ARREST, SEARCH AND SEIZURE

PLACER VS VILLANUEVA
Offense: Frustrated Murder and Murder
Issue: May a judge issue a warrant by relying on the prosecutions certification and recommendations on the existence of a probable
cause?
Rulings: Issuance of a warrant is a matter of judicial discretion. The judge must satisfy himself of the existence of probable cause before
issuing a warrant. If in the face of the information, the judge finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscals certification and
require the submission of affidavits of witnesses to aid him at arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of probable cause.

SOLIVEN VS. MAKASIAR

Offense: Beltran was charged with libel and was arrested by virtue of a warrant of arrest.
Issue: Beltran contends that the RTC judge issued a warrant of arrest without personally examining the complainant and the witnesses
to determine probable cause.
Rulings: The judge is not required to personally examined the witnesses and complainants. In order to satisfy himself with the existence
of probable cause, he shall:
a. Personally evaluate the report submitted by the fiscal regarding the existence of probable cause, and on the basis thereof
issue a warrant of arrest
b. If on the basis thereof, he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscals report and require the submission of
affidavits of witnesses to aid him in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of probable cause.

HARVEY VS. SANTIAGO

Offense charged: child prostitution

Issue: they were arrested without warrant of arrest
Ruling: An arrest may be effected by a peace officer or even a private person, even without warrant, when the offense, in fact been
committed, and he has a personal knowledge of facts indicating that the person to be arrested has committed it.

ROAN VS. GONZALES

Offense charged: Illegal possession of fire arms
Issue: Issued search warrant is not valid.
Ruling: To be valid, search warrant must be supported by probable cause to be determined by the judge or some authorized officer after
examining the complainant and the witnesses he may produce. There must be a specific description of the place to be searched and
things to be seized to prevent arbitrary and indiscriminate use of warrant.
Probable cause as described by Judge Escolin in Burgos vs Chief of staff, refers to such facts and circumstances which would
lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the objects sought in connection
with the offense are in the place sought to be searched.

PEOPLE VS. BOLASA

Offense charged: violation to RA 6452 (Dangerous drugs Act of 1972)
Issue: Is the arrest falls under the circumstances of a lawful warrantless arrest?
Ruling: An arrest is lawful even without a warrant if:
a. When the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is about to commit an offense in his presence.
b. When an offense has been committed and he has reasonable ground to believe that the person to be arrested has committed it.
c. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped.
The arrest in this case did not fall on the following circumstances and thus illegal. Likewise, the search is illegal and every evidence
obtained during an illegal search cannot be used against the accused.

STONEHILL VS. DIOKNO

Offense charged: violation of central bank laws, tariff and customs laws, internal revenue and RPC.
Issue: validity of the search warrant
Ruling: Court split the documents, papers, and things seized into two groups:
a. Those found and seized in the officer of the corporations mentioned- petitioners have no cause of action to assail the
legality of the warrants because corporations have their respective personalities, separate and distinct from the personality
of the petitioners-legality of the seizure can be contested only by the party whose right has been impaired- admissible as
evidence-search warrant valid
b. Those found and seized in the residences of the petitioner- inadmissible as evidence-search warrant null and void

PEOPLE VS ALUNDAY
Offense charged: violation of RA 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972)
Issue: warrantless arrest valid?
Ruling: An arrest is lawful even without a warrant if:
a. When the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is about to commit an offense in his presence.
b. When an offense has been committed and he has reasonable ground to believe that the person to be arrested has committed it.
c. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped
In flagrante delicto means caught in the Act of committing a crime. The arrest of the petitioner was legal because he was caught in
flagrante delicto.

PEOPLE VS. LO HO WING (ALIAS PETER LO), LIM CHENG HUAT (ALIAS ANTONIO LIM)
Offense charged: Violation of RA 6425
Issue: is the seizure illegal?
Ruling: search w/o warrant is valid under the following circumstances?
a. A search incidental to an arrest
b. Search of a moving vehicle
c. Seizure in plain view

SALAZAR V. ACHACOSO
Offense Charge: No license to operate a recruitment agency
Issue: is the search and seizure warrant issued by POEA valid under Article 38 of the Labor code?
Ruling: Secretary of Labor, not being a judge, may no longer issue search or arrest warrants. Article 38 of the Labor Code is declared
unconstitutional and of no force and effect.

PAPA VS. MAGO

Offense: Shipment of personal effects are allegedly misdeclared and undervalued.

Issue: Is there a need to procure a warrant before search be made?
Ruling: the BOC are in possession and control, even if no warrant of seizure or detention has been issued for purposes of enforcement of
the tariff and customs laws.

CORRECTION OF ENTRY

RULE 108

Cancellation Or Correction Of Entries In The Civil Registry

Section 1. Who may file petition. Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status of persons which has been recorded in the civil
register, may file a verified petition for the cancellation or correction of any entry relating thereto, with the Court of First Instance of the province where the corresponding civil
registry is located.
Section 2. Entries subject to cancellation or correction. Upon good and valid grounds, the following entries in the civil register may be cancelled or corrected: (a) births: (b)
marriage; (c) deaths; (d) legal separations; (e) judgments of annulments of marriage; (f) judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning; (g) legitimations; (h)
adoptions; (i) acknowledgments of natural children; (j) naturalization; (k) election, loss or recovery of citizenship; (l) civil interdiction; (m) judicial determination of filiation; (n)
voluntary emancipation of a minor; and (o) changes of name.
Section 3. Parties. When cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil register is sought, the civil registrar and all persons who have or claim any interest which would
be affected thereby shall be made parties to the proceeding.
Section 4. Notice and publication. Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall, by an order, fix the time and place for the hearing of the same, and cause reasonable
notice thereof to be given to the persons named in the petition. The court shall also cause the order to be published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a
newspaper of general circulation in the province.
Section 5. Opposition. The civil registrar and any person having or claiming any interest under the entry whose cancellation or correction is sought may, within fifteen (15)
days from notice of the petition, or from the last date of publication of such notice, file his opposition thereto.
Section 6. Expediting proceedings. The court in which the proceeding is brought may make orders expediting the proceedings, and may also grant preliminary injunction
for the preservation of the rights of the parties pending such proceedings.
Section 7. Order. After hearing, the court may either dismiss the petition or issue an order granting the cancellation or correction prayed for. In either case, a certified copy
of the judgment shall be served upon the civil registrar concerned who shall annotated the same in his record.

RP VS DR, NORMA S. LUGSANAY UY

Date of decision: August 12, 2013
Entry to be corrected: Norma Lugsanay instead of Anita Sy
Issue: failure to implead indispensable parties
Ruling: Section 3. Parties. When cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil register is sought, the civil registrar and all
persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected thereby shall be made parties to the proceeding.
Petitions that involve substantial and controversial alterations require strict compliance with the requirements of rule 108.

FRANCLER P. ONDE VS OFFICE OF THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR

Date: September 10, 2014
Entry to be corrected: date and place of marriage of parent to not married, Misspelled First name
Issue: Is it a substantial and controversial alterations?
Ruling: Substantial and controversial alterations includes:
a. Citizenship
b. Legitimacy
c. Paternity or filiation
d. Legitimacy of marriage, as in this case
Petitions that involve substantial and controversial alterations require strict compliance with the requirements of rule 108. Parties
indispensable to the petition must be impleaded.
 RP VS MERLINDA L. OLAYBAR
Date: February 10, 2014
Facts: Merlinda alleged that she is not yet married thus filed a Petition for Cancellation of Entries in the Marriage Contract.
Issue: WON Petition for correction of an entry in the civil registry can substitute for an action to invalidate a marriage.
Ruling: No. It must be filed in the Family Court. However, in this case, the trial court, in allowing the correction of the subject certificate
of marriage by cancelling the wife portion thereof, did not in any way declare the marriage void as there is no marriage to speak of.

MA LOURDES BARRIENTOS ELEOSIDA VS LCR OF QUEZON CITY AND CARLOS BORBON

Date: May 9,2002
Facts: Change of last name of petitioner and her child, because petitioner is not married to Borbon, and their child is an illegitimate
child which should follow the surname of his mother.
Issue: Whether corrections of entries in the certificate of live birth may be allowed even if the errors to be corrected are substantial and
not merely clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous nature.
Ruling: Yes. Through an adversary proceedings. If the correction made is clerical, then the procedure to be adopted is summary. If the
rectification affects the civil status, citizenship or nationality of the party it is deemed substantial and the procedure to be adopted is
adversary.
An appropriate adversary suit is one where the trial court has conducted proceedings where all relevant facts have been fully
and properly developed, where opposing counsel have been given opportunity to demolish the opposite partys case, and where an
evidence is thoroughly weighed and considered.

RP VS MERLYN MERCANDERA
Date: December 8, 2010
Facts: change from Marilyn to Merlyn through the Municipal civil registrar by virtue of RA 9048 which allows correction of clerical or
typo errors in the civil registries entries.
Issue: Is the correction a change in name which should fall under rule 103, or a correction of a misspelled name under rule 108.
Ruling: It falls under rule 108 as it simply sought a correction of misspelled given name.

REPUBLIC VS VALENCIA
Date: March 5, 1986
Facts: correction on nationality, from Chinese to Filipino, and status, from legitimate to Illegitimate, and the status of the mother from
married to single, in an adversary proceeding
Issue: WON the proper suit was filed by the respondent
Ruling: Yes. Even substantial errors in a civil registry may be corrected and the true facts established provided the parties aggrieved by
the error availed themselves of the appropriate adversary proceeding.

RP, LCR VS DOMINADOR AGCAOILI

Date: Oct 11, 2011

Facts: change of citizenship from chinese to Filipino and status from legitimate to illegitimate
Issue: whether or not there is an appropriate adversarial proceedings in this case.
Ruling: if the procedures under rule 108 is followed, it becomes an adversarial proceeding and not summary.

RP VS HON. PEDRO BAUTISTA

Date: Oct 26 1987

Facts: change of the word Danish in the birth certificate of Raymund Mangabat, minor, to reflect the true nationality of the father of the
said minor.
Ruling: the change is substantial and the proper adversary proceeding was adopted. Proper parties were implead, there was publication
once a week in three consecutive weeks and The Republic appeared through the trial attorney of the OSG and did not object to the
presentation of evidence. It shows compliance to sec 2,4,5 of rule 108.