Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Constitutional Law 2 Outline
Constitutional Law 2 Outline
Test for Valid Exercise of Police Power: Requisites for a Valid Search Warrant:
1. That the interest of the public 1. It must be based upon probable
generally as distinguished from those cause;
of a particular class requires such 2. The probable cause must be
interference. determined personally by the judge;
2. That the means are reasonably 3. The determination must be made
necessary for the accomplishment of after examination under oath or
the purpose and not unduly affirmation of the complainant and
oppressive upon individuals. the witnesses he may produce; and
4. It must particularly describe the place
B. Equal Protection to be searched and the persons or
things to be searched.
Equal Protection pertains to the
requirement that laws must treat Probable Cause:
all persons or things similarly Probable cause are such facts and
situated alike, bot as to similarities circumstances which would lead a
conferred and liabilities imposed. reasonably discreet and prudent man
Two (2) Ways of Violating: to believe that an offense has been
1. Classifying without basis; and committed and that the objects
2. Failure to classify when sought in connection with the offense
distinction exists. are in the place sought to be
searched.
When is Classification Permissible?
Two (2) ways of justifying: A Search Warrant must specifically
1. When the Constitution allows it; or describe:
2. When it passes the four (4) tests for 1. The place to be searched
a valid classification 2. The objects to be seized; and
3. Issue only for one specific offense.
Four (4) Tests for Valid Classification:
1. It must rest on a substantial distinction; Rules on description of place
2. It must be germane to the purpose of illustrated:
the law; 1. If the place is under the control of
3. It must not be limited to existing one person, a general description
conditions only; may be sufficient;
4. It must apply equally to members of the 2. If the place is a compound occupied
same class. by various persons, the warrant must
specifically indicate the unit to be
Section 2: The right of the people to be searched;
secure in their persons, houses, papers and 3. The police can only search the place
effects against unreasonable searches and described in the warrant, not an
seizures of whatever nature and for any adjoining one; and
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search 4. Once the place is specifically
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue described, there is no need to name
except upon probable cause to be the occupant or owner.
determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the Rules on description of object:
complainant and the witnesses he may 1. Objects need not be described in
produce, and particularly describing the precise details;
place to be searched and the persons or 2. Minor discrepancies in between the
things to be seized. objects described in the warrant from
3|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
It is narrower in the sense that it Prisons; letter was turned over the
covers only oral communication (it prosecutor. Lawyer of X objected to the
is about oral communications only not presentation of the letter and moved for
written or letters; Text messages are not its return on the ground that it violates
covered with this, Calls definitely
included.)
the right of X against unlawful search
Cases: and seizure. Decide.
Alejano A: Yes, the letter may be opened and
Q: Can letter of detainees or convicts read by the warden because it was not
be opened and read? And is Sec. 3 addressed to nor was it from his lawyer
aailable to them? Exception? (Only exception to the general rule is
A: Yes, as a general rule, all letters can the lawyer-client privilege)
be opened. People in jail do not enjoy
privacy to communications, except Q: A file an annulment case against her
letters written between clients and husband based on psychological
lawyers because it has lawyer-client incapacity of the latter. While the case
privilege. was pending, she broke open the
drawer of her husbands office and took
Ople away the pictures, letters and cards
Q: Does the Constitution protect the sent to her husband from his paramour.
right to privacy? When ma it be Her husband objected to the admission
curtailed? into evidence of the documents on the
A: The Constitution only provided the ground of illegal search and seizure.
privacy of communication, which is very Are they admissible?
limited. However, it is a constitutional A: No, because there was no court
right even if not specifically provided or order or a law authorizing the seizure of
listed in the constitution as the the documents.
provision of bill of rights is really Note: Zulueta Cases; note that you
intended to protect persons privacy; cannot invoke Bill of Rights against a
such as due process, against private person.
unreasonable seizures, against self- 1. By entering into a contract of
incrimination. marriage, one does not waive his
right to the privacy with respect to
his spouse;
Bar Question (1998 No. 7)
2. This doctrine applied only if the suit
Q: Police suspecting Juan was using
is between spouse in view of the
the mail for propaganda purposes,
fact that bill of rights can only be
Chief of Police of Lanao ordered the
invoked only against the state; and
Postmaster to intercept and open all
3. Section 3 is still covered by
mail addressed to and coming from
Exclusionary Rule.
Juan in the interest of national security?
Was the order valid?
R.A. 9372 (Please take note that the right
A: No, because the order violates the
to privacy to communications may be
privacy of communication and
limited by law)
correspondence, it can be had only
through court order or a law passed by
1. Anti-wiretapping Law
congress.
2. Anti- terrorism Law
Bar Question (1989 No. 8)
Section 7: Surveillance of Suspects and
Q: X was serving sentence at
Interception and Recording of
Muntinglupa for the crime of theft when
Communications. The provisions under
he stabbed dead on of his guards. X
R.A. 4200 (Anti-Wire Tapping Law) to the
was charged with murder. During trial,
contrary notwithstanding, a police or law
prosecution introduced a letter written
enforcement official and the members of his
by C in prison to his wife tending to
team may, upon a written order of the
establish that the crime of murder was
Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and
the result of premeditation. It was
record, with the use of any mode, for, kind
opened and read by warden pursuant to
or type of electronic or other surveillance
the rules of discipline of Bureau of
equipment or intercepting and tracking
6|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
Section 7: The right of the people to Section 8: The right of the people,
information on matters of public concern including those employed in the public and
shall be recognized. Access to official acts,, private sectors, to form unions, associations
transactions, or decisions, as well as to or societies for purposes not contrary to law
government research data used as basis for shall not be abridged.
policy development, shall be afforded the
citizen, subject to such limitations as may Right to Associations guarantees:
be provided by law. 1. The Right to Join any association;
and
Elements of Section 7: 2. The Right to Refuse to Join.
a. Right to Information; and Exception:
b. Access to Official Records o Close-shop Agreement
Exception to the Exception:
Term Matters of Public Concern refers o Freedom of Religion
to those which the public may want
to know, because it directly affects CASE: Union A has a close shop
their lives or because they arouse agreement with company X. B a new
the interest of a citizen. employee refuses to join on the ground that
his religion prohibits him from doing so.
CASE: Kabataan at Matatandang Can B be forced to join the union?
Makabansa (KMM) wrote the Department of
Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Department Decision: No, because freedom of religion
of National Defense (DND) demanding is superior to a close shop agreement.
disclosure of the details of the negotiations,
as well as copies of the minutes of the
meetings. The DFA and the DND refused,
contending that premature disclosure of the
offers and counter-offers between the
parties could jeopardize on-going
negotiations with another country. KMM
filed suit to compel disclosure of the
negotiation details, and be granted access
to the records of the meetings, invoking the
constitutional right of the people to
information on matters of public concern.
Decision: They cannot have access for it is
still on-going.
10 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
o 12% in Republic v. CA and Reyes Section 10: No law impairing the obligation
v. NHA; and of contracts shall be enacted.
o 6% in Libunao Case, apparently if
judgment is satisfied on time. A law impairs the obligations of contracts
when it changes the terms of the contract:
5. Can the owner recover the property if
expropriator fails to pay just 1. In time or mode of performance;
compensation after an unreasonable 2. Imposes new conditions;
lapse of time? Republic v. Lim 3. Dispenses with those expressed;
and
When can expropriator enter the 4. Authorizes for its satisfaction
property? something different.
not objecting to the grant of bail, is the trial that he has been duly notified and
judge correct? his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
A: No, the trial judge should have held a TRIAL RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED:
hearing to ascertain the quality of the
evidence of guilt that the prosecution had 1. Right to Due Process
against X.
2. Presumption of Innocence
When bail is not allowed? 3. To be Heard
1. After final judgement by any court
2. Before conviction for an offense 4. To Counsel
punishable by death or reclusion 5. To be Informed
perpetua.
3. After conviction for a crime 6. To Speedy Trial
punishable by reclusion perpetua or 7. To Impartial Trial
death while the case is on appeal.
4. After conviction for an offense with 8. To Public Trial
the penalty exceeding six years but 9. To Meet Witnesses
not more than 20 years.
a. Accused is a recidivist, quasi- 10. To Compulsory Process
recidivist, habitual delinquent or
has committed a crime
aggravated by reiteracion. Right to Due Process
b. Accused is found to have
previously escaped from legal Due Process here is procedural, not
confinement.
substantive.
c. Accused committed the offense
while on probation, parole or
conditional pardon; Elements:
d. Circumstances of accused o his 1. A court or tribunal cloth with judicial
case indicate the probability of power to hear and decide the case;
flight. (subjective to judge) 2. Jurisdiction lawfully acquired over
e. There is undue risk that during the person of the accused and over
the pendency of the appeal,
accused may commit another the offense;
crime. 3. Accused was given an opportunity to
be heard; and
4. Judgement was rendered upon
lawful hearing.
Section 14: Presumption of Innocence
(1) No person shall be held to answer
Reversed presumption is allowed in:
for a criminal offense without due
process of law. Malversation
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the Anti-Fencing
accused shall be presumed innocent Rules of Evidence
until the contrary is proved, and shall Illegal Fishing
enjoy the right to be head by himself
Intellectual Property Law
and counsel, to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation Plunder
against him, to have a speedy, Reasons:
impartial, and public trial, to meet the 1. It is only Prima Facie
witnesses face to face, and t have 2. There is a logical connection
compulsory process to secure the between the fact proved and the fact
attendance of witnesses and the
presumed
production of evidence in his behalf.
However, after arraignment, trial may
proceed notwithstanding the To be Heard
absence of the accused provided
14 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
place without money and any means The writ shall cover extra-legal killings
amounts to deprivation of liberty. It is and enforced disappearances or threats
then ruled that unless they bring the thereof.
person back to Manila, the petition
shall not become moot and academic. Distinction of Writ of Habeas Corpus and
Case: (Aquino vs. Esperon) Writ of Amparo
o Military Officer was detained and was Writ of Amparo is a remedy against
held incommunicado, his wife and life, liberty and security while the
relatives were not allowed to visit him. latter is limited to liberty.
o Wife filed a petition for the issuance of It applied to not only to actual
Writ of Habeas Corpus on the ground violation but also threatened
of conditions of her husbands violations while the latter is only for
confinement. actual deprivation liberty or actual
o HELD: Conditions of confinement is restraint of liberty
not a ground for petition for the
issuance of writ of habeas corpus.
o TAKE NOTE: Purpose of issuance of
writ is to obtain immediate release.
Case: (Ampatuan vs. Macaraig)
o Ampatuan was arrested in Manila for
the murder of COMELEC officials.
o He was placed under restrictive
custody wherein he was placed under
restrictive custody; he was not allowed
to go out within the specified area.
o He filed for P.I.W.H.C
o HELD: Restrictive custody is only a
Nominal Restraint and not actual.
Case: (Ilagan)
o Persons were arrested and detained
by the military without any charge.
o The court order for their release.
o After receiving order, they filed for
MFR.
o Because MFR disposition was
pending, the military file a case
against person for Rebellion.
o HELD: Once a case is already filed
against a person, the petition has
become moot and academic. Their
release may not now be in view of the
case filed. Dangerous Doctrine will
now apply and detention would be
legal.
Case: (Aberca)
o HELD: Once PWHC is suspended,
only the privilege or right of getting
immediate release is suspended. Civil
case of claim for damages is not
suspended.
WRIT OF AMPARO
Is a remedy available to any person
whose right to life, liberty and security is
violated or threatened with dilation by an
unlawful act or omission of a public
official or employee, or of a private
individual or entity.