RULE 126

Search and Seizure

Section 1. Search warrant defined. — 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. (1)

Section 2. Court where application for search warrant shall be filed. — An application for search warrant
shall be filed with the following:

a) Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed.

b) For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court within the judicial region where the crime
was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court within the judicial region where
the warrant shall be enforced.

However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the application shall only be made in the court where the
criminal action is pending. (n)

Section 3. Personal property to be seized. — A search warrant may be issued for the search and seizure
of personal property:

(a) Subject of the offense;

(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or

(c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense. (2a)

Section 4. Requisites for issuing search warrant. — A search warrant shall not issue except upon probable
cause in connection with one specific offense 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 things to be seized which may be anywhere in the Philippines. (3a)

Section 5. Examination of complainant; record. — The judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally
examine in the form of searching questions and answers, in writing and under oath, the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce on facts personally known to them and attach to the record their sworn statements,
together with the affidavits submitted. (4a)

Section 6. Issuance and form of search warrant. — If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts upon
which the application is based or that there is probable cause to believe that they exist, he shall issue the warrant,
which must be substantially in the form prescribed by these Rules. (5a)

Section 7. Right to break door or window to effect search. — The officer, if refused admittance to the
place of directed search after giving notice of his purpose and authority, may break open any outer or inner door
or window of a house or any part of a house or anything therein to execute the warrant or liberate himself or any
person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein. (6)

Section 8. Search of house, room, or premise to be made in presence of two witnesses. — No search of
a house, room, or any other premise shall be made except in the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any
member of his family or in the absence of the latter, two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the
same locality. (7a)

Section 9. Time of making search. — The warrant must direct that it be served in the day time, unless the
affidavit asserts that the property is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched, in which case a direction
may be inserted that it be served at any time of the day or night. (8)

Section 10. Validity of search warrant. — A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date.
Thereafter it shall be void. (9a)

Section 11. Receipt for the property seized. — The officer seizing property under the warrant must give a
detailed receipt for the same to the lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure
were made, or in the absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient age
and discretion residing in the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found the seized property.
(10a)
Section 12. Delivery of property and inventory thereof to court; return and proceedings thereon. — (a)
The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who issued the warrant, together with a true
inventory thereof duly verified under oath.

(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain if the return has
been made, and if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant was issued and require him to explain
why no return was made. If the return has been made, the judge shall ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule
has been complained with and shall require that the property seized be delivered to him. The judge shall see to it
that subsection (a) hereof has been complied with.

(c) The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on search
warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return, the result, and other actions of the judge.

A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of court.(11a)

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. (12a)

Section 14. Motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress evidence; where to file. — A motion to
quash a search warrant and/or to suppress evidence obtained thereby may be filed in and acted upon only by
the court where the action has been instituted. If no criminal action has been instituted, the motion may be filed
in and resolved by the court that issued the search warrant. However, if such court failed to resolve the motion
and a criminal case is subsequent filed in another court, the motion shall be resolved by the latter court. (n)
 Rule 126 Search and Seizure

1. Search warrant – 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

à Cannot be issued to look for evidence (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

à Seizing objects to be used as evidence is equivalent to forcing one to be a witness against himself (Uy Khetin
vs. Villareal)

à For a warrant to be valid, it must meet the requirements set by law (Burgos vs. Chief of Staff)

à Tapping conversations is equivalent to a search and seizure (US vs. Katz)

2. General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted unless it is authorized by a search warrant. Evidence
gathered from an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible.

à Warrantless searches are illegal, unreasonable and unconstitutional (Alvarez vs. CFI)

à It is not the police action which is impermissible, but the procedure and unreasonable character by which it is
exercised (Guazon vs. de Villa)

à Court gains jurisdiction over items seized by a valid search warrant and returned to it, and such is not an
unconstitutional deprivation of property (Villanueva vs. Querubin)

à Evidence from an illegal search may be used as evidence, if no objection is raised (Stonehill vs. Diokno)

à Right against unreasonable search and seizure may be waived, but for the waiver to be effective:

The right must exist

Person must be aware of the right
Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such right
à No waiver against unreasonable search and seizure when one compromises the criminal proceedings (Alvarez
vs. CFI)

à There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is present (Roan vs. Gonzales)

3. Requisites of a valid search warrant

a. Issued upon probable cause

à Probable cause – such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably prudent man to believe that a
crime has been committed and the thing to be searched for and seized is in the place to be searched

b. Probable cause is personally determined by the issuing judge

à Hence, signed by him

à By any RTC, to be served anywhere in the country, for an offense which occurred anywhere in the country
(Malaloan vs. CA)

c. Issuing judge personally examined, in the form of searching questions, the appellant and his witness and took
down their written depositions

d. Search warrant particularly describes or identifies the property to be seized

à Property which men may lawfully possess may not be the object of a search warrant (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

à Nature of goods may allow description to be general or not too technical (Alvarez vs. CFI)

e. Particularly describes the place to be searched

f. It shall issue only for one specific offense

à Otherwise, cannot be said to have issued upon probable cause (Asian Surety vs. Herrera)
à Absence of specific offense makes impossible determination of probable cause (Stonehill vs. Diokno)

g. Was not issued for more than 10 days prior to a search made pursuant thereto (search warrant becomes void
after 10 days)

h. Indicates time, if to be served at night

4. When a search warrant may be said to particularly describe the thing to be seized

Description is as specific as circumstances allow

Expresses a conclusion of fact by which the warrant officer may be guided
Things described are limited to those which bear a direct relation to the offense for which the warrant is issued
5. Procedure

a. Complainant files application, attaches affidavits

à Oath requires that the person taking it personally knows the facts of the case (People vs. Sy Juco)

à Affidavits submitted must state that the premises is occupied by the person against whom the warrant is
issued, that the objects to be seized are fruits or means of committing a crime, and that they belong to the same
person, thus, not affecting third persons (People vs. Sy Juco)

à When complainant’s knowledge is hearsay, affidavits of witnesses are necessary (Alvarez vs. CFI)

b. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination of complainant and witnesses under oath to determine
probable cause

à Judge must ask probing questions, not just repeat facts in the affidavit (Roan vs. Gonzales)

c. Judge issues search warrant good for 10 days

d. Peace officer in presence of occupant, members of the family OR 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality

à Search may last for more than a day as long as it is part of the same search for the same purpose and of the
same place (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)

e. Peace officer leaves receipt with occupant at place searched

f. Peace officer files return of search warrant and inventory, and surrenders items seized to receiving court (not
necessarily court which issued the warrant)

à Items seized illegally must remain in custodia legis pending resolution of the case (Roan vs. Gonzales)

6. Remedies from an unlawful search

MTQ the warrant

Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken
Return of property illegally seized
7. When a search may be validly conducted without a warrant

Without consent of person searched

When the search is incident to a lawful arrest
Personal knowledge of the arresting person (Posadas vs. CA)
Limited to:
(1) Immediate time of arrest

(2) Immediate vicinity of the arrest

(3) Weapons and things which may be used as proof of offense charged (Nolasco vs. Pano)

iii. Subject in an offense which is mala prohibita cannot be summarily seized (Roan vs. Gonzales)

iv. May extend beyond arrestee to include premises and surrounding under his immediate control

Border searches (customs, mail and airport)

Vessels and aircrafts for violation of Tariff and Customs Code, EXCEPT dwelling houses
Plain view
Moving vehicle
Hot pursuit
Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-points
Private searches with no state action (People vs. Marti)
Inspection of building and premises for enforcement of fire, sanitary and building regulations
8. Person making the arrest may take from the arrestee

Properties used in the commission of the crime

Fruits or proceeds thereof
Property which may furnish the arrestee with a weapon against the arresting person
Property which may be used as evidence at the trial
9. NOTES:

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, papers, houses 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.

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 3

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.
Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in the
proceeding.
SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Section 1. Search warrant defined. – 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.

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.

WHAT IS THE CONCEPT OF A SEARCH WARRANT?

> It is a criminal process akin to a mode of discovery
> It is a special and peculiar remedy, which is drastic in nature

ARE SEARCH AND SEIZURES PROHIBITED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION?

> No. The constitutional guarantee embodied in Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution is not a blanket
prohibition against all searches and seizures as it operates only against unreasonable searches and seizures

WHEN IS THE SEARCH OR SEIZURE UNREASONABLE?

> A search and seizure is unreasonable if it is made without a warrant, or the warrant was invalidly
issued.
> In all instances, what constitutes reasonable or unreasonable search or seizure is a purely judicial
question determinable from a consideration of the attendant circumstances.

WHAT ARE THE THREE SITUATIONS WHEREIN THERE MUST BE FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE?
1. Probable cause in filing of an information
> Facts and circumstances that would engender a well-grounded belief that a crime has been
committed and the person to be charged is probably guilty thereof
2. Probable cause in the issuance of a search warrant
> Facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable discreet and prudent man to believe that
there has been a crime committed and the things and objects connected to the crime committed are in the place
to be searched
3. Probable cause in the issuance of a warrant of arrest
> Facts and circumstances that would engender a well-grounded belief that a crime has been
committed and the person to be arrested committed it

WHY ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A SEARCH WARRANT MORE STRINGENT
THAN THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A WARRANT OF ARREST?
> The right against unreasonable search and seizure is a core right implicit in the natural right to life, liberty
and property. Even in the absence of a constitution, individuals have a fundamental and natural right against
unreasonable search and seizure under natural law.
> Moreover, the violation of the right to privacy produces a humiliating effect that cannot be rectified
anymore.
> This is why there is no other justification to speak of for a search, except for a warrant.
> On the other hand, in a warrant of arrest, the person to be arrested can always post bail to prevent
the deprivation of liberty.

Sec. 2. Court where application for search warrant shall be filed. – An application for search warrant shall be filed
with the following:

(a) Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed.

(b) For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court within the judicial region where the crime
was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court within the judicial region
where the warrant shall be enforced.

However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the application shall only be made in the court
where the criminal action is pending.
WHERE SHOULD ONE FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT?
> As a general rule, any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed BUT FOR
COMPELLING REASONS stated in the application, any court within the judicial region where the crime
was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court within the judicial region where
the warrant shall be enforced.
> For example, a drug syndicate keeps his drugs in a warehouse in Pasay for the reason that it has
connections in Pasay and can easily get a tip when the police officers will file for a search warrant. To
avoid the drug syndicate from getting a tip of the impending search, the police officers apply for a search
warrant in Makati stating the compelling reason.

> However, if the criminal action has already been filed, the application shall only be made in the
court where the criminal action is pending.

Sec. 3. Personal property to be seized. – A search warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of personal
property:

(a) Subject of the offense;

(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or

(c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense.

WHAT MAY BE THE SUBJECT OF A SEARCH WARRANT?

1. Subject of the offense;
2. Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or
3. Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense.

IS IT NECESSARY THAT THE PERSON NAMED IN THE SEARCH WARRANT BE THE OWNER OF THE
THINGS TO BE SEIZED?
> No, ownership is of no consequence.
> What is relevant is that the property is connected to an offense.

Sec. 4. Requisites for issuing search warrant. – A search warrant shall not issue except upon probable
cause in connection with one specific offense to be determined personally by the judge after examination
under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witness he may produce, and particularly describing the
place to be searched and the things to be seized which may be anywhere in the Philippines.

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF A VALID SEARCH WARRANT?

1. There must be probable cause—facts and circumstances that would engender a well-founded belief in a
reasonable prudent and discreet man that a crime has been committed and the things and objects to be seized
can be found in the place to be searched
2. Which must be determined by the judge personally through searching and probing questions—
questions not merely answerable by yes or no but could be answered by the applicant and the witnesses on
facts personally known to them
3. (Upon whom?) The complainant and the witnesses he may produce are personally examined by the
judge, in writing and under oath and affirmation
4. (Based on what?) The applicant and the witnesses testify on facts personally known to them
5. The probable cause must be in connection with the specific offense
6. The warrant specified describes the person and place to be searched and the things to be seized
7. The sworn statement together with the affidavits of the witnesses must be attached to the record

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE FOR THE PARTICULARITY OF DESCRIPTION OF THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED AND
THE THINGS TO BE SEIZED?
> The evident purpose and intent of this requirement is to limit the things to be seized to those, and only those,
particularly described in the search warrant—to leave officers of the law with no discretion regarding what
articles they should seize, to the end that unreasonable searches and seizures may not be committed, that
abuses may not be committed.

Sec. 5. Examination of complainant; record. – The judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally
examine in the form of searching questions and answers, in writing and under oath, the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce on facts personally known to them and attach to the record their sworn
statements, together with the affidavits submitted.
WHEN IS THE AFFIDAVIT OR TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESS SAID TO BE BASED ON PERSONAL
KNOWLEDGE?
> The test is whether perjury could be charged against the witness

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF THE PERSONAL EXAMINATION THAT THE JUDGE MUST CONDUCT
BEFORE ISSUING THE SEARCH WARRANT?
1. The judge must examine the witness personally
2. The examination must be under oath
3. The examination must be reduced into writing in the form of searching questions and answers

Sec. 6. Issuance and form of search warrant. – If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts upon
which the application is based or that there is probable cause to believe that they exist, he shall issue the
warrant, which must be substantially in the form prescribed by these Rules.

WHAT IS A SCATTER SHOT WARRANT?

> It is a warrant of arrest that is issued for more than one offense
> It is void for the law requires that a warrant of arrest should only be issued in connection with one specific
offense

A WARRANT WAS ISSUED FOR THE SEIZURE OF DRUGS CONNECTED WITH THE VIOLATION OF THE
DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT. IS THE WARRANT VALID?
> The warrant is valid
> Although there are many ways of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act, it is not a scatter shot warrant since
it is in connection with only one penal law

POLICE OFFICERS APPLIED FOR A WARRANT TO SEARCH DOOR #1 OF AN APARTMENT COMPLEX. THE
COURT ISSUED THE WARRANT. WHEN THEY WENT TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, THEY REALIZED THAT
WHAT THEY THOUGHT WAS DOOR #1 WAS ACTUALLY DOOR #7. CAN THEY SEARCH DOOR #7?
> No, what is controlling is what is stated in the warrant, and not what the peace officers had in mind,
even if they were the ones who gave it the description to the court.
> This is to prevent abuses in the service of search warrants

CAN THE POLICE OFFICER SEIZE ANYTHING THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE WARRANT?
> No, anything not included in the warrant cannot be seized EXCEPT if its mala prohibita, in which case, the
seizure is justified under the plain view doctrine.
> Even if the object was related to the crime, but it is not mentioned in the warrant nor is it mala prohibita, it
still cannot be seized

POLICE OFFICERS WENT TO THE HOUSE TO EXECUTE A SEARCH WARRANT. THEY FOUND A PISTOL
ON THE TABLE, BUT THE PISTOL WASN’T INCLUDED IN THE SEARCH WARRANT. CAN THEY SEIZE
THE PISTOL?
> No, it is not mala prohibita and they have no proof that it is unlicensed.

WHAT SHOULD THE POLICE OFFICER OR COURT TO DO THINGS SEIZED ILLEGALLY?

> Anything seized illegally must be returned to the owner unless it is mala prohibita. In such a case, it should
be kept in custodia legis.

Sec. 7. Right to break door or window to effect search. – The officer, if refused admittance to the place of
directed search after giving notice of his purpose and authority, may break open any outer or inner door
or window of a house or any part of a house or anything therein to execute the warrant to liberate himself or any
person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein.

Sec. 8. Search of house, room, or premises to be made in presence of two witnesses. – No search of a house,
room, or any other premises shall be made except in the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any
member of his family or in the absence of the latter, two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the
same locality.
NOTE: The two witness rule only applies in the absence of the lawful occupants of the premises searched

PEACE OFFICERS RAIDED A HOUSE, WHICH WAS SUSPECTED TO BE A FACTORY FOR ILLEGAL DRUGS.
DURING THE RAID, 8 CHINESEMEN WERE FOUND INSIDE WHO COULDN’T SPEAK ENGLISH OR
FILIPINO. THE CHINESE WERE LOCKED INSIDE A ROOM AND TWO WITNESSES WHO WERE NOT
OCCUPANTS WERE USED WHILE SEARCHING THE HOUSE AND SEIZING THE PROHIBITED
DRUGS. VALID?
> No.
> The two-witness rule can only apply when there is absence of the lawful occupants of the premises searched.
> In this case, they locked the occupants in a room while doing the search and seizure and used 2 witnesses
who weren’t the occupants of the premises.

Sec. 9. Time of making search. – The warrant must direct that it be served in the day time, unless the affidavit
asserts that the property is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched, in which case a direction may
be inserted that it be served at any time of the day or night.

WHEN SHOULD THE SEARCH WARRANT BE EXECUTED?

> If possible, it should be executed during the daytime
> But in certain cases, such as when the things seized are mobile or are in the person of the accused, it can
be served during nighttime

Sec. 10. Validity of search warrant. – A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date.
Thereafter, it shall be void.

FOR HOW LONG IS THE SEARCH WARRANT VALID?

> It is valid for 10 days, after which the police officer should make a return to the judge who issued it
> If the police officer doesn’t make a return, the judge should summon him and require him to explain
why no return was made
> If the return was made, the judge should determine if the peace officer issued the receipt to the occupant
of the premises from which the things were taken.
> The judge shall also order the delivery to the court of the things seized.

IF THE WARRANT WAS EXECUTED EVEN BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE 10-DAY PERIOD, CAN THE
PEACE OFFICER USE THE WARRANT AGAIN BEFORE IT EXPIRES?
> No, of the purpose for which it was issued has already been carried out, the warrant cannot be used
anymore.
> The exception is if the search wasn’t finished within 1 day, the warrant can still be used the next
day, provided it is still within the 10-day period

Sec. 11. Receipt for the property seized. – The officer seizing the property under the warrant must give
a detailed receipt for the same to the lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure
were made, or in the absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient
age and discretion residing in the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found the seized
property.

WHAT IS THE DUTY OF THE OFFICER WHEN HE SEIZES THE PROPERTY?

> The officer seizing the property under the warrant must give a detailed receipt for the same to the
lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence the search and seizure were made, or in the absence of
such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the
same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found the seized property.

CAN THE OWNER OF THE THINGS SEIZED BE MADE TO SIGN THE RECEIPT?
> No since this would be tantamount to a violation of one’s right against self-incrimination. It is
a confession without the assistance of counsel.

IS THERE PERIL TO THE OWNER OF THE THINGS SEIZED IF HE IS MADE TO SIGN THE BOOKING SHEET?
> There is no peril since he would just be made to acknowledge that a case has been filed against him

THE ACCUSED WAS ARRESTED DURING A BUY-BUST OPERATION. PESO BILLS WERE SEIZED FROM
HIM. CAN THE ACCUSED BE MADE TO SIGN THE BILLS?
> Yes, having the bills is not a crime.
> This applies even if the bills involved is marked money.

Sec. 12. Delivery of property and inventory thereof to court; return and proceedings thereon. –

(a) The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who issued the warrant, together
with a true inventory thereof duly verified under oath.

(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain if the return has been
made, and if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant was issued and require him to explain
why no return was made. If the return has been made, the judge shall ascertain whether section 11 of this
Rule has been complied with and shall require that the property seized be delivered to him. The judge
shall see to it that subsection (a) hereof has been complied with.

(c) The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on search
warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return, the result, and other actions of the judge.

A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of court.

WHAT IS THE DUTY OF THE OFFICER AFTER THE PROPERTY SOUGHT UNDER THE SEARCH WARRANT
HAS BEEN SEIZED?
> The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who issued the warrant, together with
a true inventory thereof duly verified under oath.

Sec. 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.

IN WHAT INSTANCES WOULD A SEARCH AND SEIZURE WITHOUT A WARRANT BE ALLOWED?

1. A warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest
a. Arrest must be lawful
b. It must be contemporaneous with the arrest in both time and place
c. Within the vicinity of the person arrested, immediate control, which is the evidence of the offense or
weapon
2. Search of evidence in plain view
3. Search of a moving vehicle
a. Must be cursory
b. Cant make a thorough search; just have to take a look; not to open trunks
4. Consented warrantless searches
a. The right exists
b. Person making the consent knows that he has the right
c. In spite of the knowledge of the right, he voluntarily and intelligently gives his consent
5. Customs searches
6. Stop and frisk
7. Exigent and emergency circumstances
8. Checkpoints
9. Republic Act requiring inspections or body checks in airports
10. Emergency
11. In times of war and within military operations

WHAT ARE THE INSTANCES OF A PERMISSIBLE WARRANTLESS ARREST?

1. Arrest in flagrante delicto
2. Arrest effected in hot pursuit
3. Arrests of escaped prisoners

WHAT IS THE AREA OF COVERAGE OF AN OFFICER’S SEARCH? IS IT LIMITED TO THE PERSON OF THE
ACCUSED?
> Under this rule, the search being an incident to a lawful arrest may extend beyond the person of the
one arrested to include the premises or surrounding under his immediate control
> The search must be made after the arrest. The objective is to make sure that the life of the peace
officer will not be endangered. It must be contemporaneous with the arrest in both time and place.

WHEN IS THE WARRANTLESS SEARCH OF A MOVING VEHICLE ALLOWED?

> It is allowed when it is not practicable to secure a warrant

WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS IN A WARRANTLESS SEARCH INCIDENTAL TO A LAWFUL ARREST?

1. Arrest must be lawful
2. It must be contemporaneous with the arrest in both time and place
3. Within the vicinity of the person arrested, immediate control, which is the evidence of the offense or
weapon

WHO SHOULD GIVE CONSENT TO A WARRANTLESS SEARCH AND WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES?
> Only the person whose right may be violated can give the consent; it is a personal right that cannot
be availed of by third parties. The requisites are:
1. The person has knowledge of his right against the search
2. He freely and intelligently gives his consent in spite of such knowledge

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES FOR THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE TO APPLY?
1. There must have been a prior valid intrusion based on the warrantless arrest in which the police
are legally present in the pursuit of their official duties
2. The evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who had the right to be where they are
3. The evidence must be immediately apparent
4. There was no need for further search

WHAT IS A STOP AND FRISK SITUATION? WHEN IS IT VALID?

> It is a situation wherein there is a limited protective search of outer clothing for weapons
> While probable cause is not required to conduct a stop and frisk, mere suspicion or a hunch will not validate
such a procedure.
> A genuine reason must exist, in light of the police officer’s experience and surrounding conditions, to
warrant the belief that the person has detained the weapons concealed about him.

Sec. 14. Motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress evidence; where to file. – A motion to quash a
search warrant and/or to suppress evidence obtained thereby may be filed in and acted upon only by the
court where the action has been instituted. If no criminal action has been instituted, the motion may be
filed in and resolved by the court that issued search warrant. However, if such court failed to resolve the
motion and a criminal case is subsequently filed in another court, the motion shall be resolved by the latter
court.

A POLICE OFFICER WAS GRANTED TO SEARCH THE HOUSE FOR REBEL OFFICERS. CAN THE
POLICEMAN CONDUCT A WARRANTLESS SEARCH?
> NO, the permission didn’t include the room to room search and anything confiscated will be inadmissible

IF AN OBJECT HAS BEEN SEIZED UPON ORDERS OF THE COURT, MAY A COORDINATE COURT
ISSUE A REPLEVIN ORDER FOR THE RELEASE OF THE OBJECT?
> No, only the court that ordered its confiscation may release the object

IF THE ARRESTED PERSON SIGNS THE RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY SEIZED WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE
OF COUNSEL, IS THE RECEIPT ADMISSIBLE?
> No, because it was done without assistance of counsel

WHAT IS THE MULTI-FACTOR BALANCING TEST?

> It requires officers to weigh the manner and intensity of the interference of the right of the people,
the gravity of the crime committed, and the circumstances attending the incident.

WHERE SHOULD ONE FILE THE NOTION TO QUASH WARRANT OR TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE?
1. In the court where the action has been instituted
2. If no criminal action has been filed, in the court that issued the warrant
3. However, if said court failed to resolve the motion and a criminal case is subsequently filed in another
court, the motion shall be filed in the latter court
A MOTION TO QUASH WAS FILED IN THE COURT WHERE THE CRIMINAL ACTION WAS FILED.
DURING THIS TIME, THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION WAS ONGOING. THE ACCUSED MOVES FOR
THE SUSPENSION OF THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION. VALID AND PROPER?
> No, the preliminary investigation is of different nature from deciding on whether to grant the motion to
quash the warrant
> The result of one will not affect the other. One deals on probable cause on whether there are facts and
circumstances that would engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the accused is
probably guilty thereof. The other deals on whether the things and objects were seized legally or not.

NOTE: The Motion To Quash, filed in the issuing court, or to Suppress Evidence, filed with the court
trying the case, are alternative, not cumulative remedies. If one is filed, the other can no longer be availed of.
The court first taking cognizance of the motion does so to exclusion of the other. The proceedings thereon are
subject to the omnibus motion rule and the rule against forum shopping.

WHAT IS THE TOTAL EXCLUSIONARY RULE?

> Things and objects seized in violation of the right against unreasonable searches and seizures are
fruits of the poisonous tree and are inadmissible as evidence