Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches
and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall
issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of
the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons
or things to be seized.
Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court,
or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any
proceeding.
Rule 126
Section 1 SEARCH WARRANT DEFINED
1. Is an order in writing
2. Issued in the name of the People of the Philippines
3. Signed by the judge
4. Directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the
court
Section 13 SEARCH INCIDENT TO LAWFUL ARREST
A person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may have been used or constitute
proof in the commission of an offense without a search warrant.
Exclusionary Rule
1. Stonehill vs. Diokno 1967
Facts: 42 search warrants were issued against the petitioners and/of the corporation of which they were officers. The
warrant appears to be a general warrant as petitioners assail that it does not contain particularity (all business transactions,
receipts, financial records etc). Respondents contend that the warrants were issued in accordance with the law and even
if its not, the effects seized are admissible evidence against petitioners.
Issue: WoN the effects seized may be used as evidence
Ruling: No. Two points must be stressed in connection with this constitutional mandate, namely: (1) that no warrant shall
issue but upon probable cause, to be determined by the judge in the manner set forth in said provision; and (2) that the
warrant shall particularly describe the things to be seized. To uphold the validity of the warrants in question would be to
wipe out completely one of the most fundamental rights guaranteed in our Constitution, for it would place the sanctity of the
domicile and the privacy of communication and correspondence at the mercy of the whims caprice or passion of peace
officers. This is precisely the evil sought to be remedied by the constitutional provision above quoted to outlaw the so-
called general warrants.
Airport Searches
1. People v. Canton
Facts: While passing thru a metal detector booth at NAIA, a beeping sound was emitted. A civilian employee then fisked
Canton and felt something bulging at her abdominal area. Upon the instruction of SPO4 Reyes, the officers brought
Canton to the restroom for a thorough physical search where after frisking her, she voluntarily handed the package to the
officers. It was found that it was a shabu.
Issue: WoN the scope of search pursuant to airport security is confined only to search weapons under the Terry Doctrine
Ruling: No. The search was made pursuant to routine airport security procedure. Passengers are also subject to search
for prohibited materials or substances, unlike in Terry search which is limited to weapons. The strip search in the ladies
room was justified under the circumstances.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 4200 - AN ACT TO PROHIBIT AND PENALIZE WIRE TAPPING AND OTHER RELATED
VIOLATIONS OF THE PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or
spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or
record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph or
dictaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described:
It shall also be unlawful for any person, be he a participant or not in the act or acts penalized in the next preceding
sentence, to knowingly possess any tape record, wire record, disc record, or any other such record, or copies thereof, of
any communication or spoken word secured either before or after the effective date of this Act in the manner prohibited by
this law; or to replay the same for any other person or persons; or to communicate the contents thereof, either verbally or
in writing, or to furnish transcriptions thereof, whether complete or partial, to any other person: Provided, That the use of
such record or any copies thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal investigation or trial of offenses mentioned in section 3
hereof, shall not be covered by this prohibition.