Political Law - page 16

FACTS: The Regional Intelligence Operations Unit of the Capital Command (RIOU-CAPCOM) received confidential information about a member of the NPA Sparrow Unit being treated for a gunshot wound at a hospital. Upon verification, it was found that the wounded person who was listed in the hospital records as Ronnie Javelon is actually petitioner Rolando Dural, a member of the NPA liquidation squad responsible for the killing of two CAPCOM soldiers the day before. He 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 two…

Keep Reading

FACTS: A team of policemen arrived at the house of accused-appellant armed with a search warrant. She invited one of them to enter the house. While seated at the sala and showing her the search warrant, the other policeman had entered the house through the backdoor which was open and found a plastic bag containing dried marijuana flowering tops in the kitchen. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the search and seizure was lawful. HELD: NO. Apparently, the search of the accused-appellant’s house was conducted in violation of Section 7, Rule 126 of the Rules of Court which specifically provides that no…

Keep Reading

FACTS: A search warrant was issued authorizing the search and seizure of an “undetermined quantity” of shabu and its paraphernalia in the premises of appellant’s house. An entrapment was planned that led to the arrest of del Rosario and to the seizure of the shabu, its paraphernalia’s and of a .22 caliber pistol with 3 live ammunition. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the seizure of the firearms was proper. HELD: NO. The raiding party was authorized to seize only shabu and paraphernalia for the use thereof and no other. A search warrant is not a sweeping authority empowering a raiding party…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Capt. Reynaldo Obrero, acting upon a directive, raided the Davao City residence of petitioner spouses who were already residing in Quezon City on information that the said residence was being used as a safehouse of rebel soldiers. The team did not enter the house since the owner was not present and they did not have a search warrant. When contacted by Obrero to ask permission to search the house, Ma. Luisa relented if the search would be conducted in the presence of longtime family friend, a ranking military officer. The team gained entry into the yard and the kitchen.…

Keep Reading

FACTS: A search warrant was issued against petitioner who was believed to be in illegal possession of firearms, hand grenades, pistols, dynamites and subversive documents. The police team searched petitioner’s house and seized cash envelopes, radio handsets, an FM transceiver, battery packs, a notebook and assorted papers. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the search warrant was valid. HELD: NO. The search warrant violates Section 3, Rule 126 of the Revised Rules of Court, which prohibits the issuance of a search warrant for more than one specific offense. The caption of Search Warrant No. 365 reflects the violation of two special laws:…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioners were arrested on the strength of a search warrant issued for rebellion. The searching party seized 428 documents and written materials, including a portable typewriter and two wooden boxes. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the search warrant is void for being general. HELD: YES. The search warrant authorizes the seizure of personal properties vaguely described and not particularized. It is an all-embracing description which includes everything conceivable regarding the CPP and the NDF. There is absent a definite guideline to the searching team as to what items might be lawfully seized thus giving the officers of the law discretion…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Appellant’s house was searched on the strength of a warrant issued to internal revenue agents and seized from therein fraudulent books, invoices and records. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the search warrant was illegal and void for failure to particularly describe the things to be seized. HELD: NO. While the place to be searched and the property to be seized under a search warrant must be particularly described in the warrant, yet the description is required to be specific only in so far as the conditions will ordinarily allow. By the nature of the goods to be seized, their description…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioners applied for a search warrant with the Regional Trial Court of Pasig against private respondents for violation of the Protection of Intellectual Property law. Upon the offer of pieces of evidence, a search warrant was issued. ISSUE(S): Whether or not there are requirements to the issuance of a valid search warrant. HELD: YES. In issuing a search warrant, the judge must strictly comply with the constitutional and statutory requirements. He must determine the existence of probable cause by personally examining the applicant and his witnesses in the form of searching questions. The search warrant must contain a specific…

Keep Reading

FACTS: Petitioner is a delegate of the First District of Leyte to the 1971 Constitutional Convention. He delivered a privileged speech at the plenary session and disclosed that certain persons are bribing some delegates. He eventually released from his hospital bed a sworn statement the names of the persons who gave him the money, implicating the First Lady among others. On the basis of a search warrant, agents of the respondent National Bureau of Investigation raided petitioner’s house and a criminal complaint for direct bribery was filed against him. ISSUE(S): Whether or not the search warrant issued was valid. HELD:…

Keep Reading

FACTS: The Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG) issued separate orders against private respondents Sipalay Trading Corporation and Allied Banking Corporation to effect their sequestration. PCGG also issued a “Search and Seizure Order” against Allied Banking Corporation. ISSUE(S): Whether or not PCGG may validly issue a search and seizure order. HELD: NO. The PCGG has no authority to issue the order in the first place. Only a “judge” and “such other responsible officer as may be authorized by law” were empowered by the FREEDOM CONSTITUTION to do so, and the PCGG is neither. It is not a judge, as clarified…

Keep Reading