Posted on Saturday, December 26, 2009. Filed under: PHILIPPINE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE | Tags: , , |

Section 13, Rule 126 of the Rules of Court and some cases decided by the Supreme Court provide the instances when search is lawful without search warrant:

1. In times of war within the area of military operation.

(People v. de Gracia, 233 SCRA 716, Guanzon v. de Villa, 181 SCRA 623)

2. As an incident of a lawful arrest.

Section 13, Rule 126 of the Rules of Court states that “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”.

Requisites:  a) arrest must be lawful; b) search and seizure must be contemporaneous with arrest; c) search must be within permissible area (People v. Estella, G.R. Nos. 138539 – 40, January 21, 2003)

3. When there are prohibited articles open to the eye and hand of an officer (Plain View Doctrine).

The “plain view doctrine” is usually applied where the police officer is not searching for evidence against the accused, but nonetheless inadvertently comes upon an incriminationatory object (People v. Musa, 217 SCRA 597).

Requisites: a) a prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless arrest in which the police are legally present in the pursuit of their official duties; 2) the evidence was accidentally discovered by the police who have the right to be where they are; c) the evidence must be immediately visible; and d) “plain view” justified the seizure of the evidence without any further search (People v. Sarap, G.R. No. 132165, March 26, 2003).

4. When there is consent which is voluntary (consented search)

Requisites: a) there is a right; b) there must be knowledge of the existence of such right; and c) there must be intention to waive (De Gracia v. Locsin, 65 Phil 689).

5. When it is incident to a lawful inspection.

Example of this kind of search is the searches of passengers at airports, ports or bus terminals. Republic Act 6235 provides that luggage and baggage of airline passengers shall be subject to search

6. Under the Tariff and Customs Code for purposes of enforcing the customs and tariff laws;

The purpose is to prevent violations of smuggling or immigration laws.

7. Searches and seizures of vessels and aircraft; this extends to the warrantless search of motor vehicle for contraband.

Examples of this is the seizure without warrant of a fishing vessel found to be violating fishery laws and the “stop and search” without a warrant at military or police checkpoints which are legal. Warrantless search and seizure in these instances are justified on the ground that it is not practicable to secure a warrant because the vehicles, vessels, or aircrafts can be moved quickly out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant may be sought.

8. When there is a valid reason to “stop – and – frisk”.

“Stop – and – frisk is defined as the particular designation of the right of a police officer to stop a citizen on the street, interrogate him and pat him for weapons whenever he observes unusual conduct which leads him to conclude that criminal activity may be afoot (Terry v. Ohio).

Requisites:  a) that there is a person who manifests unusual and suspicious conduct; b) that the police officer should properly introduce himself and make initial inquiries; c) that the police officer approached and restrained the person in order to check the latter’s outer clothing for possibly concealed weapon; and d) that the apprehending officer must have a genuine reason to warrant the belief that the person to be held has weapon or contraband concealed about him People v. Sy Chua, G.R. Nos. 136066 – 67, February 4, 2003)



Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


RSS Feed for The Round Table Comments RSS Feed

What are the lawfull procedure to be observed when a police officer 0r a officer of military/ para military forces conducts search and seizure without warrant in certain places under his jurisdiction. I.E. numbers and category of witnesses, frisking of the officer and men conducting search by the house owner before conducting house search if any.

Hi sir thank you for your comment.

I will be answering your query based on Philippine Laws.

In the Philippines, a police officer who conducts search and seizure must be armed with a valid search warrant. This is based on Rule 113 of the Rules of Court. In addition, he is required to bring at least two witnesses during the conduct of the search (two – witness). Frisking is allowed but the police officer is only allowed to seize on matters which could be seen and touched by him (plain view doctrine).

Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: