CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
preservation and vitality of civil and political institutions
FINAL EXAM REVIEWER
BY: REALES
MIDTERM QUESTIONS:
WHAT IS THE BILL OF RIGHTS?
The bill of rights is a declaration and enumeration of the
individual rights and privileges which the constitution is
designed to protect against violations by the government
or by individuals or group of individuals. It is a charter of
liberties for the individual and a limitation upon the
power of the state.
WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS?
The bill of rights is a guarantee that there are certain
areas of a person’s life, liberty and property which
governmental power may not touch.
WHAT does the Bill of Rights regulate?
The Bill of Rights basically govern the inter-relationship
between the government and the individual, how the
exercise of governmental powers affect the rights of the
individual. Philippines vs Marti
WHO MAY INVOKE THIS RIGHTS?
The rights enshrined in the constitution extends to all
persons who resides within the Philippine territory. This
rights are vested not only to Filipino citizens, but also to
aliens residing in the country.
AGAINST WHOM MAY IT BE INVOKED?
Generally against the government when it exercises its
basic or fundamental powers, however, in the absence
of government interference, the liberties guaranteed by
the Constitution cannot be invoked against the state.
The bill of rights does not concern itself with the relation
between a private individual and another individual. It
governs the relationship between the individual and
state. The prohibitions therein are primarily addressed to
State and its agents.
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF PREFERRED RIGHTS?
As expounded in Philippine Blooming Mills Employees
Association vs. Philippine Blooming Mills Co., 50 SCRA
189 (1990), in the hierarchy of civil liberties, there are
rights safeguarded and sanctioned in the Constitution
that occupy a preferred position being essential to the
“and such priority gives such liberties the sanctity and
the sanction not permitting dubious intrusions.”
WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF DUE PROCESS?
The essence of due process is simply an opportunity to
be heard or as applied to administrative or quasi-judicial
proceedings, an opportunity to explain one’s side or an
opportunity to seek reconsideration of the action or
ruling complained of. A formal or trial type hearing is not
at all times and in all instances essential. Abang Lingkod
Party-List (Abang Lingkod) vs. Commission on Elections
WHAT ARE THE CARDINAL RULES OF PROCEDURAL DUE
PROCESS AS ENUNCIATED IN THE ANG TIBAY RULING?
1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to
present one's case and submit evidence in support
thereof;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence
presented;
3. The decision must have something to support
itself;
4. The evidence must be substantial. Substantial
evidence is such reasonable evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion;
5. The decision must be based on the evidence
presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the
record and disclosed to the parties affected;
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act
on its or his own independent consideration of the law
and facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the
views of a subordinate; and
7. The tribunal or body should render its decision in
such manner that the parties to the proceeding can know
the various issues involved and the reason for the
decision rendered.
SUBSTANTIVE VS PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS: City of
Manila vs. Laguio
Procedural due process, as the phrase implies, refers to
the procedures that the government must follow before
it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. Classic
procedural due process issues are concerned with what
kind of notice and what form of hearing the government
must provide when it takes a particular action.
Substantive due process, as that phrase connotes, asks
whether the government has an adequate reason for
taking away a person’s life, liberty, or property. In other
words, substantive due process looks to whether there is
a sufficient justification for the government’s action.
WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT? PROCEDURAL OR
SUBSTANTIVE?
Due process, as a constitutional precept, does not always
and in all situations require a trial-type proceeding. Due
process is satisfied when a person is notified of the
charge against him and given an opportunity to explain
or defend himself. The essence of due process is simply
to be heard, or as applied to administrative proceedings,
an opportunity to explain one’s side, or an opportunity
to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling
complained of. Vivo vs. Philippine Amusement and
Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR)
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF OPERATIVE FACT
The Doctrine of Operative Fact as an exception to the
general rule that when the courts declare a law to be
inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be
void and the latter shall govern. It nullifies the effects of
an unconstitutional law by recognizing that the existence
of a statute prior to a determination of
unconstitutionality is an operative fact and may have
consequence which cannot always be ignored.
DIFFERENTIATE CONTENT NEUTRAL AND CONTENT
BASED REGULATION.
It is not enough to determine whether the challenged
act constitutes some form of restraint on freedom of
speech. A distinction has to be made whether the
restraint is
(1) a content-neutral regulation, i.e., merely concerned
with the incidents of the speech, or one that merely
controls the time, place or manner, and under well
defined standards; or
(2) a content-based restraint or censorship, i.e., the
restriction is based on the subject matter of the
utterance or speech. The cast of the restriction
determines the test by which the challenged act is
assayed with. Chavez vs. Gonzales
POSSIBLE EXAM QUESTIONS:
WHAT IS THE ENROLLED BILL DOCTRINE?
Enrolled Bill Doctrine states that the bill which is passed
and approved shall be deemed importing an absolute
verity and binding upon the court. Copy of a bill is
conclusive not only of its provisions but also of its due
enactment.
EXPLAIN EQUAL PROTECTION
The equal protection clause means that no person or
class of persons shall be deprived of the same protection
of laws enjoyed by other persons or other classes in the
same place in like circumstances.
Equal protection simply requires that all persons or
things similarly situated should be treated alike both as
to the rights conferred and responsibilities imposed.
DOES EQUAL PROTECTION PROHIBIT CLASSIFICATION?
No, but the classification must be reasonable. To be
reasonable: (PEOPLE VS CAYAT)
1. It must rest on substancial distinctions
2. It must be germane to the purpose of the law
3. Must not be limited to existing conditions only
4. Must apply to all members of the same class
EXPLAIN RIGHT TO LIFE;
The constitutional protection of the right to life is not just
a protection of the right to be alive or to the security of
one’s limb against physical harm. The right to life is the
right to a good life. It commands the state to promote a
life of dignity which guarantees a decent standard of
living.
EXPLAIN RIGHT TO LIBERTY;
Liberty is the freedom to do right and never wrong.
Liberty as guaranteed under the due process clause is not
unbridled license as it is liberty regulated by law. The
individual as a creature of society should be prepared to
surrender part of his freedom for the benefit of the
greater number in recognition to the principle of SALUS
POPULI EST SUPREMA LEX.
WHAT ARE INCLUDED IN RIGHT TO LIBERTY?
The chief elements of the guaranty are the right to labor,
the right to contract, the right to choose ones
employment and the right to locomotion. RUBI VS PROV
BOARD OF MINDORO
WHAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE RIGHT TO PROPERTY?
Property is anything that can come under the right of
ownership and can be subject of a contract. This will
include all things real personal tangible and intangible.
REQUIREMENTS OF DUE PROCESS IN ADMINISTRATIVE
CASES; (Ang tibay vs CIR)
1. The right to a hearing which includes the right to
present one’s cause and submit evidence in
support thereof
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence
presented
3. The decision must have something to support
itself
4. The evidence must be substantial
5. The decision must be based to the evidence
presented at the hearing or at least contained in
the record and disclosed to the parties affected.
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act
on its own independent consideration of the law
and factsand not simply accept the views of a
subordinate
7. The board should render its decision in such
manner that the parties to the proceeding can
know the various issues involved.
WHAT IS A VAGUE STATUTE?
A vague statute is one that lacks comprehensible
standards that men of “Common intelligence must
necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application. PEOPLE VS NAZARIO
EXPLAIN TEST FOR VAGUENESS.
The test in determining whether a criminal statute is void
for uncertainty is whether the language conveys a
sufficiently definite warning as to the proscribed conduct
when measured by common understanding and practice.
It must be stressed, however, that the 'vagueness'
doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of
certainty for the statute to be upheld — not absolute
precision or mathematical exactitude, as petitioner
seems to suggest.
EXPLAIN THE VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE;
Due process requires that the terms of a penal statute
must be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are
subject to it what conduct on their part will render them
liable to its penalties. A criminal statute that “fails to give
a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his
contemplated conduct is forbidden by the statute,” or is
so indefinite that “it encourages arbitrary and erratic
arrests and convictions,” is void for vagueness. People vs.
Dela Piedra
The void-for-vagueness doctrine states that “a statute
which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in
terms so vague that men of common intelligence must
necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application, violates the first essential of due process of
law.” Romualdez vs. Sandiganbayan
EXPLAIN THE OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE
The overbreadth doctrine decrees that ‘a governmental
purpose may not be achieved by means which sweep
unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of
protected freedoms. Romualdez vs. Sandiganbayan
VOID FOR VAGUENESS VS OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE;
A statute or act suffers from THE DEFECT
OF VAGUENESS when it lacks comprehensible standards
that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess
at its meaning and differ as to its application. It is
repugnant to the Constitution in two respects: (1) it
violates due process for failure to accord persons,
especially the parties targeted by it, fair notice of the
conduct to avoid; and (2) it leaves law enforcers
unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and
becomes an arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle.
THE OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE, meanwhile, decrees
that a governmental purpose to control or prevent
activities constitutionally subject to state regulations
may not be achieved by means which sweep
unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of
protected freedoms.
As distinguished from the vagueness doctrine, the
overbreadth doctrine assumes that individuals will
understand what a statute prohibits and will accordingly
refrain from that behavior, even though some of it is
protected.
WHAT IS SOCIAL JUSTICE?
Social justice is "neither communism, nor despotism, nor
atomism, nor anarchy," but the humanization of laws
and the equalization of social and economic forces by the
State so that justice in its rational and objectively secular
conception may at least be approximated. Social justice
means the promotion of the welfare of all the people,
the adoption by the Government of measures
calculated to insure economic stability of all the
competent elements of society, through the
maintenance of a proper economic and social
equilibrium in the interrelations of the members of the
community, constitutionally, through the adoption of
measures legally justifiable, or extra-constitutionally,
through the exercise of powers underlying the
existence of all governments on the time-honored
principle of salus populi est suprema lex. Social justice,
therefore, must be founded on the recognition of the
necessity of interdependence among divers and diverse
units of a society and of the protection that should be
equally and evenly extended to all groups as a combined
force in our social and economic life, consistent with the
fundamental and paramount objective of the state of
promoting the health, comfort, and quiet of all persons,
and of bringing about "the greatest good to the greatest
number. CALALANG VS WILLIAMS
EXPLAIN “VERTICAL” AND “HORIZONTAL”
ENFORCEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
Vertical” enforcement of constitutional rights normally
pertain to a legal action initiated by an individual against
the government or the State as the case may be.
“Horizontal” enforcement of constitutional rights refers
to a legal action by an individual against another
individual or private bodies.
DEFINE CIVIL RIGHTS
The term "civil rights," has been defined as referring (to)
those (rights) that belong to every citizen of the state or
country, or, in a wider sense, to all its inhabitants, and
are not connected with the organization or
administration of government. They include the rights of
property, marriage, equal protection of the laws,
freedom of contract, etc.
Or, as otherwise defined civil rights are rights
appertaining to a person by virtue of his citizenship in a
state or community. Such term may also refer, in its
general sense, to rights capable of being enforced or
redressed in a civil action."
DEFINE POLITICAL RIGHTS
Political rights, refer to the right to participate, directly
or indirectly, in the establishment or administration of
government, the right of suffrage, the right to hold public
office, the right of petition and, in general, the rights
appurtenant to citizenship vis-a-vis the management of
government.
DEFINE POLICE POWER
The police power is the power vested in the legislature of
the state to make, ordain, and establish all manner of
wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes, and
ordinances, either with penalties or without, which are
not repugnant to the constitution as they shall judge to
be for the good and welfare of the commonwealth, and
of the subjects of the state. PEOPLE VS POMAR
WHAT ARE THE TESTS FOR A VALID EXERCISE OF POLICE
POWER?
a. There must be a lawful subject
b. The police power must be exercised through
lawful means.
DEFINE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
It is the right of the state to acquire private property for
public use upon payment of just compensation.
WHAT THINGS ARE SUBJECT TO EXPROPRIATION?
Anything that can come under the dominion of man is
subject to expropriation. It includes real and personal
tangible and intangible properties.
WHAT IS JUST COMPENSATION?
Just compensation is the full and fair equivalent of the
property taken from the private owner. This is intended
to indemnify the owner fully for the loss he has sustained
as a result of the expropriation.
REQUISITES OF TAKING?
1. Expropriator must enter a private property.
2. Entry must be for more than a momentary
period
3. Entry must be under warrant or color of legal
authority
4. Property must be devoted to public use or
otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously
affected.
 5. Utilization of the property must be in such a way
as to oust the owner and deprive him of
beneficial enjoyment of the property.
WHEN DOES PUBLIC USE JUSTIFY THE TAKING OF
PRIVATE PROPERTY?
The taking to be valid must be for public use. Whatever
project is undertaken must be for the public to enjoy. It
is accurate to state then that at present whatever may
be beneficially employed for the general welfare
satisfies the requirement of public use.
DEFINE POWER OF TAXATION
Taxation is the inherent plenary power of the state by
which it raises revenues for its expenses for public
welfare and the delivery of basic services to the people.
EXPLAIN THE PRINCIPLE OF UNIFORMITY IN TAXATION
Uniformity of taxation, like the kindred concept of equal
protection, merely requires that all subjects or objects of
taxation, similarly situated, are to be treated alike both
in privileges and liabilities
Uniformity in taxation implies that all taxable articles or
properties of the same class shall be taxed at the same
rate.
The concept of equity in taxation requires that such
apportionments be more or less just in the light of the
taxpayer’s ability to shoulder the tax burden.
WHAT ARE THE TWO TYPES OF TAKING?
There are two different types of taking that can be
identified.
A "possessory" taking occurs when the government
confiscates or physically occupies property.
A "regulatory" taking occurs when the government's
regulation leaves no reasonable economically viable use
of the property.
WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPLES BEHIND THE POWER TO
TAX?
They are the principle of necessity and the principle of
benefits.
The principle of necessity drives the government to
collect revenues for its existence and survival. No state
can survive without taxes.
The principle of benefits compels the state to render
basic services and public welfare benefits to all citizens
or persons including those who have not paid their
enforced contributions.
WHAT IS DOUBLE TAXATION?
When additional taxes are laid on the same taxing
jurisdiction for the same purpose and during the same
taxing period the second imposition would be
considered double taxation.
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF BENEVOLENT NEUTRALITY?
It allows accommodation of religion under certain
circumstances. The government may take religion into
account, to exempt, when possible, from generally
applicable governmental regulation individuals whose
religious beliefs and practices would otherwise thereby
be infringed, or create without state involvement an
atmosphere in which voluntary religious exercise may
flourish.
REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW?
(a) there must be an actual case or controversy
(“justiciable controversy”) calling for the
exercise of judicial power;
(b) the person challenging the act must have the
standing (“locus standi”) to question the validity
of the subject act or issuance;
(c) the question of constitutionality must be raised
at the earliest opportunity; and
(d) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis
mota of the case.
An ACTUAL CASE OR CONTROVERSY means an existing
case or controversy that is appropriate or ripe for
determination, not conjectural or anticipatory, lest the
decision of the court would amount to an advisory
opinion. The power does not extend to hypothetical
questions since any attempt at abstraction could only
lead to dialectics and barren legal questions and to
sterile conclusions unrelated to actualities.
LOCUS STANDI or legal standing is defined as a personal
and substantial interest in a case such that the party has
sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of the
challenged governmental act. It requires a personal
stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure the
concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation
of issues upon which the court so largely depends for
illumination of difficult constitutional questions.
 WHAT IS THE AS APPLIED CHALLENGE?
(PROHIBITION AGAINST THIRD PARTY
STANDING)
the "as applied challenge" embodies the rule
that one can challenge the constitutionality of a
statute only if he asserts a violation of his own
rights. The rule prohibits one from challenging
the constitutionality of the statute grounded on
a violation of the rights of third persons not
before the court.
MEMORIZE: Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging
the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble and
petition the government for redress of grievances.
EXPLAIN THE CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE OF FREE
SPEECH/EXPRESSION AND OF THE PRESS;
The constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression
means that "the government has no power to restrict
expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject
matter, or its content."
WHAT ARE THE TEST TO EVALUATE THE RESTRAINTS OF
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?
(a) the dangerous tendency doctrine which permits
limitations on speech once a rational connection
has been established between the speech
restrained and the danger contemplated;
(b) the balancing of interests tests, used as a
standard when courts need to balance
conflicting social values and individual interests,
and requires a conscious and detailed
consideration of the interplay of interests
observable in a given situation of type of
situation; and
(c) the clear and present danger rule which rests on
the premise that speech may be restrained
because there is substantial danger that the
speech will likely lead to an evil the government
has a right to prevent. This rule requires that the
evil consequences sought to be prevented must
be substantive, “extremely serious and the
degree of imminence extremely high.”
CONTENT NEUTRAL VS CONTENT BASED;
A distinction has to be made whether the restraint is (1)
a content-neutral regulation, i.e., merely concerned with
the incidents of the speech, or one that merely controls
the time, place or manner, and under well-defined
standards; or (2) a content-based restraint or censorship,
i.e., the restriction is based on the subject matter of the
utterance or speech.
WHAT IS CONCEPT OF PRIOR RESTRAINT?
Prior restraint refers to official governmental restrictions
on the press or other forms of expression in advance of
actual publication or dissemination.
WHAT IS THE OPEN JUSTICE PRINCIPLE?
It is justified on the ground that if the determination of
justice cannot be hidden from the public, this will
provide: (1) a safeguard against judicial arbitrariness or
idiosyncrasy, and (2) the maintenance of the public’s
confidence in the administration of justice.
WHAT IS GRAVE BUT IMPROBABLE DANGER RULE?
For an impediment on free expression to be permissible,
the gravity of the evil, discounted by its improbability of
coming about, must sufficiently outweigh the invasion of
free speech necessary to avoid the danger.
WHAT IS THE CAPTIVE AUDIENCE DOCTRINE?
states that when a listener cannot, as a practical matter,
escape from intrusive speech, the speech can be
restricted. It recognizes the right not to be exposed to an
unwanted message in circumstances in which the
communication cannot be avoided.
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF FAIR COMMENT?
The doctrine of fair comment means that while in
general every discreditable imputation publicly made is
deemed false, because every man is presumed innocent
until his guilt is judicially proved, and every false
imputation is deemed, malicious, nevertheless, when the
discreditable imputation is directed against a public
person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily
actionable. In order that such discreditable imputation to
a public official may be actionable, it must either be a
false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false
supposition. If the comment is an expression of opinion,
based on established facts, then it is immaterial that the
opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it might
reasonably be inferred from the facts. BORJAL VS CA
WHAT IS THE SUB JUDICE RULE?
The sub judice rule restricts comments and disclosures
pertaining to the judicial proceedings in order to avoid
prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or
obstructing the administration of justice.
EXPLAIN FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY;
Freedom of assembly connotes the right of the people to
meet peaceably for consultation and discussion of
matters of public concern. It is entitled to be accorded
the utmost deference and respect. It is not to be limited,
much less denied, except on a showing, as is the case
with freedom of expression, of a clear and present
danger of a substantive evil that the state has a right to
prevent.
MEMORIZE: ART3 Section 15. The privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of
invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it.
READ: ART7 SECTION 18. The President shall be the
Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the
Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may
call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or
rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for
a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege
of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or
any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight
hours from the proclamation of martial law or the
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus,
the President shall submit a report in person or in writing
to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote
of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or
special session, may revoke such proclamation or
suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by
the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the
Congress may, in the same manner, extend such
proclamation or suspension for a period to be
determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion
shall persist and public safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four
hours following such proclamation or suspension,
convene in accordance with its rules without any need of
a call.
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate
proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the
factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the
suspension of the privilege of the writ or the extension
thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon
within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of
the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil
courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the
conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and
agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to
function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the
writ.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall apply
only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or
offenses inherent in or directly connected with the
invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any
person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially
charged within three days, otherwise he shall be
released.
DEFINE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
It is an order directed to the person detaining another
commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at
a designated time and place with the day and cause of
his capture and detention to do, to submit to, and
receive whatever the court or judge awarding the writ
shall consider in his behalf.
Simplified: The person detaining is ordered to bring the
latter to the court which may release the detainee if the
detention is without cause.
CAN THE WRIT BE ISSUED IF THE DETENTION IS LEGAL
NO. The most basic criterion for the issuance of the writ,
is that the individual seeking such relief is illegally
deprived of his freedom of movement or placed under
some form of illegal restraint. If an individuals liberty is
restrained via some legal process, the writ of habeas
corpus is unavailing.
WHAT IS A JUDICIAL PROCESS
A judicial process is defined as a writ, warrant, subpoena,
or other formal writing issued by authority of law; also,
the means of accomplishing an end, including judicial
proceedings, or all writs, warrants, summonses
and orders of courts of justice or judicial officers. It is
likewise held to include a writ, summons or order issued
in a judicial proceeding to acquire jurisdiction of a person
or his property, to expedite the cause or enforce the
judgment, or a writ, warrant, mandate or other process
issuing from a court of justice. A commitment order and
a warrant of arrest are but species of judicial process.
SCOPE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
The writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases of illegal
confinement or detention by which any person is
deprived of his liberty or by which the rightful custody of
a person is being withheld from the one entitled
thereto. It is issued when one is either deprived of liberty
or is wrongfully being prevented from exercising legal
custody over another person. Thus, it contemplates two
instances: (1) deprivation of a person’s liberty either
through illegal confinement or through detention and (2)
withholding of the custody of any person from someone
entitled to such custody.
WRIT OF AMPARO
The privilege of the writ of amparo is a remedy available
to victims of extra-judicial killings and enforced
disappearances or threats of a similar nature, regardless
of whether the perpetrator of the unlawful act or
omission is a public official or employee or a private
individual. It is envisioned basically to protect and
guarantee the right to life, liberty and security of
persons, free from fears and threats that vitiate the
quality of life.
The difference between habeas corpus and amparo is
that habeas corpus is designed to enforce the right to
freedom of the person, whereas amparo is designed to
protect those other fundamental human rights
enshrined in the Constitution but not covered by
the writ of habeas corpus
DIFF EXTRALEGAL KILLINGS AND ENFORCED
DISAPPEARANCES
The Amparo Rule was intended to address the
intractable problem of "extralegal killings" and "enforced
disappearances," its coverage, in its present form, is
confined to these two instances or to threats thereof.
"EXTRALEGAL KILLINGS" are "killings committed without
due process of law, i.e., without legal safeguards or
judicial proceedings." On the other hand, "ENFORCED
DISAPPEARANCES" are "attended by the following
characteristics: an arrest, detention or abduction of a
person by a government official or organized groupsor
private individuals acting with the direct or indirect
acquiescence of the government; the refusal of the State
to disclose the fate or whereabouts of the person
concerned or a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation
of liberty which places such persons outside the
protection of law.
MEMORIZE: ART3 Section 6. The liberty of abode and of
changing the same within the limits prescribed by law
shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the
court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except
in the interest of national security, public safety, or
public health, as may be provided by law.
WHAT ARE GUARANTEED BY THE LIBERTY OF ABODE
DOCTRINE
It guarantees the freedom to choose and change one’s
abode and the freedom to travel within the country and
outside.
IS BAIL A VALID RESTRICTION OF THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL?
YES. Bail is a valid restriction of the right to travel because
if the accused were allowed to leave the Philippines
without sufficient reason, he may be placed beyond the
reach of the court. The condition imposed on the
accused is to make himself available at all times
whenever the court requires his presence. (Manotoc vs
CA)
IS THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL ABSOLUTE?
NO. The exercise of one’s right to travel or the freedom
to move from one place to another, as assured by the
Constitution, is not absolute. There are constitutional,
statutory and inherent limitations regulating the right to
travel. Section 6 itself provides that "neither shall the
right to travel be impaired except in the interest of
national security, public safety or public health, as may
be provided by law." (LEAGUE DIVISION VS HEUSDENS)
Some of these statutory limitations are the following:
1] The Human Security Act of 2010 or Republic Act (R.A.)
No. 9372. The law restricts the right to travel of an
individual charged with the crime of terrorism even
though such person is out on bail.
2] The Philippine Passport Act of 1996 or R.A. No. 8239.
Pursuant to said law, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs or
his authorized consular officer may refuse the issuance
of, restrict the use of, or withdraw, a passport of a
Filipino citizen.
3] The "Anti- Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003" or R.A.
No. 9208. Pursuant to the provisions thereof, the Bureau
of Immigration, in order to manage migration and curb
trafficking in persons, issued Memorandum Order Radjr
No. 2011-011,12 allowing its Travel Control and
Enforcement Unit to "offload passengers with fraudulent
travel documents, doubtful purpose of travel, including
possible victims of human trafficking" from our ports.
4] The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of
1995 or R. A. No. 8042, as amended by R.A. No. 10022. In
enforcement of said law, the Philippine Overseas
Employment Administration (POEA) may refuse to issue
deployment permit to a specific country that effectively
prevents our migrant workers to enter such country.
5] The Act on Violence against Women and Children or
R.A. No. 9262. The law restricts movement of an
individual against whom the protection order is
intended.
6] Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995 or R.A. No. 8043.
Pursuant thereto, the Inter-Country Adoption Board may
issue rules restrictive of an adoptee’s right to travel "to
protect the Filipino child from abuse, exploitation,
trafficking and/or sale or any other practice in
connection with adoption which is harmful, detrimental,
or prejudicial to the child."
MEMORIZE: ART3
SECTION 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the
commission of an offense shall have the right to be
informed of his right to remain silent and to have
competent and independent counsel preferably of his
own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of
counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights
cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence
of counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or
any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used
against him. Secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of
this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for
violations of this section as well as compensation to and
rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices,
and their families.
SECTION 19.
(1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel,
degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither
shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the
Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or
degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee
or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.
IS THE DEATH PENALTY VIOLATIVE OF SEC 19?
NO. Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or
a lingering death, but the punishment of death is not
cruel, within the meaning of that word as used in the
constitution. It implies there something inhuman and
barbarous, something more than the mere
extinguishment of life.—Now it is well-settled in
jurisprudence that the death penalty per se is not a cruel,
degrading or inhuman punishment. Echegaray vs.
Secretary of Justice
The cruelty against which the Constitution protects a
convicted man is cruelty inherent in the method of
punishment, not the necessary suffering involved in any
method employed to extinguish life humanely.—Any
infliction of pain in lethal injection is merely incidental in
carrying out the execution of the death penalty and does
not fall within the constitutional proscription against
cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment.
MEMORIZE: ART3 Section 7. The right of the people to
information on matters of public concern shall be
recognized. Access to official records, and to documents
and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to government research data used
as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the
citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by
law.
WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY SECTION 7?
The two rights guaranteed by sec 7 are the right to
information on matters of public concern and the right
to access official records and to documents and papers
pertaining to official acts transactions or decisions as well
as to government research data used as basis for policy
development.
IS THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ABSOLUTE?
NO. Like all the constitutional guarantees, the right to
information is not absolute. The people’s right to
information is limited to “matters of public concern,” and
is further “subject to such limitations as may be provided
by law. Antolin vs. Domondon
WHAT IS THE POLICY OF FULL DISCLOSURE?
Under Art2 Sec 28 of the constitution subject to
reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State
adopts and implements a policy of full public disclosure
of all its transactions involving public interest. The policy
of full public disclosure enunciated in above-quoted
Section 28 complements the right of access to
information on matters of public concern found in the
Bill of Rights. The right to information guarantees the
right of the people to demand information, while Section
28 recognizes the duty of officialdom to give information
even if nobody demands. Province of North Cotabato vs.
Government of the Republic of the Philippines Peace
Panel on Ancestral Domain
WHAT IS THE TEST TO DETERMINE IF A PARTICULAR
INFORMATION IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC CONCERN?
In determining whether a particular information is of
public concern there is no right test. It is for the courts to
determine on a case to case basis whether the matter at
issue is of interest or importance as it relates to or affect
the public.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS RIGHT?
An essential element of this freedom is to keep a
continuing dialogue or process of communication
between the government and the people. It is in the
interest of the state that the channels for free political
discussion be maintained to the end that the
government may perceive and be responsive to the
people’s will. VALMONTE VS VELMONTE
MEMORIZE ARTXIV SECTION 5 (2) Academic freedom
shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.
WHAT IS ACADEMIC FREEDOM?
According to jurisprudence the meaning of academic
freedom can be viewed from the point of view of the
freedom of a faculty member and freedom of an
academic institution of higher learning.
Freedom of a faculty member includes the full freedom
in research and publication, freedom to discusss his
subject in the classroom and freedom from institutional
censorship or discipline.
Freedom of an Academic Institution pertains to the
freedom of the school or college to decide on what its
aims and objectives will be and what is the best manner
to attain the same. It is free to determine for itself on
academic grounds who may teach what may be taught
how it shall be taught and who may be admitted to study.
CAN A SCHOOL OF HIGHER LEARNING BE COMPELLED
TO ADMIT STUDENTS WHO DESIRE TO ENROLL?
NO. A school has the discretion to admit or not to admit
students. Admission is not a right but merely a privilege.
ISABELO VS PERPETUAL HELP COLLEGE
WHAT IS THE TERMINATION OF CONTRACT RULE?
It means that when a student enrolls in a given school he
is registering for the entire semester and after the
semester ends the school has no duty to accept him
because the contract is deemed terminated. ALCUAZ VS
PSBA
MEMORIZE: Section 10. No law impairing the obligation
of contracts shall be passed.
WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF SECTION 10?
Section 10 prohibits the passage of any law which impairs
the obligation of contracts. The mere change therefore
in existing laws does not fall within the prohibition. The
change must be such that it will impair the obligations of
contracts.
WHEN IS A LAW CONSIDERED TO BE AN IMPAIRMENT
OF CONTRACT?
A law impairs a contract when it enlarges abridges or in
any manner change the intention of the parties, and this
is true even if the change is done indirectly.
EXPOUNDED: A law which changes the terms of a legal
contract between parties either in the time or mode of
performance or imposes new conditions or dispenses
with those expressed or authorities for its satisfaction
something different from that provided in its terms is a
law which impairs the obligation of a contract and is
therefore null and void.
WHAT POWERS PREVAILS OVER THE NON IMPAIRMENT
CLAUSE?
Demands of police power arising from the dictates of
social justice, general welfare, public health, safety,
amelioration of labor conditions, prevail over contracts.
All of these are based under the principle of SALUS
POPULI EST SUPREMA LEX.
ALTERNATE: The constitutional guaranty of non-
impairment of contracts is limited by the exercise of the
police power of the state in the interest of public health,
safety, morals and general welfare. ORTIGAS vs FEATI
MEMORIZE: Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of
attainder shall be enacted.
WHAT IS AN EX POS FACTO LAW (LACSON VS EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY)
AN EX POST FACTO LAW IS ONE:
(a)which makes an act done criminal before the passing
of the law and which was innocent when committed, and
punishes such action; or
(b) which aggravates a crime or makes it greater that
when it was committed; or
(c) which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime when it
was committed,
(d) which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives
less or different testimony than the law required at the
time of the commission of the offense in order to convict
the defendant.
(e) Every law which, in relation to the offense or its
consequences, alters the situation of a person to his
disadvantage.
(f) that which assumes to regulate civil rights and
remedies only but in effect imposes a penalty or
deprivation of a right which when done was lawful;
(g) deprives a person accused of crime of some lawful
protection to which he has become entitled, such as the
protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a
proclamation of amnesty
WHAT IS A BILL OF ATTAINDER?
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts
punishment without trial. Its essence is the substitution
of a legislative for a judicial determination of guilt.
(PEOPLE VS FERRER)
ALTERNATIVE: A bill of attainder is a legislative act which
inflicts punishment on individuals or members of a
particular group without a judicial trial.
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST
EXPOST FACTO LAW?
The prohibition applies only to criminal legislation which
affects the substantial right of the accused and to
criminal procedural law prejudicial to the accused.
ALTERNATIVE: The constitutional doctrine that outlaws
an ex post facto law generally prohibits the
retrospectivity of penal laws. Penal laws are those acts of
the legislature which prohibit certain acts and establish
penalties for their violations, or those that define crimes,
treat of their nature and provide their punishment.
WHY ARE EXPOST FACTO LAWS PROHIBITTED?
RATIONALE?
Criminal laws cannot be applied retroactively because an
accused cannot be held liable for an act which at the time
of it’s commission was not punishable. Nulla poena sine
lege. (there is no crime when there is no law punishing
it.)
WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A BILL OF
ATTAINDER?
a. They are convictions and sentences pronounced
by the legislative department instead of the
judicial department.
 b. The sentence pronounced and punishment
inflicted are determined by no previous law or
fixed rule
c. The investigation into the guilt of the accused if
any were made , was not necessarily or generally
conducted in his presence or that of counsel and
no recognized rule of evidence governed the
inquiry.
WHY ARE BILLS OF ATTAINDER PROHIBITED?
The constitutional ban against bills of attainder serves to
implement the principle of separation of powers by
confining legislatures to rule-making and thereby
forestalling legislative usurpation of the judicial function.
Bills of attainder were employed to suppress unpopular
causes and political minorities, 8 and it is against this evil
that the constitutional prohibition is directed. The
singling out of a definite class, the imposition of a burden
on it, and a legislative intent, suffice to stigmatizea
statute as a bill of attainder. (PEOPLE VS FERRER)
ALTERNATIVE: The purpose is to implement the time
honored principle of separation of powers. The task of
the legislature is to enact laws and not to pronounce the
guilt of a party through legislation. It cannot undertake a
trial by legislation.
MEMORIZE
Section 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by
reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or
non-payment of a poll tax.
WHAT IS THE RATIONALE OF SEC 18?
Every person has his own conscience, and this conscience
whether that of a rich or poor man or that mighty, should
not be curtailed or restrained except when they are
translated into action and appears to be contrary to law
morals or public order.
WHAT IS PERTAINED TO AS “DEBT” in section 20?
According to the supreme court, non-imprisonment for
debt in section 20 were intended to prevent
commitment of debtors to prison for liabilities arising
from actions ex contractu and not for damages arising ex
delicto.
WHAT IS THE REASON?
The reason for this is because in actions ex delicto the
damages recoverable therein do not arise from any
contract by and between the parties. Damages arising
from ex delicto are imposed upon the defendant for the
wrong he has committed.
IS THE BP22 UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR VIOLATING
SECTION20?
NO. The non payment of the obligation is not what the
law punishes. What is punished is the making and issuing
of worthless checks or a check which is dishonored upon
its presentation and payment. Moreover the law
punishes the act not an offense against property but
against public order. LOZANO VS MARTINEZ
MEMORIZE 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.
WHAT IS A SEARCH WARRANT?
A search warrant is an order in writing issued in the name
of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and
directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search
for personal property described therein and bring it
before the court. RULE 126 SEC 1
MAY THERE BE A SEARCH AFTER A 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. RULE 126 SEC 13
WHAT IS PROBABLE CAUSE?
Probable cause for an arrest or for the issuance of a
warrant of arrest has been defined as such facts and
circumstances which would lead a reasonable discreet
and prudent man to believe that an offense has been
committed by the person sought to be arrested. ALLADO
VS DIOKNO
DEFINE ARREST;
An arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order
that he may be bound to answer for the commission of
an offense, and it is made by an actual restraint of the
person to be arrested, or by his submission to the
custody of the person making the arrest. PEOPLE VS
SEQUINO
IS PHYSICAL RESTRAINT REQUIRED IN ARREST?
NO. Application of actual force, manual touching of the
body, physical restraint or a formal declaration of arrest
is not, required. It is enough that there be an intent on
the part of one of the parties to arrest the other and an
intent on the part of the other to submit, under the belief
and impression that submission is necessary. SANCHEZ
VS DEMETRIOU
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES FOR A VALID SEARCH
WARRANT OR WARRANT OF ARREST?
a. It must be issued upon probable cause
b. The probable cause must be determined
personally by the judge
c. In determination of the probable cause, the
judge must examine under oath the complainant
and the witnesses
d. The warrant must particularly describe the place
to be searched and the persons or things to be
seized.
WHAT IS A GENERAL WARRANT?
A general warrant is a void search warrant for it does not
particularly describe either the place to be searched or
the things to be seized.
WHAT IS THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE?
A search and seizure must be carried out through or on
the strength of a judicial warrant absent such , the search
and seizure becomes unreasonable and the evidences
secured would be inadmissible as evidence for any
purpose in any proceeding.
WHEN IS A WARRANTLESS ARREST VALID?
As a general rule, no peace officer or person has the
power or authority to arrest anyone without a warrant of
arrest except in those cases expressly authorized by law.
Umil vs. Ramos
A peace officer or a private person may, without a
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 is temporarily confined while
his case is pending, or has escaped while being
transferred from one confinement to another.
WHY IS WARRANTLESS ARREST ALLOWED?
The rationale behind lawful arrests, without warrant,
was stated by this Court in the case of People vs. Kagui
Malasugui thus: “To hold that no criminal can, in any
case, be arrested and searched for the evidence and
tokens of his crime without a warrant, would be to leave
society, to a large extent, at the mercy of the shrewdest,
the most expert, and the most depraved of criminals,
facilitating their escape in many instances. Umil vs.
Ramos
DIFFERENTIATE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR WARRANT OF
ARREST AND FOR SEARCH WARRANT;
Probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest is
the existence of such facts and circumstances that would
lead a reasonably discreet and prudent person to
believethat an offense was committed by the person
sought to be arrested.
Probable cause for warrant of arrest is determined to
address the necessity of placing the accused under
custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. HAO
VS PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
SHOULD PROBABLE CAUSE BE BASED UPON CLEAR AND
CONVINCING EVIDENCE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?
NO. t is well-settled that a finding of probable cause need
not be based on clear and convincing evidence beyond
reasonable doubt; Probable cause is that which
engenders a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed and that the respondent is probably guilty
thereof and should be held for trial AAA vs. Carbonell
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT MUST CONCUR IN
ORDER THAT A MUNICIPAL JUDGE MAY ISSUE A
WARRANT OF ARREST?
there are three (3) conditions that must concur for the
issuance of the warrant of arrest by the municipal judge
during a preliminary investigation. The investigating
judge must: 1. Have examined in writing and under oath
the complainant and his witnesses by searching
questions and answers; 2. Be satisfied that a probable
cause exists; and 3. That there is a need to place the
respondent under immediate custody in order not to
frustrate the ends of justice. Gutierrez vs. Hernandez
DIFFERENTIATE EXECUTIVE DETERMINATION OF
PROBABLE CAUSE AND JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF
PROBABLE CAUSE;
The executive determination of probable cause is one
made during preliminary investigation. It is a function
that properly pertains to the public prosecutor who is
given a broad discretion to determine whether probable
cause exists and to charge those whom he believes to
have committed the crime as defined by law and thus
should be held for trial.
The judicial determination of probable cause, on the
other hand, is one made by the judge to ascertain
whether a warrant of arrest should be issued against
the accused. The judge must satisfy himself that based
on the evidence submitted, there is necessity for placing
the accused under custody in order not to frustrate the
ends of justice.
IS THE RULE THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD PERSONALLY
EXAMINE THE COMPLAINANT AND THE WITNESSES
ABSOLUTE OR MANDATORY?
NO. The judge does not have to personally examine the
complainant and the witnesses. The prosecutor can
perform the same functions as the commissioner for the
taking of evidence. However, there should be a report
and necessary documents supporting the Fiscal’s bare
certification. LIM VS FELIX
In making the required personal determination, a Judge
is not precluded from relying on the evidence earlier
gathered by responsible officers. The extent of the
reliance depends on the circumstances of each case and
is subject to the Judge's sound discretion. However, the
Judge abuses that discretion when having no evidence
before him, he issues a warrant of arrest.
While there are cases where the circumstances may call
for the judge’s personal examination of the complainant
and his witnesses, it must be emphasized that such
personal examination is not mandatory and
indispensable in the determination of probable cause for
the issuance of a warrant of arrest—the necessity arises
only when there is an utter failure of the evidence to
show the existence of probable cause. AAA vs. Carbonell
IS A WARRANTLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE DURING A
VALID WARRANTLESS ARREST ALSO VALID?
YES. legitimate warrantless arrest necessarily cloaks the
arresting officer with authority to validly search and seize
from the offender (1) dangerous weapons, and (2) those
that may be used as proof of the commission of an
offense. People vs. Montilla
IS THERE A VALID WARRANTLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE
IF THERE IS CONSENT?
YES. When an individual voluntarily submits to a search
or consents to have the same conducted upon his person
or premises, he is precluded from later complaining
thereof. People vs. Montilla
WHAT ARE EXAMPLES OF REASONABLE WARRANTLESS
SEARCHES?
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.
WHAT IS THE INEVITABLE DISCOVERY DOCTRINE? to indicate clearly the proper person upon whom the
warrant is to be served. People vs. Veloso
Information obtained illegally is not absolutely
inadmissible under the fruit of the poisonous tree WHEN CAN A JOHN DOE WARRANT BE CONSIDERED AS
doctrine where it is shown that such evidence would A GENERAL WARRANT?
have been inevitably gained or discovered even without
as said warrant is issued against fifty (50) “John Does”
the unlawful act. PEOPLE VS ALICANDO
not one of whom the witnesses to the complaint could
ARE CHECK POINTS VIOLATIVE OF THE RIGHT TO or would identify, it is of the nature of a general warrant,
UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE? one of a class of writs long proscribed as unconstitutional
and once anathematized as “totally subversive of the
NO Routine inspections are not regarded as violative of
liberty of the subject.” Clearly violative of the
an individual's right against unreasonable search. The
constitutional injunction that warrants of arrest should
search which is normally permissible in this instance is
particularly describe the person or persons to be seized,
limited to the following instances: (1) where the officer
the warrant must, as regards its unidentified subjects, be
merely draws aside the curtain of a vacant vehicle which
voided. Pangandaman vs. Casar
is parked on the public fair grounds; (2) simply looks into
a vehicle; (3) flashes a light therein without opening the WHAT IS THE FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE
car's doors; (4) where the occupants are not subjected to DOCTRINE?
a physical or body search; (5) where the inspection of the
The rule is settled that once the primary source (the
vehicles is limited to a visual search or visual
“tree”) is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any
inspection; and (6) where the routine check is conducted
secondary or derivative evidence (the “fruit”) derived
in a fixed area. CABALLES VS CA
from it is also inadmissible. People vs. Sequiño
WHAT IS THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE?

Under the plain view doctrine, objects falling in the "plain

view" of an officer, who has a right to be in the position
to have that view, are subject to seizure and may be
presented as evidence.
It applies when the following requisites concur: (a) the
law enforcement officer in search of the evidence has a
prior justification for an intrusion or is in a position from
which he can view a particular area; (b) the discovery of
the evidence in plain view is inadvertent; and (c) it is
immediately apparent to the officer that the item he
observes may be evidence of a crime, contraband, or
otherwise subject to seizure.
CAN THE RIGHT TO BE SECURE AGAINST
UNREASONABLE SEARCH BE WAIVED?
YES. the right to be secure from unreasonable search
may, like other rights, be waived either expressly or
impliedly. People vs. Montilla
IS A JOHN DOE WARRANT A VOID WARRANT?
The warrant for the apprehension of an unnamed party
is void, "except in those cases where it contains a
descriptio personae such as will enable the officer to
identify the accused." The description must be sufficient
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION VS PRELIMINARY
INQUIRY;
There is a distinction between the preliminary inquiry
which determines probable cause for the issuance of a
warrant of arrest and the preliminary investigation
proper which ascertains whether the offender should be
held for trial or be released—the former is made by the
judge while the latter is the function of the investigating
prosecutor. AAA vs. Carbonell
CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION VS PRELIMINARY
INVESTIGATION
Custodial interrogation is the questioning initiated by law
enforcement officers after a person has been taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action
in any significant way.
A preliminary investigation is an inquiry or a proceeding
to determine whether there is sufficient ground to
engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed, and that the respondent is probably guilty
thereof and should be held for trial.
WHEN CAN A PERSON INVOKE RIGHTS OF AN ACCUSED?
the rights enumerated in the constitutional provision
“exist ONLY in custodial interrogations, or in-custody
interrogation of accused persons.” Ladiana vs. People
WHEN CAN IT BE SAID THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE
GROUND FOR SUSPICION IN A WARRANTLESS ARREST?
The grounds of suspicion are reasonable when, in the
absence of actual belief of the arresting officers, the
suspicion that the person to be arrested is probably
guilty of committing the offense, is based on actual facts,
i.e., supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in
themselves to create the probable cause of guilt of the
person to be arrested. A reasonable suspicion therefore
must be founded on probable cause, coupled with good
faith on the part of the peace officers making the arrest.
Umil vs. Ramos
RIGHT TO CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS WAIVED
The settled rule is that when an accused pleads to the
charge, he is deemed to have waived the right to
preliminary investigation and the right to question any
irregularity that surrounds it. Cruz vs. People
Once an accused escapes from prison or confinement or
jumps bail or flees to a foreign country, he loses his
standing in court and unless he surrenders or submits to
the jurisdiction of the court he is deemed to have waived
any right to seek relief from the court. People vs. Taruc
An accused, by entering his plea, and actively
participating in the trial, is deemed to have waived his
right to preliminary investigation. Villarin vs. People
MEMORIZE: SECTION 12. (1) Any person under
investigation for the commission of an offense shall have
the RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF HIS RIGHT TO REMAIN
SILENT AND TO HAVE COMPETENT AND INDEPENDENT
COUNSEL PREFERABLY OF HIS OWN CHOICE. If the
person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be
provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except
in writing and in the presence of counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or
any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used
against him. Secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of
this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for
violations of this section as well as compensation to and
rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices,
and their families.
WHAT ARE THE MIRANDA RIGHTS?
1. The person must be informed in clear and
unequivocal terms that he has the right to
remain silent.
2. He must be informed that anything he says can
and will be used against him.
3. He must be informed of his right to consult with
a lawyer.
4. He must be informed that if he is indigent a
lawyer will be appointed to represent him.
5. Even if the person consents to answer questions
without the assistance of counsel, the moment
he asks for a lawyer at any point during the
investigation the interrogation must cease until
his attorney is present.
6. If the foregoing protections are not
demonstrated no evidence as a result of the
investigation can be used against him.
MAY ALL THIS RIGHTS BE WAIVED?
NO. Only the right to remain silent and to be assisted by
counsel can be waived, and in case they are waived the
waiver must be in WRITING and in the PRESENCE of
counsel. PEOPLE VS CONTINENTE
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT TO REMAIN
SILENT?
A person under investigation has the right to refuse to
answer any question. More than this, his silence may not
be used against him.
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL?
The right of a person under investigation is to have
competent and independent counsel preferably of his
own choice. The purpose of the right to counsel during
custodial investigation is to preclude the slightest
coercion as would lead the accused to admit something
else.
CAN THIS RIGHTS BE INVOKED BEFORE CUSTODIAL
INVESTIGATION?
NO. The rights exist only during custodial investigation.
WHAT IS CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION?
Custodial investigation refers to any questioning
initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has
been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his
freedom of action in any significant way. This
presupposes that he is suspected of having committed a
crime and that the investigator is trying to elicit
information or a confession from him. PEOPLE v.
RODOLFO OMILIG
Custodial investigation refers to the critical pre-trial
stage when the investigation is no longer a general
inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on
a particular person as a suspect. PEOPLE VS RODRIGUEZ
something less than a confession, and is but an
acknowledgment of some fact or circumstance which in
itself is insufficient to authorize a conviction and which
tends only to establish the ultimate fact of guilt.
WHAT ARE THE TWO KINDS OF INVOLUNTARY
CONFESSION?
There are two kinds of involuntary or coerced
confessions treated in this constitutional provision: (1)
those which are the product of third degree methods
such as torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation,
which are dealt with in paragraph 2 of 12, and (2) those
which are given without the benefit of Miranda
warnings, which are the subject of paragraph 1 of the
same 12.

WHAT IS PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION?

Preliminary Investigation “is an inquiry or a proceeding

to determine whether there is sufficient ground to
engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed, and that the respondent is probably guilty
thereof and should be held for trial. PEOPLE v. RODOLFO
OMILIG
WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ADMISSIBLE
CONFESSION?
SECTION 13. All persons, EXCEPT THOSE CHARGED WITH
OFFENSES PUNISHABLE BY RECLUSION PERPETUA when
evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, BE
BAILABLE by sufficient sureties, or be released on
recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail
shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be
required.

To be admissible, a confession must comply with the DEFINE BAIL

following requirements: it “must be (a) voluntary; b)
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in
made with the assistance of a competent and
custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, to
independent counsel; c) express; and d) in writing.”
guarantee his appearance before any court as required
WHEN DOES CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION BEGIN? under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be
given in the form of corporate surety, property bond,
Custodial investigation commences when a person is
cash deposit, or recognizance. RULE 114 SEC 1
taken into custody and is singled out as a suspect in the
commission of a crime under investigation and the police CAN A PERSON CHARGED WITH A CAPITAL OFFENSE, OR
officers begin to ask questions on the suspect's AN OFFENSE PUNISHABLE BY RECLUSION PERPETUA OR
participation therein and which tend to elicit an LIFE IMPRISONMENT APPLY FOR BAIL?
admission. PEOPLE VS PASUDAG
NO. RULE 114 SEC 7; No person charged with a capital
DIFFERENCE OF ADMISSION AND CONFESSION? offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail
A CONFESSION is an acknowledgment in express terms,
when evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage
by a party in a criminal case, of his guilt of the crime
of the criminal prosecution.
charged, while an admission is a statement by the
accused, direct or implied, of facts pertinent to the issue EXPLAIN DOUBLE JEOPARDY?
and tending, in connection with proof of other facts, to
prove his guilt. In other words, an ADMISSION is
when a person is charged with an offense and the case is
terminated either by acquittal or conviction or in any
other manner without the consent of the accused, the
latter cannot again be charged with the same or identical
offense

REQUISITES OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY;

For a claim of double jeopardy to prosper, the following

requisites must concur: (1) there is a complaint or
information or other formal charge sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction; (2) the same is filed
before a court of competent jurisdiction; (3) there is a
valid arraignment or plea to the charges; and (4) the
accused is convicted or acquitted or the case is otherwise
dismissed or terminated without his express consent.

WHAT IS THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE RIGHT TO BAIL?

An accused is presumed innocent until his guilt is proven

beyond reasonable doubt by final judgment. The right to
bail gives the accused not only an opportunity to obtain
provisional liberty but also the chance to prepare for trial
while continuing his usual work or employment.

The purpose of the right to bail is to relieve the accused

from imprisonment until his conviction and at that time
his appearance at the trial is secured.

WHEN IS THE RIGHT TO BAIL A MATTER OF RIGHT AND

WHEN IS IT A MATTER OF DESCRETION?

It is a matter of right when the offense charged is

punishable by any penalty lower than reclusion
perpetua. To that extent the right is absolute. x x x Upon
the other hand, if the offense charged is punishable by
reclusion perpetua bail becomes a matter of discretion.
It shall be denied if the evidence of guilt is strong. People
vs. Nitcha

WHAT IS A SUMMARY HEARING?

A summary hearing means such brief and speedy method

of receiving and considering the evidence of guilt as is
practicable and consistent with the purpose of hearing
which is merely to determine the weight of evidence for
purposes of bail.