Você está na página 1de 12

Crimes Against the Fundamental

Laws of the State

3
4

Chapter One
Crimes against the Fundamental laws of
the State:
1
2

Arbitrary detention
Delay in delivery of detained
persons to the proper judicial
authorities
3 Delaying release
4 Expulsion
5 Violation of domicile
6 Search warrants maliciously
obtained and abuse on the service
of those legally obtained
7 Searching domicile without
witnesses
8 Prohibition, interruption and
dissolution of peaceful meetings
9 Interruption of religious worship
10 Offending the religious feelings
They are called crimes against the
fundamental laws of the State
because they violate certain
provisions of the Bill of Rights,
including:
1

Section 1, Article III; no person shall


be deprived of xxx, liberty xxx
without due process of law
Section 6, Article III; 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
secutity, public safety, or public
health, as may be provided by law

Section 2, Article III;


Section 4, Article III; 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
Section 5, Article III

Section One Arbitrary detention and


expulsion
Classes of arbitrary detention:
1
2

Arbitrary detention by detaining a


person without legal ground
Delay in the delivery of detained
persons to the proper judicial
authorities
Delaying release

b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Agents of the law


Judges
Mayors
Barangay Captain
Municipal Councilor

If the offender is a public individual, the


act of detaining another is illegal
detention
Detention it is the actual confinement
of a person in an enclosure, or in any
manner detaining and depriving him of his
liberty. A person is detained when he is
placed in confinement or there is a
restrain on his person
The detention of a person is without
legal ground:
1

Article 124. Arbitrary detention


Elements:
1
2
3

That the offender if a public officer


or employer
He detains a person
That the detention is without legal
grounds

When he has NOT


committed any crime or at
least, there is no reasonable
ground for suspicion that he
has committed a crime
When he is not suffering
from violent insanity or any
other ailment requiring
compulsory confinement on
a hospital

The offender in arbitrary detention is


a public officer. The public officers liable
for arbitrary detention must be vested
with authority to detain or order the
detention of persons accused of a crime,
but when they detain a person they have
no legal grounds thereof

Legal grounds for the detention of


any person

Public Officers:

Arrest without warrant when lawful

a. Policemen

1
2

The commission of a crime


Violent insanity or any other
ailment requiring the compulsory
confinement of the patient in a
hospital

When in his presence, the person


to be arrested has committed, is
actually committing, or is
attempting to commit a offense
When an offense has in fact just
been committed, and he has
probable cause to believe based o
personal knowledge of facts and
circumstances that the person to
be arrested has committed it
When the person to be arrested is
a prisoner who has escaped from a
penal establishment or place where
he is serving final judgment
1 and 2 refer to cases when a
suspect is caught in flagrante
delicto or immediately thereafter,
while 3 refers to escaping prisoner

committed and that the objects sought in


connection with the offense are in the
place sought to be searched

Personal knowledge is required

Under Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the


Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure, an officer arresting a
person who has just committed a
offense must have probable
cause to believe based on
personal knowledge of facts and
circumstances that the person to
be arrested has committed it
Personal knowledge of facts in
arrests without a warrant must be
based upon PROBABLE CAUSE,
which means an actual belief or
reasonable grounds of suspension

Probable cause such facts and


circumstances which could lead a
reasonable discreet and prudent man to
believe that an offense has been

A crime must in fact or actually


have been committed first
That a crime has actually been
committed is an essential
precondition
In arbitrary detention, the legality
of the detetntion does not depend
upon the juridical and much less
the judicial fact of a crime, whixh at
the time of the commission, is not
and ca not definitely be determined
for lack of necessary data and of
jurisdiction, but upon nature of the
deed.
Under Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the RRCP,
the actual commission of a crime
by the person detained is not
necessary to justify detention
No reasonable ground if officer only
wants to know the commission of
the crime

Arbitrary detention through


imprudence

The accused acted without malice,


but he should have verified the
order of release before proceeding
to make the re-arrest

Periods of detention penalized


1
2

If the detention has not exceeded


three days
If the detention has continued
more than three days but not more
than 15 days

If the detention has continued


more than 15 days but not more
than 6 months
If the detention has exceeded 6
months

Rule 112, Section 6. When warrant of


arrest may issue. (a) By the Regional
Trial Court. Within ten (10) days from
the filing of the complaint or information,
the judge shall personally evaluate the
resolution of the prosecutor and its
supporting evidence. He may immediately
dismiss the case if the evidence on record
clearly fails to establish probable cause. If
he finds probable cause, he shall issue a
warrant of arrest, or a commitment order
if the accused has already been arrested
pursuant to a warrant issued by the judge
who conducted the preliminary
investigation or when the complaint or
information was filed pursuant to section 7
of this Rule. In case of doubt on the
existence of probable cause, the judge
may order the prosecutor to present
additional evidence within five (5) days
from notice and the issue must be
resolved by the court within thirty (30)
days from the filing of the complaint of
information.
(b) By the Municipal Trial Court. When
required pursuant to the second
paragraph of section 1 of this Rule, the
preliminary investigation of cases falling
under the original jurisdiction of the
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or
Municipal Circuit Trial Court may be
conducted by either the judge or the

prosecutor. When conducted by the


prosecutor, the procedure for the issuance
of a warrant or arrest by the judge shall be
governed by paragraph (a) of this section.
When the investigation is conducted by
the judge himself, he shall follow the
procedure provided in section 3 of this
Rule. If the findings and recommendations
are affirmed by the provincial or city
prosecutor, or by the Ombudsman or his
deputy, and the corresponding information
is filed, he shall issue a warrant of arrest.
However, without waiting for the
conclusion of the investigation, the judge
may issue a warrant of arrest if he finds
after an examination in writing and under
oath of the complainant and his witnesses
in the form of searching question and
answers, that a probable cause exists and
that there is a necessity of placing the
respondent under immediate custody in
order not to frustrate the ends of justice.
(c) When warrant of arrest not necessary.
A warrant of arrest shall not issue if the
accused is already under detention
pursuant to a warrant issued by the
municipal trial court in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section, or if the
complaint or information was filed
pursuant to section 7 of this Rule or is for
an offense penalized by fine only. The
court shall then proceed in the exercise of
its original jurisdiction. (6a)
Rule 113 Section 5. Arrest without
warrant; when lawful. 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.
In cases falling under paragraph (a) and
(b) above, the person arrested without a
warrant shall be forthwith delivered to the
nearest police station or jail and shall be
proceeded against in accordance with
section 7 of Rule 112. (5a)
Article 125. Delay in the Delivery of
detained persons to the proper
judicial authorities
Elements:
1
2

That the offender is a public officer


or employee
That he has detained a person for
some legal ground

That he fails to deliver such person


to the proper judicial authorities
within
a 12 hours for the crimes or
offenses punishable by light
penalties, or their equivalent
b 18 hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by correctional
penalties, or their equivalent
c 36 hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by afflictive or
capital penalties or their
equivalent

Shall detain any person for some legal


gorund

Under Article 125, the public officer


or employee has detained the
offended party for some legal
ground.
The detention is legal in the
beginning, because the person
detained was arrested under any of
the circumstances when arrest
without warrant is authorized by
law
It becomes ILLEGAL after a certain
period of time, because the
offended party is not delivered to
the proper judicial authority, within
the period specified by 125

Article 125 applies only when the


arrest is made WITHOUT warrant of
arrest. But the arrest must be
lawful
If the arrest is made with warrant,
the person can be detained
indefinitely because there is
already a complaint or information

filed against him wit the court


which issued the order or warrant
of arrest and it is not necessary to
deliver the person thus arrested to
that court
In cases falling under paragraphs a
and b of Sectio 5, Article 113, the
person arrested without a
warrant shall be forthwith
delivered to the nearest police
station or jail, and he shall be
proceeded against in accordance
with 112, section 7 RRC
What constitutes a violation of Article 125?
It is the failure to deliver the
person arrested to te proper
judicial authority within the period
specified therein
Judicial Authorities
Courts of justice or judges of the
said courts vested with judicial
power to order the temporary
detention or confinement of a
person charged with having
committed a public offense, that is
the Supreme Court and such
inferior courts as may be
established by law
NOT Fiscal of the City of Manila or
any other city, because they
CNNOT issue a warrat of arrest or
of commitment for temporary
confinement of a person
surrendered to legalie the
detention of the person arrested
without warrant (SAYO v CHIEF OF
POLICE)

Detained person should be released


when a judge is not available
Waiver of the provisions of Article
125
The perso arrested may ask for
preliminary investigation in
accordance with the Rule, but he
must sign a waiver of the
provisions of Article 125 RPC
Circumstances considered in
determining liability of officer
detaining a person beyond legal
period
1. Means of communication
2. The hour of arrest
3. Other circumstances such
as the time of surrenderand
the material possibility for
the fiscal to make the
investigation and file in time
the necessary information
Failure of the arresting officer to deliver
the person arrested to the judicial
authority within the time specified in
Article 125, does not affect the legality of
the confinement of the petitioner who is
detained because of the warrant
subsequently issued by a competent court
when an information was filed therein
Fiscal, not liable unless he ordered
detention
If no charge is filed by the fiscal in
court within the period specified in
125, the arresting officer must

release the detainee; otherwise, he


will be guilty under 125
Remedy where warrant improperly
issued
Set aside the warrant of arrest and
order the discharge of the accused,
but without enjoining the municipal
judge from conducting a
preliminary examination and
afterwards properly issuing a
warrant of arrest
Rights of the person detained:
1
2

He shall be informed of the cause


of his detention
He shall be allowed, upon his
request, co communicate and
confer at anytime with his attorney
or counsel

Public officer or employee is liable for


preventing the exercise of the right
of attorneys to visit and confer with
persons arrested
Reason for the provisions of Article
125
Article 125 is intended to prevent
any abuse resulting from confining
a person without informing him of
his offense and without permitting
him to go on bail
Detention under RA No. 9372
Time for delivery of detained persons
prescribed in Article 125 does not apply to

suspected terrorists who are detained


under RA No. 9372
A PERSON CHARGED WITH OR
SUSPECTED OF THE CRIME OF
TERRORISM OR THE CRIME OF
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
TERRORISM SHALL BE DELIVERED
TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL
AUTHORITY WITHIN 3 DAYS from
the said charged or suspected
person has been apprehended
A judge must be notified before a
suspected terrorist is detained
Period of detention in the Event of an
Actual or Imminent Terrorist Attack
Suspects may not be detained for
more than 3 days without written
approval of a municipal, city,
provincial or regional office of a
Human Rights Commission or judge
Arrest is made during Saturdays,
Sundays or Holidays, the suspect
may be brought to the residence of
the officials
Penalty for failure to deliver suspect
to the proper judicial authority within
three days
10 years and 1 day 12 years
imprisonment
ARBITRARY
DETENTION 124
The detention is
illegal from the
beginning

ARBITRARY
DETENTION 125
The detention is
legal in the
beginning but the
illegality of the
detention starts

from the expiration


of any of the
periods of time
specified under the
said article
Rule 112, Section 7. When accused
lawfully arrested without warrant. When
a person is lawfully arrested without a
warrant involving an offense which
requires a preliminary investigation, the
complaint or information may be filed by a
prosecutor without need of such
investigation provided an inquest has
been conducted in accordance with
existing rules. In the absence or
unavailability of an inquest prosecutor, the
complaint may be filed by the offended
party or a peace office directly with the
proper court on the basis of the affidavit of
the offended party or arresting officer or
person.
Before the complaint or information is
filed, the person arrested may ask for a
preliminary investigation in accordance
with this Rule, but he must sign a waiver
of the provisions of Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended, in the
presence of his counsel. Notwithstanding
the waiver, he may apply for bail and the
investigation must be terminated within
fifteen (15) days from its inception.
After the filing of the complaint or
information in court without a preliminary
investigation, the accused may, within five
(5) days from the time he learns of its
filing, ask for a preliminary investigation

with the same right to adduce evidence in


his defense as provided in this Rule. (7a;
sec. 2, R.A. No. 7438)
Republic Act No. 7438
27, 1992

April

AN ACT DEFINING CERTAIN RIGHTS OF


PERSON ARRESTED, DETAINED OR
UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION AS
WELL AS THE DUTIES OF THE
ARRESTING, DETAINING AND
INVESTIGATING OFFICERS, AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled::
Section 1. Statement of Policy. It is
the policy of the Senate to value the
dignity of every human being and
guarantee full respect for human rights.
Section 2. Rights of Persons Arrested,
Detained or Under Custodial
Investigation; Duties of Public
Officers.
(a) Any person arrested detained or
under custodial investigation shall
at all times be assisted by counsel.
(b) Any public officer or employee,
or anyone acting under his order or
his place, who arrests, detains or
investigates any person for the
commission of an offense shall
inform the latter, in a language

known to and understood by him,


of his rights to remain silent and to
have competent and independent
counsel, preferably of his own
choice, who shall at all times be
allowed to confer privately with the
person arrested, detained or under
custodial investigation. If such
person cannot afford the services
of his own counsel, he must be
provided with a competent and
independent counsel by the
investigating officer.lawphi1
(c) The custodial investigation
report shall be reduced to writing
by the investigating officer,
provided that before such report is
signed, or thumbmarked if the
person arrested or detained does
not know how to read and write, it
shall be read and adequately
explained to him by his counsel or
by the assisting counsel provided
by the investigating officer in the
language or dialect known to such
arrested or detained person,
otherwise, such investigation
report shall be null and void and of
no effect whatsoever.
(d) Any extrajudicial confession
made by a person arrested,
detained or under custodial
investigation shall be in writing and
signed by such person in the
presence of his counsel or in the
latter's absence, upon a valid
waiver, and in the presence of any
of the parents, elder brothers and

sisters, his spouse, the municipal


mayor, the municipal judge, district
school supervisor, or priest or
minister of the gospel as chosen by
him; otherwise, such extrajudicial
confession shall be inadmissible as
evidence in any proceeding.

As used in this Act, "custodial


investigation" shall include the practice of
issuing an "invitation" to a person who is
investigated in connection with an offense
he is suspected to have committed,
without prejudice to the liability of the
"inviting" officer for any violation of law.

(e) Any waiver by a person arrested


or detained under the provisions of
Article 125 of the Revised Penal
Code, or under custodial
investigation, shall be in writing
and signed by such person in the
presence of his counsel; otherwise
the waiver shall be null and void
and of no effect.

Section 3. Assisting Counsel.


Assisting counsel is any lawyer, except
those directly affected by the case, those
charged with conducting preliminary
investigation or those charged with the
prosecution of crimes.

(f) Any person arrested or detained


or under custodial investigation
shall be allowed visits by or
conferences with any member of
his immediate family, or any
medical doctor or priest or religious
minister chosen by him or by any
member of his immediate family or
by his counsel, or by any national
non-governmental organization
duly accredited by the Commission
on Human Rights of by any
international non-governmental
organization duly accredited by the
Office of the President. The
person's "immediate family" shall
include his or her spouse, fianc or
fiance, parent or child, brother or
sister, grandparent or grandchild,
uncle or aunt, nephew or niece,
and guardian or ward.

The assisting counsel other than the


government lawyers shall be entitled to
the following fees;
(a) The amount of One hundred
fifty pesos (P150.00) if the
suspected person is chargeable
with light felonies;lawphi1alf
(b) The amount of Two hundred fifty
pesos (P250.00) if the suspected
person is chargeable with less
grave or grave felonies;
(c) The amount of Three hundred
fifty pesos (P350.00) if the
suspected person is chargeable
with a capital offense.
The fee for the assisting counsel
shall be paid by the city or
municipality where the custodial
investigation is conducted,
provided that if the municipality of
city cannot pay such fee, the

province comprising such


municipality or city shall pay the
fee: Provided, That the Municipal or
City Treasurer must certify that no
funds are available to pay the fees
of assisting counsel before the
province pays said fees.
In the absence of any lawyer, no custodial
investigation shall be conducted and the
suspected person can only be detained by
the investigating officer in accordance
with the provisions of Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code.
Section 4. Penalty Clause. (a) Any
arresting public officer or employee, or
any investigating officer, who fails to
inform any person arrested, detained or
under custodial investigation of his right to
remain silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own
choice, shall suffer a fine of Six thousand
pesos (P6,000.00) or a penalty of
imprisonment of not less than eight (8)
years but not more than ten (10) years, or
both. The penalty of perpetual absolute
disqualification shall also be imposed upon
the investigating officer who has been
previously convicted of a similar offense.
The same penalties shall be
imposed upon a public officer or
employee, or anyone acting upon
orders of such investigating officer
or in his place, who fails to provide
a competent and independent
counsel to a person arrested,
detained or under custodial
investigation for the commission of

an offense if the latter cannot


afford the services of his own
counsel.
(b) Any person who obstructs,
prevents or prohibits any lawyer,
any member of the immediate
family of a person arrested,
detained or under custodial
investigation, or any medical
doctor or priest or religious
minister chosen by him or by any
member of his immediate family or
by his counsel, from visiting and
conferring privately with him, or
from examining and treating him,
or from ministering to his spiritual
needs, at any hour of the day or, in
urgent cases, of the night shall
suffer the penalty of imprisonment
of not less than four (4) years nor
more than six (6) years, and a fine
of four thousand pesos
(P4,000.00).lawphi1
The provisions of the above Section
notwithstanding, any security officer with
custodial responsibility over any detainee
or prisoner may undertake such
reasonable measures as may be
necessary to secure his safety and prevent
his escape.
Section 5. Repealing Clause. Republic
Act No. No. 857, as amended, is hereby
repealed. Other laws, presidential decrees,
executive orders or rules and regulations,
or parts thereof inconsistent with the
provisions of this Act are repealed or
modified accordingly.

Section 6. Effectivity. This Act shall


take effect fifteen (15) days following its
publication in the Official Gazette or in any
daily newspapers of general circulation in
the Philippines.
Article 126. Delaying release
Three acts punishable under Article
126
1

By delaying he performance of a
judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner
By unduly delaying service of the
notice of such order to said
prisoner
By unduly delaying the proceedings
upon any petition for the liberation
of such person

Elements:
1
2

That the offender is a public officer


or employer
That there is a judicial or executive
order for the release of a prisoner
or detention prisoner, or that there
is a proceeding upon a petition for
the liberation of such person
That the offender without good
reason delays: 1. Service f the
notice of such order to the
prisoner; 2. The performance f such
judicial or executive order for the
release of the prisoner; 3. The
proceedings upon a petition for the
release of such person

Example of delaying cases

For failure to prosecute, because


the witness of the prosecution did
not appear, the case was dismissed
and the justice of the peace gave
an order to relase the accused. The
jailer refused to release the
accused, notwithstanding that
order of release, until after several
days
Wardens and Jailers are the public
officers most likely to violate Article
126
Article 127. Explusion
Two acts punishable under Article 127
1
2

By expelling a person from the


Philippines
By compelling a person to change
his residence

Elements
1
2

That the offender us a public officer


or employer
That he expels any person from the
Philippines, or compels a person to
change his residence
That the offender is not authorized
to do so by law

Not being thereunto authorized by


law
Only the court by a final judgment
can order a person to change his
residence. This is illustrated in
ejectment proceedings,
expropriation proceeding and in the
penalty of distierro

Section Two Violation of domicile


Crimes known as violation of domicile
1

Violation of domicile by entering a


dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof or making search
without previous consent of the
owner
Search warrants maliciously
obtained and abuse in the service o
those legally obtained
Searching domicile without
witnesses

Article 128. Violation of domicile


Acts punishable under Article 128
1
2

By entering any dwelling against


the will of the owner thereof
By searching papers or other
effects found therein without the
previous consent of such owner
By refusing to leave the premises,
after having surreptitiously entered
said dwelling and after having been
required to leave the same

Elements common to 3 acts:


1
2

That the offender is a public officer


or employee
That he is not authorized but
judicial order to enter the dwelling
and/or to make a search therein for
papers or other effects

The offender must be a public officer or


employee

Not being authorized by judicial


order
A public officer or employee is
authorized by judicial order when
he is armed with a search warrant
duly issued by the court. Hence, he
is not being authorized by judicial
order, when the public has no
search warrant
Against the will of the owner
It will be noted that to constitute a
violation of domicile, the entrance
by the public officer or employee
must be against the will of the
owner of the dwelling, which
presupposes opposition or
prohibition by said owner, whether
express or implied
Section 11. Right of officer to break into
building or enclosure. An officer, in
order to make an arrest either by virtue of
a warrant, or without a warrant as
provided in section 5, may break into any
building or enclosure where the person to
be arrested is or is reasonably believed to
be, if he is refused admittance thereto,
after announcing his authority and
purpose.
A peace officer without search warrant
cannot lawfully enter the dwelling against
the will of the owner, even he knew that
someone in the dwelling is having
unlawful possession of opium
Search papers, etc. without previous
consent of such owners

Article 128 is not applicable when a


public officer searched a person
outside his dwelling without search
warrant, because the papers or
other effects mentioned in the said
article must be found in the
dwelling its gonna be, grave
coercion or unjust vexation
Having surreptitiously entered said
dwelling
Violation even if the entrance is
only without the consent of the
owner
What constitutes the crime is the
refusal of the offender to leave the
premises when required to do so
NOT the entrance into the dwelling
Circumstance qualifying the offense
1
2

If the offense is committed at


nighttime
If any papers or effects not
constituting evidence of a crime
are not returned immediately after
the search made by the offender

Article 129. Search warrants


maliciously obtained, and abuse in
the service of those legally obtained
Acts punishable in connection with
search warrants
1
2

By procuring a search warrant


without just cause
By exceeding his authority or by
using unnecessary severity in

executing a search warrant legally


procured
Elements of procuring a search
warrant without just cause
1
2
3

That the offender is a public officer


or employee
That he procures a search warrant
That there is no just cause

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
Search warrant for search and
seizure of the following personal
property
1
2
3

Subject of the offense


Stolen or embezzled and other
proceeds or fruits of the offense
Used or intended to be used as the
means of committing an offense

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 ad the things to be
seized which may be anywhere in
the Philippines

Search of house, room or premise


must be made in presence of two
witnesses
A search warrant shall be valid for
10 days from its date
Examination of Complainant
The judge must, before issuing a
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 any affidavits
submitted
Rule 126, 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.
Rule 126, 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.

Validity of search warrant


Rule 126, Section 10. Validity of search
warrant. A search warrant shall be valid
for ten (10) days from its date. Thereafter
it shall be void.
Rule 126, 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.
Probable cause it is such reasons,
supported by facts and circumstances, as
will warrant a cautious man in belief that
his action, and the means taken in
prosecuting it, are legally just and proper

Facts and circumstances which


would lead a reasonably discreet
and prudent man to believe that an
offense has been committed and
that the object sought in
connection with the offense are in
the place sought to be searched

Search warrant have been procured


without just cause

When it appears on the face of the


affidavits filed in support of the
application therefor, or through
other evidence, that the applicant

had every reason t believe that the


search warrant sought for was
unjustified
The public officers procuring a
search warrant without just cause
may also be held liable for perjury
if they made a willful and
deliberate assertion of falsehood in
the affidavits
Search and seizure without warrant
as an incident to a lawful arrest is
legal. Also search and seizure of
vessels without search warrant is
legal

Test of lack of just cause


The true test is whether the
affidavit filed in support of the
application for search warrant has
been drawn in such a manner that
perjury could be charged thereon
and affiant be held liable for
damages caused
In addition to the liability attaching
to the offender for the commission of
any other offense
The public officers procuring a
search warrant without just cause
may also be held liable for perjury
if theu made a willful and
deliberate assertion of falsehood in
the affidavits filed in support of the
application for search warrant
They cannot form a complex crime
because they are separate and
distinct crimes, to be punished with
their respective penalties

Evidence obtained in violation of Section 2


and 3 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution
is not admissible for any purpose in any
proceeding
Search and seizure without warrant
as an incident to a lawful arrest is
legal
Section 12, Rule 126, of the RRC
provides that a person lawfully
arrested may be searched for
dangerous weapons or anything
which may be used as proof of the
commission of an offense, without
a search warrant
Peace officer may enter the house of
an offender who committed an
offense in his presence
Search and seizure of vessels without a
search warrant of vessels and aircraft for
violations of the customs laws have been
the traditional exception to the
constitutional requirement of search
warrant
Elements exceeding authority or
using unnecessary severity in
executing a search warrant legally
procured
1
2
3

That the offender is a public officer


or employee
That he has legally procured a
search warrant
That he exceeds his authority or
uses unnecessary severity in
executing the same

Example of exceeding authority in


executing search warrant
If the public officer, in executing a
search warrant for opium, seized
books, personal letter, and other
property having a remote
connection with opium
Example of using unnecessary
severity in executing search warrant
If in searching a house, the public
officer destroys furniture therein
without any justification at all, he is
guilty under 129, as having used
unnecessary severity in executing
the search warrant
Article 130. Searching domicile
without witnesses
Elements
1
2
3

That the offender is a public officer


or employee
That he is armed with search
warrant legally procured
That he searches the domicile,
papers or other belongings o any
person
That the owner, or ay member f his
family, or two witnesses residing in
the same locality are not present

In cases where a search is proper


This clause means that the public
officer at the time of the search is
armed with a search warrant
legally procured

I violation under Article 128, the


public officer has no authority to
make a search; in searching
domicile without witnesses, the
public officer has a search warrant

Search go to over or look through for


the purpose of finding something to
examine. The thing searched by the
offender is the domicile, the papers or the
other belongings
Search without warrant under the tariff
and customs code does not include a
dwelling house
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.
Section Three Prohibition,
interruption, and dissolution of
peaceful meetings

Elements common to the three acts


ounishable
1
2

By prohibiting or by interrupting,
without legal ground, the holding of

That the offender is a public officer


or employer
That he performs any of the acts
metioned above
A private individual cannot commit
this crime

To commit the crime defined in the


first paragraph of the Article 131, the
public officer must act without legal
ground
1
2

Article 131. Prohibition,


interruption, and dissolution of
peaceful meetings
Acts punished in connection with
peaceful meetings, associations and
petitions

peaceful meeting, or by dissolving


the same
By hindering any person from
joining any lawful association or
from attending any of its meetings
By prohibiting or hindering any
person from addressing, either
alone or altogether with others,
any petition to the authorities for
the correction if abuses or redress
of grievances

The meeting must be


peaceful
There is no legal ground for
prohibiting, or interrupting
or dissolving that meeting

Right to peaceful meeting is not


absolute, it may be regulated in
order that it may not be injurious
to the equal enjoyment of others
having equal rights, nor injurious to
the right of the community or
society, and this power may be

exercised under the police power of


the state
There is no legal ground to prohibit
the holding of a meeting when the
danger apprehended is not
imminent and the evil to be
prevented is not a serious one
When the meeting to be held is not
peaceful, there is legal ground for
prohibiting it
There is no legal ground to prohibit
the holding of a meeting when the
danger apprehended is not
imminent and the evil to be
prevented is not a serious one
The offender must be a stranger,
not a participant in the peaceful
meeting
Interrupting and dissolving the
meeting of municipal council by a
public officer is a crime against
legislative body, not published
under Article 131
Stopping the speaker who was
attacking certain churches in public
meeting is a violation of Article 131

Section Four Crimes against


religious worship
Crimes against religious worship
1

Interruption of religious worship

Offending the religious feelings


Article 132. Interruption

Elements:
1
2

That the offender is a public officer


or employee
That religious ceremonies or
manifestations of any religion are
about to take place or are going on
That the offender prevents or
disturns the same

Circumstances qualifying the offense

If the crime is committed with


violence or threats

Reading of bible and then attacking


certain churches in a public plaza is not a
ceremony or manifestation of a religion,
but only a meeting of a religious sect
Article 133. Offending the religious
feelings
Elements:
1

That the acts complained of were


performed (1) in a place devoted to
religious worship, or (2) during the
celebration of any religious
ceremony

That the acts must be notoriously


offensive to the feelings of the
faithful

In a place devoted to religious


worship
It is not necessary that there is a
religious ceremony going on when
the offender performs acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings
of the faithful
The phrase place devoted to
religious worship, which indicates
that the religious ceremony need
not be celebrated in a place of
worship
Religious ceremonies those religious
acts performed outside of a church, such
as possessions and special prayers for
burying dead persons
Acts notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful
The acts must be directed against
religious practice or dogma or ritual
for the purpose of ridicule, as
mocking or scoffing at or
attempting to damage an object of
religious veneration