of
(Particularity
PAREDES 141 Chia v. Coll. of Customs Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 142 20th Century Fox Film Corp. v. CA Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 143 P. v. Choi Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 144 Nolasco v. Cruz Pano Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
PAREDES 145 PICOP v. Asuncion Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
RAMIREZ 146 Yousef Al Ghoul v. CA Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
RAMIREZ 147 Del Rosario v. P Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
RAMIREZ 148 P. v. Francisco Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
RAMIREZ 149 Unilab v. Isip Warrant (Particularity
Conditions of a Valid of
RAMIREZ 150 Katz v. U.S. Warrant Objects
Conditions of
of a Valid
RAMIREZ 151 Lopez v. Comm of Customs Warrant
Valid Objects of
Warrantless
RAMIREZ 152 P. v. Ramos Searches
Valid (Valid Waiver)
Warrantless
RAMIREZ 153 Veroy v. Layague Searches
Valid (Valid Waiver)
Warrantless
RAMIREZ 154 P. v. Damaso Searches
Valid (Valid Waiver)
Warrantless
RENDON 155 P. v. Evaristo Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 156 P. v. Omaweng Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 157 P. v. Barros Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 158 P. v. Correa Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 159 Caballes v. Court of Appeals Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 160 P. v. Asis, et. al Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 161 P. v. Tudtud Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 162 P v. de la Cruz Searches (Valid Waiver)
Valid Warrantless
RENDON 163 P. Tangliben Searches (Incident to
Valid Warrantless
Searches (Incident to
SALAZAR 164 P.v. Kalubiran Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 165 Pv. Malmstedt Searches
Valid (Incident to
Warrantless
SALAZAR 166 Espano v. Court of Appeals Searches (Incident to
Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 167 P. v. Che Chun Ting Searches (Incident to
Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 168 P. v. Estrella Searches (Incident to
Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 169 P. v. Libnao Searches (Incident to
Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 170 P. v. Musa Searches (Incident to
Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 171 Padilla v. CA Searches (Plain View
Valid Warrantless
SALAZAR 172 P. v. Valdez Searches (Plain View
Valid Warrantless
SANTOS 173 P. v. Compacion Searches (Plain View
Valid Warrantless
SANTOS 174 P. v. Huang Zhen Hua Searches (Plain View
Valid Warrantless
SANTOS 175 Veronia School District 47 J v. ACTON Searches
Valid (Plain View
Warrantless
SANTOS 176 Roldan v. Arca Searches
Valid (Plain View
Warrantless
SANTOS 177 P. v. Gatward Searches
Valid (Enforcement
Warrantless
SANTOS 178 P. v. Johnson Searches
Valid (Enforcement
Warrantless
SANTOS 179 P. v. Canton Searches
Valid (Enforcement
Warrantless
SANTOS 180 P. v. Suzuki Searches
Valid (Enforcement
Warrantless
SUWALAWA 181 Terry v. Ohio Searches (Enforcement
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 182 P. v. Solayao Searches ("Stop &
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 183 Manalili v. Court of Appeals Searches ("Stop &
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 184 Malacat v. Court of Appeals Searches ("Stop &
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 185 Papa v. Mago Searches ("Stop &
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 186 P. v. CFI of Rizal Searches (Search of
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 187 P. v. Lo Ho Wing Searches (Search of
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 188 Salvador v. P. Searches (Search of
Valid Warrantless
N
SUWALAWA 189 P. v. De Gracia Searches (Search of
Valid Warrantless
N
TUBBAN 190 Gen. De Villa v. Valmonte Searches
Valid (Emergency
Warrantless
TUBBAN 191 Aniag v. COMELEC Searches
Valid (Checkpoints)
Warrantless
TUBBAN 192 P. v. Usana Searches
Valid (Checkpoints)
Warrantless
TUBBAN 193 P. v. Vinecario Searches
Valid (Checkpoints)
Warrantless
TUBBAN 194 Umil v. Ramos Searches
Valid (Checkpoints)
Warrantless
TUBBAN 195 P. v. dela Cruz Arrests
Valid (Rebellion as a
Warrantless
TUBBAN 196 P. v Sucro Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
TUBBAN 197 P. v. Mengote Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
TUBBAN 198 P.v . Luisito Go Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 199 Larranaga v. CA Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 200 P. v. Bongalon Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 201 P. v. Recepcion Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 202 P. v. Bagista Arrests (Committed in
Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 203 P. v. Gerente Arrests (Personal
Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 204 Padilla v. Court of Appeals Arrests (Personal
Valid Warrantless
Arrests (Personal
VILORIA 205 P. v. Sinoc Valid Warrantless
VILORIA 206 P. v. Baula Arrests
Valid (Personal
Warrantless
VILORIA 207 P. v. Cubcubin Arrests (Personal
Valid Warrantless
WY 208 P. v. Rodrigueza Arrests (Personal
Valid Warrantless
WY 209 Go v. Court of Appeals Arrests (Time of Arrest)
Valid Warrantless
WY 210 P. v. Calimlim Arrests (Time of Arrest)
Valid Warrantless
WY 211 P. v. Vinalon Arrests (Time of Arrest)
Valid Warrantless
WY 212 P. v. Mendez Arrests (Time of Arrest)
Valid Warrantless
WY 213 P. v. Enrile Arrests (Time of Arrest)
Valid Warrantless
WY 214 P. v. Pasudag Arrests (Marked Money)
Valid Warrantless
WY 215 P. v. Aminnudin Arrests (Lack of
Valid Warrantless
216 Gaanan v. IAC Arrestsof(Lack
Privacy Communication
of
217 Ramirez v. CA and Correspondence,
PoC&C, Art
Art III, Sec. 3(1)
218 Alejano v. Cabuay PoC&C,
PoC&C, Art
Art III,
III, Sec.
Sec. 3(1)
3(2),
219 In Re Laureta Exclusionary Rule
220 Gutang v. People PoC&C, Art III, Sec. 3(2),
PoC&C, Art III, Sec. 3(2),
221 KMU v. Dir. Gen. of NEDA Exclusionary Rule
Exclusionary Rule
Ponente
MAKASIAR, J.
Vitug, J.
Sarmiento, J.
LABRADOR, J.
REYES, J.B L., J.
Cruz, J.
Yap, J.
Cruz, J.
Cruz, J.
Gutierrez, Jr, J.
Johnson, J.
Romero, J.
Zaldivar, J.
Davide, Jr. J.
Callejo, Sr., J.
Decided by the Stone Court
Gutierrez, Jr., J.
Cortes, J.
Quiason, J.

GUTIERREZ, JR., J.:


REGALADO, J.:
MEDIALDEA, J.:
ROMERO, J.:
NARVASA, J.:
Garcia, J;
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
CARPIO MORALES, J.:
GUTIERREZ, JR., J.:
Escolin, J.
Panganiban, J.
Ynares- Santiago, J.
Street, J.
Regalado, J.
Per Curiam
Panganiban, J.
Puno, J.
Puno, J.
LAUREL, J.
HERMOSISIMA, JR., J.
PURISIMA, J.
PANGANIBAN, J.
MELO, J.
PANGANIBAN, J.
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
NARVASA, J.
PARAS, J.

Paras, J.
Bellosillo, Jr., J
Ynares-Santiago, J.>
Garcia, J.
Carson, J.
Trent, J.
REYES, J. B. L., J.
Malcolm, J.
Fernando, J.
FERNANDO, J.
BELLOSILLO, J.
CRUZ, J.
ROMERO, J.
PUNO, J.
MORAN, J.
FERNANDEZ, J.
Melencio-HERRERA, J.
BENGZON, J.P., J.

Mendoza, J.
Panganiban, J.
Martinez, J.
Quisimbing, J.
Puno, J.
Kapunan, J.
Purisima, J.
Tinga, J.
Azcuna, J.
PUNO, J.:
AZCUNA, J.:
AZCUNA,J:
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J p:
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE
WARREN
PADILLA, J.:
PADILLA, J.:
GUTIERREZ, JR., J:
DE JOYA, J p:
BIDIN, J.
VILLAMOR, J

IMPERIAL, J
ESCOLIN, J.
DAVIDE, JR., J
DAVIDE, JR., C.J.
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
MENDOZA, J.
Carpio, J.
Per curiam (consolidated
cases)
Gutierrez, Jr., J
Regalado, J
Gonzaga-Reyes, J
Azcuna, J
Callejo, Sr., J
Laurel, J
Laurel, J
IMPERIAL, J
De Castro, J
Cruz, J
Padilla, J
Grino-Aquino, J
Guiterrez, J
Corona, J
Melencio Herrera, J.
Panganiban, J.
QUISUMBING, J.:
J. Pardo
Ynares-Santiago, J
Callejo, Sr., J
J. Potter Stewart

Padilla, J.
Davide, JR., J.
Feliciano, J.
Martinez, J.
Puno, J.
En Banc, Panganiban, J.
Tinga, J.
Regalado, J.
Gutierrez, JR. J.
CRUZ, J.
PADILLA, J.
ROMERO, J.
BELLOSILLO, J.
MARTINEZ, J.
PUNO, J.
ROMERO, J.
FRANCISCO, J.
QUISUMBING, J.
Kapunan, J.
Callejo, Sr., J
Scalia, J
Makasiar, J
Regalado, J
Mendoza, J
Davide, Jr., C.J
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J

PADILLA, J.:
BELLOSILLO, JR., J.:
DAVIDE, JR., C.J.:
CARPIO-MORALES, J.:

REGALADO, J.:
GUTIERREZ, JR., J.:
CRUZ, J.:
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
Regalado, J
FELICIANO, J :

Quisumbing, J
Doctrine
The rights of free expression, free assembly and petition, are not only civil rights but also political rights
essential
The Commission to manson enjoyment
Human Rights of his was
life, to nothis happiness
meant by theand to his full and
fundamental law to complete
be anotherfulfillment.
court orWhile
quasi-ju the
agency
Dept. Order in this
No. country,
1 doesornot duplicate
impair the much rightless take over
to travel. Thethe functions ofofthe
consequence thelatter. The most
deployment banthat
has mayon be the
to travel does not impair the right, as the right to travel is subjects
Requirements for equal protection: applies alike to all persons w/in such class, and 2) reasonable ground among other things, to the requirements
exists
The subjectfor making
tax isalevieddistinction
with abetween
regulatory those who fall
purpose, to within
providesuch meansclassforand
thethose who do and
rehabilitation not. stabilization
the
Justthreatened
compensation sugar is industry.
defined as In the
otherfullwords,
and fair theequivalent
act is primarilyof theaproperty
valid exercise
taken fromof police power.
its owner by the
expropriator.
The scope of constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt was for liabilities arising from but
It has been repeatedly stressed by this Court that the measure is not the takers gain actionsthe
contractu
The right to and was never
quality education meant to include
is not absolute. damages arising in actions
The Constitution ex delicto
also states / Validcitizen
that every policehaspowerthe meas
right
choose a profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable
To be considered a valid exercise of police power there must be a reasonable connection between the me and equitable admission and academic
employed
Police power andisthe purpose
usually soughtintothe
exercised be form
achieved
of mere by the law. or restriction in the use of liberty or prope
regulation
forThe
1) the promotion of the generalmust
land to be expropriated welfare. It does and
be private, not involve
the purpose the taking
of theor confiscationmust
expropriation of property
be public,with the 2) L
already devoted
Eminent domain,toisaapublic use cannot
fundamental Statebe takenthat
power by the public for another
is inseparable use which is
from sovereignty. inconsistent
It is govt's rightwith to th
appropriate,
1) in the nature
Just compensation of abe
should compulsory
determined sale
as toof the
the State,
date ofprivate property
the filing of the for public use
complaint. or purpose.
However, when th
takingthe
Upon of the property
filing sought to or
of the complaint beatexpropriated coincidesthe
any time thereafter, with the commencement
petitioner has the right of to the
takeexpropriation
or enter upon t
possession
Indeed, of the property
expropriation is notinvolved
limited toupon complianceofwith
the acquisition realP.D. No. 42
property which
with requires the petitioner,
a corresponding transfer ofafter d
title o
possession.
The The right-of-way
flight of aircraft easement
is lawful 'unless at such resulting
a lowinaltitude
a restriction or limitation
as to interfere withon theproperty rights use
then existing overtothe whiclan
land or water, or the space over the land or water, is put by the owner,
the concept of public use is not limited to traditional purposes. Here as elsewhere the idea that "public use or unless so conducted as to be
strictly
Housing limited to clear
is a basic human cases of "use
need. by the in
Shortage public"
housing hasisbeena matterdiscarded.As long assince
of state concern the purpose
it directlyof and
the takin
significantly
The expropriation affectsofpublic health, authorized
the property safety, the environment
by the questioned and inresolution
sum, the general welfare.
is for a public purpose. The
establishment of a pilot devt center would inure to the direct
Eminent domain, also often referred to as expropriation and, with less frequency, as condemnation, benefit and advantage of the people of the is, like
police power and taxation, an inherent power of sovereignty. It need
In Sumulong v. Guerrero, this Court has ruled that, "the public use" requirement for a valid exercise of the not be clothed with any constitutional
power
It is now of settled
eminent domainthat
doctrine is athe flexible
concept andof evolving
public use concept
is noinfluenced
longer limited by changing conditions.
to traditional purposes. In this
Here, a
elsewhere, the idea that
Requisites of taking in eminent domain: "public use" is strictly limited to clear cases of "use by the public" has been
i.
The Thepower
expropriator
of eminent must enter acan
domain private
only property;
be exercised for public use and with just compensation. Taking an
individual's
Housing is a basic human need. Shortage inwhich
private property is a deprivation housing canisonly be justified
a matter of statebyconcern
a highersince goodit which is public
directly
iand signicantly affects
"Compensation" meanspublic health, safety,
an equivalent for thethe valueenvironment
of the landand in sum,
taken. the general
Anything beyondwelfare.
that is more and
anything short
According to the of weight
that is less than compensation.
of authority, if the constitution The word "just" is
or statutes doused merely to require
not expressly intensifyit,the meaning
actual payme o
tender
For before of
purposes taking is unnecessary,inand
just compensation cases it will be sufficient
of private property if a acquired
certain and by adequate
the governmentremedyfor is public
provided useb
basisvaluation
The shall be in thethe current
decree and may faironly
marketserve value as declared
as guiding principle by the owner
or one or administrator
of the or such market
factors in determining just
compensation,
Sec. 85 of RA 3844 but it may not substitute the courts own judgment as to what amount
Contrary to the submission of private respondents, the
appointment
Whoever by act of atorleast
omissionthreecauses
(3) competent persons as commissioners to ascertain just compensation for
damage
There is a to"taking"
anotherinthere this being
sensefault whenor negligence is obliged to pay for the damage
the
Theexpropriator
appellate court enters private property
determined the timenot of only
taking fortoa be
momentary
in period but for a
1991.
Section Thus, the greater value
50.Quasi-judicial Powers of P913,122.00
of the DAR.;as declared
Section in Tax Declaration
57.Special Jurisdiction.; No. 011-2667
Sec. 3. Judicialdated July 23,
Notice.
The law must not be read in truncated parts;
its provisions
Section 15 of must
Republic be read in relation
Act No. to the whole
6958; Section 17 law. It is a cardinal rule in statutory
There is no question that in the decision of this Court dated October 30, 1980 in De Knecht vs. Bautista, G
No. L-51078,isthis
o If property takenCourt by held that the "choice
the government withoutof the
theFernando
benefit of Rein-Del
expropriationPan proceedings
streets as theand lineisthrough
devotedwh to
public use, such as a road, after many years, the property owner
Republic Act No. 1383 does not constitute a valid exercise of police power. The Act does not confiscate, n may no longer bring an action for recove
destroy, nor appropriate property belonging to appellee. It merely directs that all waterworks belonging to
Where in its motion for reconsideration of the main decision of this Court declaring that Republic Act 3039
unconstitutional
o "It is a general and rule void
that inthesolegislature
far as theissame seeks
without powerto deprive the Province
to appropriate publicofrevenues
Zamboanga del Nortebut
for anything of ai
public purpose. . . . It is the essential character of the direct object of the
o It is not for the courts to judge what particular cities or municipalities should be empowered to impose expenditure which must determin
occupation
o Section 22taxes in addition
(3), Art. VI of thetoConstitution
those imposed by Philippines,
of the the national exempts
Government. from That matter
taxation is peculiarly
cemeteries, within
churches
personages
- Section 22,or convents,3,appurtenants
paragraph Article VI, of thereto,
the thenand 1935 allPhilippine
lands, buildings, and improvements
Constitution, which expressly used exclusive
grants
exemption
- This power from realty taxes
to prescribe for "Cemeteries,
regulations to promote churches
the health,and parsonages
morals, education,or conventsgood appurtenant
order or safety, thereto,
and
general welfare of the people flows from the recognition that salus populi
The clause "unless otherwise provided" in Art.2 of the Civil Code refers to the date of effectivity and not th est suprema lex the welfare of
requirement
The publication of publication,
must be in full whichor itcannt
is no in any eventatbeallommitted.
publication Publication
since its purpose is torequirement applies
inform the public ofonthe1) a
contents of the laws.
Thus, publication in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation is a condition sine qua non
before statutes, rules
Jurisdiction over the person or regulations
is acquired can bytaketheeffect.
voluntary appearance of a party in court and his submissio
its authority, or it is acquired by the
The order of the court granting the motion to dismiss coercive power ofdespite
legal process
absence exerted over the
of a notice person. or
of hearing, Jurisdiction
proof of seo
thereof, of
Matters is merely
judicial an irregularity
notice have three in the proceedings.
material requisites:It cannot
(1) thedeprive
matteramustcompetent
be onecourt of jurisdiction
of common and gener ove
knowledge; (2)
Well-settled it must
is the rule be thatwell
the and authoritatively
factual findings andsettled and notofdoubtful
conclusions the trial or uncertain;
court and theand (3) of
Court it must
Appeals be
entitled
A findingtoofgreat weight
probable and respect
cause needs only andtowill notonbeevidence
rest disturbedshowingon appeal thatinmore
the absence
likely than of not
anyaclear
crimeshowin
has
committed
In resolvingand the was committed
admissibility of by
andthe suspects.
relying Probable cause
on out-of-court need not
identification of be based on
suspects, clearhave
courts and adopted
convinci
totalityare
There of circumstances
primary rights test which where
mustthey consider the
be respected even following factors, viz:
in proceedings (1)character:
of this the witness' opportunity to
o rules,
The The even
first ofinthese rights is the right
an administrative case,todemand
a hearing, that,which
if theincludes
respondent the right
judgeofshould
the partybe interested
disciplinedor for g
misconduct or any graver offense, the evidence against him should be
The employment or profession of a person is a property right within the constitutional guaranty of due proc competent and should be derived f
of
Due law.
process of law requires notice and hearing. Hearing, on the other hand, presupposes a competent an
impartial
Procedural tribunal. The right
due process to be heard
requires and, ultimately,
a determination of what theprocess
right to isdue process
due, when of it islaw lose
due, andmeaning
the degreein theo
what is due. Stated otherwise, a prior determination should be made as
The essence of due process is the opportunity to be heard but, at the same time, the doctrine does not alw to whether procedural protections
call
- The forexercise
a prior opportunity
of the States to power
be heard. Where an
to deprive theindividual
circumstances, such as
of his liberty is those present inlimited
not necessarily an extradition
to criminc
proceedings.
There are minimum Respondentsstandards in administrative
which must beproceedings,
met to satisfysuch the as deportation
demands and quarantine,
of procedural have likew
due process; and
these
Due process in disciplinary cases involving students does not entail proceedings and hearings similar aga
are, that (1) the students must be informed in writing of the nature and cause of any accusation to th
prescribed for actions and proceedings in courts of justice. Such proceedings may be summary and cross

1. There is no requirement whether express or implied, that a hearing be first conducted before a banking
institution
As long asmay be placed
the parties wereunder receivership.
given opportunity 2.to Closure
be heardand liquidation
before judgmentof awas
bank may be considered
rendered, the demands asofa
process
Dismissalswere sufficiently
based on just met
causes contemplate acts or omissions attributable to the employee while dismis
based on authorized causes
In all cases of business closure involve groundsof
or cessation under the Labor
operation Code which
or undertaking of allow the employer
the employer, to terminate
the affected
employee
The restrain is placed
entitledbyto the
separation pay.slaughter for human consumption of carabaos fit for agricultural wor
law on the
and draft purpose
Unsightly is not anorappropriation
advertisements of property
signs, signboards, interestswhich
or billboards to a "public use," and
are offensive is not,
to the therefore,
sight, are not withi
disassociated
The state mayfrom the general welfare
not permanently of the public.
divest owners of the beneficial use of their property and practically confisc
them solely to preserve or assure the aesthetic
The pledge that no person shall be denied the equal appearance of the
protection community
of the laws is not infringed by a statute wh
applicable to all of a class. The classification must have a reasonable basis and cannot be purely arbitrary
Standard of due process which must exist both as a procedural and a substantive requisite to free any
governmental
Substantive action
Due for that
Process is amatter, from
question of the
law;imputation of legal Due
while Procedural infirmity sufficient
Process to spell its
is a question ofdoom
Legal isProce
1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 1:No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process
General of law, nor
Welfare shall -any
Clause person
Every localbe denied theunit
government equal protection
shall exerciseofthe
thepowers
laws. expressly granted, those
necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and
Right of Privacy
The
1987right of privacyArticle
Constitution, is concisely defined
III, Section 1: No as person
the rightshall
to be beleft alone. Itofhas
deprived life,also been
liberty, or defined
propertyas the right
without dueo
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
Test of Delegation
The
It bearsfirstreiteration
test is called thatthe
the"completeness
equal protection test." Casedoes
clause law notstates thatalla legal
forbid law isclassification.
complete when it sets
What forth th
is proscrib
a classification
o The which isclause
equal protection arbitrary and unreasonable.
applies only to personsThat constitutional
or things identically guarantee
situated is andnotdoes
violated
not bar by aa
reasonable
The principleclassification
of local autonomy of the subject
under the of legislation,
1987 Constitution and a classification
simply means is "decentralization"
reasonable whereIt(1) does it isnot
base m
local governments
Police power is inherent sovereignin thewithin
state thebut state
not inormunicipal
an "imperium in imperio."
corporations. BeforeIn a aunitary
municipal system of governme
corporation may
exercise
Courts such power,
should not givethere must
a literal be a valid delegation
interpretation to the letter of of
suchthepower
law if itbyruns the counter
legislature which
to the is the reposi
legislative inten
The legislative
Suppose intent
the trial is notto terminated
classify thewithin INP inninetysuch manner
days from that Section 89 of
arraignment, theR.A. 6975 is applicable
suspension of accusedonly shouldto
be lifted.
The standard Whilethough
the lawdoesusesnot thehave
mandatory
to be spelled word shall before theItphrase
out specifically. could be beimplied
terminated from thewithin ninety
policy and(90
purpose
What of the act
Congress considered
delegated as aCity
to the whole. In theinReflector
of Manila Rep. ActLaw, clearly
No. 409, therespect
with legislative objective
to wagers is publicwa
or betting, sa
power protection
Equal to license,simplypermit, or regulate
requires that all which
persons therefore
or thingsmeans that asituated
similarly license shouldor permit beissued
treatedbyalike,
the Citybothofa
rights conferred and responsibilities imposed, 12 Similar subjects,
The rule of uniformity does not call for perfect uniformity or perfect equality, because this is hardly in other words, should not be treated
unattainable."
There cannot be When the problemthat
an assumption of classification
the second placer became of issue,
would have the Court the
received said: "Equality
other votes and uniformit
otherwise it is
judgment
Broadcast media are not mere common carriers but entities with free speech rights, they are also public th
substituting the mind of a voter. It cannot be assumed that the second placer would have won
trustees
Subic Special charged with the
Econmic dutyClassification,
Zone: of ensuring that to the people
be valid, have
must (1)access
rest ontosubstantial
the diversity of views on
distinctions, (2)politica
be
germane to the purpose of the law, (3) not be limited to existing
Every classification made by law is presumed reasonable. Thus, the party who challenges the law must conditions only, and (4) apply equally to a
present
Probation proof
is notof an
arbitrariness.
absolute right. It is an
It isestablished
a mere privilege precept in constitutional
whose grant rests upon law that thethe guaranty
discretion of of
thethe equ
trial co
Its grant is subject to certain terms and conditions that may be
Broad power of the COMELEC under Section 2(1), Article IX(C) of the Constitution"to enforce and adminisimposed by the trial court.
Receiving
all laws and salaries less than relative
regulations their counterparts
to the conduct hired abroad, the local-hires
of an election, of private
plebiscite, respondent
initiative, School, mostly
referendum Filipino
and recall."
discrimination. Employees should be given equal pay for work of equal value .
The singling out of election officers in order to "ensure the impartiality of election officials by preventing the
from developing
Equal protection familiarity
simply means with that
the people
all personsof their andplace of assignment"
thingssimilarly situated does not be
must violate
treatedthe alike
equalboth protect
as t
Sec.
rights 15.conferredand
Powers, Functions theand Duties.The
liabilities Office ofItthe
imposed. Ombudsman
follows that theshall have theoffollowing
existence powers, functionsdistinction
a valid andsubstantial and duties
Investigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public officer or employe
1. The concept of relative constitutionality.
The
o The constitutionality
phrase tax andofduty-free a statuteimportations
cannot, in every of raw instance,
materials, be capital
determined by a mere was
and equipment comparison
merely citedof its as a
example
o As stated of incentives
above, thethat State,may in be
ordergiven to entities
to promote theoperating within themay
general welfare, zone. Publicwith
interfere respondent
personalSBMA liberty, w
property,
A levy of tax andiswith
not business and occupations.
unconstitutional because it Thus, is not persons
intrinsically mayequalbe subjected
anduniform to certain kinds of restraint
in its operation.The
uniformity rule does not prohibit classification for purposes oftaxation
o "Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored
children. The impactright
o The constitutional is greater
against when it has the sanction
unreasonable searchesofand the seizures
law, for the is apolicy
personal of separating
right evocablethe racesonly by is
those
o In any whose rightswhere
situation, have beenabuseinfringed,
marks the oroperation
threatened of to be infringed.the
a checkpoint, What citizenconstitutes a reasonable
is not helpless. For the ormi
isIt not above butthat
is significant subject to the
it is not thelaw.
policeAnd the courts
action per seexistwhich to is
see that the law is
impermissible and supreme.
which should Soldiers, including
be prohibited
Rather,
But it does it isnot
theprohibit
procedure the used
Federal or in the words of
Government the taking
from court, methods
advantage which "offendsearches
of unlawful even hardenedmade by a pr
person or under authority of state law. (Weeks V8. United States,
The constitutional proscription against unlawful searches and seizures therefore applies as a restraint 232 U. S., 383; Burdeau vs. McDowell. dire2
only
"SEC. against the government
4. Examination and its agencies
of the applicant. The tasked judge orwith the enforcement
justice of the peace of the law.
must, before Thus, it could
issuing the only
warrab
personally examine on oath or affirmation the complainant and any witnesses he may produce and take th
That the search and seizure made are illegal for the following reasons: (a) Because the warrant was base
solely upon the affidavit of the petitioner who had no personal knowledge of the facts of probable cause, a
Probable cause for a search is defined as such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably
discreet
The Jointand prudent was
Resolution man sufficient
to believeinthat itselfantooffense
have beenhas been
reliedcommitted and that the
upon by respondent objects
Judge sought in
in convincing
himself
The arresting officer, therefore, must have personal knowledge of such fact or as recent case lawofadverts
that probable cause indeed exists for the purpose of issuing the corresponding warrants arrest.
personal
As applied knowledge of facts
to in flagrante or circumstances
delicto arrests, it is settledconvincingly indicative
that "reliable or constitutive
information" alone,of probable
absent any cause.
overt act Th
indicative
Rule 126, of a felonious
4 of the Revised enterprise
Rules on in Criminal
the presence and within
Procedure providesthe view
that aofsearch
the arresting
warrantofficers,
shall notare not ex
issue
upon probable
- A partially cause warrant
defective in connection remains with oneas
valid specific
to the offense to be determined
items specifically described personally by the judge
in the warrant. A search afte
warrant
Following is established
severable, the items and
doctrine not sufficiently
procedure,described
the judge may shall:be cut off without destroying the whole warra
(1)
Thepersonally
extent of the evaluate
reliance thedepends
report and on the
the supporting
circumstances documents
of eachsubmitted
case and is bysubject
the fiscal regarding
to the Judge's the sound
discretion. However, the Judge abuses that discretion when having no evidence
Preliminary investigation is generally inquisitorial, and it is often the only means of discovering the person before him, he issues a
who mayless
Nothing be reasonably charged with
than the fundamental lawaofcrime,
the landto enable the fiscal
(Constitution) to preparethe
commands hisjudge
complaint or information.
to personally determ
probable cause in the issuance of warrants of arrest. A judge fails in this
In determining the existence of probable cause for a search warrant, it is required that: (1) the judge must constitutionally mandated duty if
examine
If the Judge the fails
complainant
to determine and his witnesses
probable cause personally;
by personally(2) the examination
examining must be under
the applicant and his oath; and (3)inth
witnesses
form of searching
Freedom questions before
from unreasonable searches issuing
and aseizures
search warrant,
is declared it constitutes
a popular right graveand abusefor aofsearch
discretion.
warrant to
valid,existence
The (1) it must ofbe issued cause
probable upon probable
has beencause; (2) theby
determined probable
the justice cause must
of the peacebe determined
of Sagay beforeby theissuing
judge
search warrant
Section complained
1, paragraph of, is shown
3, of Article III of the byConstitution,
the followingrelative
statement to thein the warrant
bill of rights,itself.
provides that "The right
the people
Section 4 oftoRule
be secure
126 which in their persons,
provides thathouses,
the judge papers, and effects
must before issuing against unreasonable
the warrant personallysearches
examine ando
oath specific
The or affirmation
sectionthe of complainant
the law needand be notanypinpointed
witnesses in heserving
may producea valid and take ittheir
warrant, onlydepositions
needs that in thewritin
spe
offense alleged to have been committed be stated as a basis for the finding
"The true test of sufficiency of a deposition or affidavit to warrant issuance of a search warrant is whether of probable cause. The search
has
SEC.been
2209. drawn in a manner
SEARCH OF Athat perjury could
DWELLING HOUSE.be charged thereonhouse
A dwelling and the may affiant be heldand
be entered liable for dama
searched on
upon warrant issued by a Judge of the court or such other responsible
The government's right to issue search warrants against a citizen's papers and effects is circumscribed by officers as may be authorized by la
requirements
The searchingmandated questionsinpropounded
the searches to and seizures provision
the applicant of the Constitution.This
and the witnesses depend largelyconstitutional
on the discretion prov
the
Thejudge.
natureAlthough
of a generaltherewarrant
is no hard-and-fast
infringes on the ruleconstitutional
governing how a judgerequiring
mandate should conduct
particularhisdescription
examination, of
things to be seized. In the recent rulings of the Court, search warrants
The requisites for a valid search warrant are: 1) probable cause present; 2) such presence is determined of vague description were consider
personally
The two-witness by therequirement
judge; 3) theunder complainant
Section and the witnesses
10, Rule 126 of theheRevised
or she may Rules produce
of Court, arepetitioners
personallyclaim
rule
As an was violated the
exception, because
policeonly mayone seizewitness
without signed
warranttheillegally
receipt possessed
for the properties
firearmseized.
or any For clarity, letforusth
contraband
matter, inadvertently
The requisites for thefound
issuance in plain
of aview.
valid However,
search warrant"the seizure
are: of evidence in 'plain view' applies only whe
(1)search
A probable causetoisbe
warrant, present;
valid, must particularly describe the place to be searched and the things to be seiz
officers of the of
The permissibility law are to seize wiretap
a warrantless only those things
is not particularly
dependent upondescribed in the placed
the area being search under
warrant. A search
surveillanc
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public,

-Doctrine of seizure of evidence in plain view -- objects inadvertently falling in the plain view of an officer, w
has the rightsubmitting
-Voluntarily to be in theto position
a searchtoorhave that view,
consenting are subject
to have it made toinseizure and may
a person's be introduced
or a person's as evide
premises vali
waives his right against unreasonable searches and seizures. Thus, precluding him from
-Warrantless searches of moving vehicles are limited only to visual inspection. When, however, a vehicle i later complaining
stopped
When one and subjectedsubmits
voluntarily to an extensive search,
to a search such warrantless
or consents search
to have it made onwould only be
his person or permissible
premises, he if the
is
precluded from later complaining thereof. The right to be secure from unreasonable search
The "consent" given under intimidating or coercive circumstances is no consent within the purview of the may, like every
constitutional guarantee.
-The constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures, being a personal one, cannot be wa
by anyone except the personofwhose
-There is an effective waiver rightsrights
againstareunreasonable
invaded or who is expressly
searches authorized
and seizures onlytoifdo
theso on his or h
following
requisites are present:
While it is conceded (1)inItamust
that appear
buy-bust that the there
operation, rightsisexist; (2) The
seizure person involved
of evidence from one'shadperson
knowledge,
withoutact a
search warrant, needless to state a search warrant is not necessary, the search being
-Section 12 (Search incident to a lawful arrest) of Rule 126 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure provincident to a lawful
that "A person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may be used
Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, authorizing a warrantless arrest of any person actually committing a crime
The Constitution
search was made guarantees the rightof
as an incident of athe people
lawful to be and
arrest secure
soinwas
theiralso
persons, houses,
lawful underpapers and12
Section effects against
of Rule 116.
unreasonable searches and seizures. However, where the search is made pursuant to a lawful arrest, there is no need to
Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, a
a
Asperson: (a) When,ofinthe
a consequence hisillegal
presence,
search,thethe
person
thingsto seized
be arrested
on thehas committed,
occasion is actually
thereof committing,
are inadmissible or is
in evid
under
Sectionthe
5. exclusionary
Arrest withoutrule. They are
Warrant; when regarded
lawful. -as havingofficer
A peace been obtained
or a privatefrom a polluted
person may, source,
without the fruit
warrant,
arrest
Sec. 5.aArrest
person:without warrant; when lawful. A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, a
a person: (a) When, in hisof
Objects in the plain view presence,
an officerthewhoperson
has theto be arrested
right to be inhas
thecommitted, is actually
position to have committing,
that view or is
are subject
seizure and may
Sec. 5. Arrest be presented
without as evidence.
warrant; when lawful. The plain officer
A peace view doctrine is usually
or a private personapplied where a police
may, without warrant, offia
a person:
Section 5,(a) When,
Rule 113 of in the
his Rules
presence, the person
on Criminal to be arrested
Procedures hasfor
provides committed, is actuallypermitting
the only occasions committing, a or is
warrantless arrest:
1. A search and (a) therefore,
seizure, When, in his must presence,
be carriedtheout
person to be
through or arrested has committed,
with a judicial is actuallysuch
warrant; otherwise,
search andentry
1. A lawful seizure
is thebecomes "unreasonable"
indispensable predicatewithin the meaning
of a reasonable of the A
search. constitutional
search would provision. Evidence
violate the
constitutional
1.Where thereguarantee
was no clear against unreasonable
practice, search or
either approving and seizure if the
disapproving theentry
typewere illegal,atwhether
of search issue, at the ti
theSection
1. constitutional
2210 ofprovision
the Tariffwasand enacted,
Customsthe reasonableness
Code, as amended byofDP a search
No. 34isofjudged
October by27,balancing the intru
1972, authorize
any official
While or person
no search warrantexercising
had been police authority
obtained under
for that the provisions
purpose, of the Code,
when appellant to search
checked in his and
bag seize
as hisany
personal
1. luggage
Searches as a passenger
and seizure through aofwarrantless
the flight, he thereby
search agreed
during to the
routine inspection
airport securitythereof in accordance
procedure is legal. Sw
searches
1. are reasonable,
The Constitution given
bars state their minimal
intrusions intrusiveness,
to a person's the gravity
body, personal of theorsafety
effects interests
residence involved,
except thru a an
va
search warrant.
Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6235 reads: "SECTION 8. Aircraft companies which operate as public utilitie
operators of aircraft which are for hire are authorized to open and investigate suspicious packages and

Automobiles, because of their mobility, may be searched without a warrant upon facts not justifying a
warrantless
As search
a rule, a valid of a residence
search or office. Brinegar
must be authorized by a searchv. United States,
warrant 338 USby
duly issued 160,
an 93 L Ed 1879,
appropriate 69 S Ct
authority.
However,
This Courtthishasisruled
not absolute.
that not allAside from a search
checkpoints incident
are illegal. to awhich
Those lawfularearrest, a warrantless
warranted search hadofbe
by the exigencies p
order and conducted
Searches are conducted in a way least
in checkpoints are intrusive
valid for to
as motorists
long as theyare are
allowed. For, admittedly,
warranted routine of
by the exigencies checkpo
public
ordercrimes
The and are of conducted
insurrectioninora rebellion,
way least subversion,
intrusive to motorists.
conspiracyFor as long as
or proposal tothe vehicle
commit suchis neither
crimes,searche
and oth
crimes
A and operation
buy-bust offenses committed
is the methodin the furtherance,
employed on the
by peace occasion
officers thereof,
to trap or incident
and catch thereto,in
a malefactor orflagrante
in
delicto. It is essentially a form of entrapment since the peace officer neither
Arrest without warrant, when lawful. A peace officer or private person may, without warrant, arrest instigates nor induces theaacc
per
When in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing,
Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant when lawful. A peace officer or private person may, without a warrant, arr or is attempting to
person; (a) When, proscription,
The constitutional in his presence,that the
no person shall
to be bearrested haswithout
arrested committed, is actually
any warrant committing,
of arrest having or is
been
issued prior thereto,
The petitioners is notat
detention a hard-and-fast
the Bagong Buhay rule. The Rules of Court
Rehabilitation Center andis jurisprudence
legal in recognize exception
view of the information
The appellant also cannot andassail
the warrant of arrest
the validity of hisagainst
arrest him. The absence of a
on account
of
The thearrest
absence of a warrant.
of appellants has He
been was caught
made in flagrante
in hot pursuit, an delicto selling
exception shabu.
from the rule that warrantless arrests
illegal. In any event, appellants can no
The constitutional proscription against warrantless longer assail the illegality of their arrest since such a claim has not
searches and seizures admits of certain exceptions. Aside from a search
The
Anent search conducted
the first defense,on Gerente's
petitioner person was
questions likewiseoflawful
the legality his because it was made as
arrest. There is no dispute that no warrant was issued for the arrest of
As regards Sinocs claim of illegal arrest, the law provides that an arrest without warrant may be licitly effec
by a peace
Section officer,III,inter
2, Article alia1987
of the When an offenseprovides:
Constitution has in fact just been committed, and he has personal knowl
Accused-appellant contends that his
arrest, effected
Sec 2,Art on August
III, 1987 26, 1997
Constitution; withouttoabe
A search, warrant, wasgenerally
valid must illegal. Onbethis
authorized by a search warrant du
issued by the propoer gov't authority
Warrantless arrest under Section 5 of Rule 113 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure; and Right to
preliminary investigation
Sec 2, Art III, 1987 Constitution ; claim of warrantless arrest which is illegal cannot render void all other
proceedings
Valid warrantless arrestthose
including - the leading to the conviction
officer seizing of the
the property underaccused
the warrant must give a detailed receipt to
lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure was made
Circumstances allowing arrest without warrant
search and seizure without requisite judicial warrant
Rights against unreasonable searches and seizures
Notes
o
i
o
o
o
o
o
i
o
o
o
i
o
i
i
US Jurisprudence https://www.la
i w.cornell.edu/
i
i
o
i
o
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
i
o
o
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
o
o
o
o
o
i
i
i
o
o
o
i
o
o
o
o
o
i
i
o
i
i
i
o
o
o
o
i
i
i
o
o
o
o
o
i
i
i
i
o
i
o
i
Emphasis on personal determination by the Judge, a power vested by the
Constitution

In this case, the third requirement is absent.


In this case, questions during the examination were in a form of leading
questions
In rather
this case, than searching
the existence questions.
of probable cause was determined by the
applicant. contending
Petitioner The judge accepted the agent's
that the warrant affidavit
is invalid as it was
because without
it was prepared
three days before the examination of the applicant. Court found no

In People v. Rubio, 57 Phil. 384, 389 (1932), this Court said, While it is
true that the property to be seized under a warrant must be particularly
Rule 126 Search and Seizure. Section 4. Requisites for Issuing search
warrant. A search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in
US Jurisprudence
i