SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Illegality of search and seizure does
1. Source – Fourth Amendment, U.S.
Federal Constitution
2. Scope of protection – natural and
juridical persons; citizens and non-citizens
3. Reasonableness: touchstone of the
validity of search and seizure
CASE: SJS v. Dangerous Drugs Board, G.R.
No. 157870, November 3, 2008
4. Meaning of “search”
CASES:
Katz v. U.S., 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
Pollo v. Constantino-David, G.R. No.
181881, October 18, 2011
5. Search warrants
a. Requisites
i. existence of probable cause
CASES:
Microsoft Corp. v. Maxicorp, Inc.,
G.R. No. 140946, September 13,
2004
Castro v. Pabalan, G.R. No. L-
28642, April 30, 1976
Asian Surety v. Herrera, G.R. No. L-
25232, December 20, 1973
ii. probable cause determined
personally by the judge
CASE: Salazar v. Achacoso, G.R.
No. 81510, March 14, 1990
iii. examination under oath of the
applicant and his witnesses
CASES:
People v. Tee, G. R. Nos. 140546-
47, January 20, 2003
Mata v. Bayona, G.R. No. L- 50720
March 26, 1984
Nolasco v. Paño, G.R. No. L-69803,
October 8, 1985 (Read also the
dissents of JJ. Cuevas &
Teehankee)
Roan v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 71410,
November 25, 1986
Burgos vs. Chief of Staff, G.R. No.
L-64261, December 26, 1984
Alvarez vs. CFI, G.R. No. L-45358,
January 29, 1937
20th Century Fox Film v. CA, G.R.
Nos. 76649-51, August 19, 1988
People v. Marcos, G.R. No. L-31757,
October 29, 1982
iv. particularity of description
CASES:
People vs. Tuan, G.R. No. 176066,
August 11, 2010
Stonehill v. Diokno, G.R. No. L-
19550, June 19, 1967
Columbia Pictures vs. Flores, G.R.
No. 78631, June 29, 1993
v. issued in connection with one
specific offense only
CASE: Prudente v. Dayrit, G.R. No.
82870 December 14, 1989
b. Partially defective SWs: legal effect
CASE: People v. Salanguit, G.R. No.
133254-55, April 19, 2001
c.
not ipso jure result in return of seized
items
CASES:
Alih v. Castro, G.R. No. L-69401, June
23, 1987
Uy Kheytin v. Villareal, G.R. No. 16009,
September 21, 1920
6. Warrants of Arrest
a. Requisites
i. existence of probable cause
CASES:
Webb v. De Leon, G.R. No. 121234,
August 23, 1995
Allado v. Diokno, G.R. No. 113630,
May 5, 1994
ii. probable cause determined
personally by the judge
CASES:
Ponsica v. Ignalaga, G.R. No. 72301,
July 31, 1987
Morano v. Vivo, G.R. No. L-22196,
June 30, 1967
Harvey v. Santiago, G.R. No. 82544,
June 28, 1988
Ho v. People, G.R. No. 106632,
October 9, 1997
Roberts v. CA, G.R. No. 113930,
March 5, 1996 (Read also the dissent
of J. Puno)
iii. particularity of description of the
person to be arrested
b. Examination of complainant & witness
not required for WOA
CASE: Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163,
June 5, 1990
7. Warrantless search and seizure
a. Search incident to a lawful arrest
CASES:
Malacat v. CA, G.R. No. 123595,
December 12, 1997
People v. Chua, G.R. No. 128222, June
17, 1999
People vs. Cuizon, G.R. No. 109287,
April 18, 1996
People v. Encinada, G.R. No. 116720,
October 2, 1997
Espano v. CA, G.R. No. 120431, April 1,
1998
People v. Claudio, G.R. No. 72564, April
15, 1988
People vs. Aminnudin, G.R. No. 74869
July 6, 1988
People v. Maspil, G.R. No. 85177, August
20, 1990
People v. Tangliben, G.R. No. L-63630
April 6, 1990
b. Stop-and-frisk (“Terry” search)
CASES:
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (Further
reading: Floyd v. City of New York, 959
F. Supp. 2d 540, August 12, 2013)
Manalili vs. CA, G.R. No. 113447,
October 9, 1997
People v. Mengote, G.R. No. 87059 June
22, 1992
Posadas vs. CA, G.R. No. 89139, August
2, 1990
 People v. Cogaed, G.R. No. 200334, July
30, 2014
c. Consented warrantless search
CASES:
People v. Figueroa, G.R No. 134056,
July 6, 2000
People v. Lacerna, G.R. No. 109250,
September 5, 1997
People v. Tabar, G.R. No. 101124, May
17, 1993
People v. Barros, G.R. No. 90640, March
29, 1994
People v. Aruta, G.R. No. 120915, April
3, 1998
d. Customs search; search of vessels
CASES:
Papa v. Mago, G.R. No. L-27360, February
28, 1968
Roldan v. Arca, G.R. No. L-25434, July
25, 1975
e. The plain view doctrine
CASES:
People vs. Salanguit, supra
People v. Musa, G.R. No. 96177 January
27, 1993
f. Warrantless search of moving land
vehicles
CASES:
People v. Exala, G.R. No. 76005, April
23, 1993 (Read also the dissent of J.
Cruz)
People v. Lo Ho Wing, G.R. No. 88017,
January 21, 1991
i. Check points
CASE: Valmonte v. De Villa, G.R.
No. 83988, September 29, 1989
(Read also dissents of JJ. Cruz and
Sarmiento)
g. Warrantless search under urgent and
exigent circumstances
CASE: People v. De Gracia, G. R. Nos.
102009-10 July 6, 1994 (Cf. Alih v.
Castro: “precarious state of lawlessness”
cannot excuse the non-observance of the
constitutional guaranty, more so if no state
of hostilities in the area to justify,
assuming it could, the unreasonable
search and seizure.)
h. Warrantless search during “on-the-
spot apprehensions” with probable cause
CASES:
People v. Tangliben, supra
People v. Aminnudin, supra
People v. Malmstedt, G.R. No. 91107,
June 19, 1991 (Read also the dissents of
CJ Narvasa & Justice Cruz)
8. Warrantless arrests (Sec. 5, Rule 113,
The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
a. In flagrante arrest (person to be
arrested has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit an
offense)
CASES:
Umil v. Ramos, G.R. No. 81567, July 9,
1990 (decision); October 3, 1991
(resolution; read also the concurring and
dissenting opinion of J. Feliciano)
David v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, May 3,
2006
b. Hot pursuit arrest (an offense has just
been committed and arresting officer has
probable cause to believe based on
personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances that the person to be
arrested has committed the offense)
CASE: Umil v. Ramos, supra, concurring
and dissenting opinion of J. Feliciano and
separate opinion of J. Regalado to the per
curiam resolution
c. Arrest of prisoner who has escaped
9. Issue of legality of search and seizure
a. Who may raise
CASE: Stonehill v. Diokno, supra
b. When to raise
CASE: People vs. Salvatierra, G.R. No.
104663, July 24, 1997
10. The exclusionary rule & the “fruit of the
poisonous tree” doctrine
CASES:
Burgos v. Chief of Staff, supra
People v. Cogaed, supra
11. Disposal of seized items
12. Instances of non-availability of right
against unreasonable search & seizure
a. Search at the instance of private
entities
CASE: People v. Marti, G.R.
No. 81561, January 18, 1991
b. In disbarment proceedings filed by
private persons against a lawyer
CASE: Tolentino v. Atty. Mendoza, A.C.
No. 5151, October 19, 2004
SEARCH AND SEIZURE
1. Source – Fourth Amendment, U.S. Federal
Constitution
2. Scope of protection – natural and juridical
persons; citizens and non-citizens
3. Reasonableness: touchstone of the validity of
search and seizure
4. Meaning of “search”
5. Search warrants
a. Requisites
i. existence of probable cause
ii. probable cause determined personally by the
judge
iii. examination under oath of the applicant and
his witnesses
iv. particularity of description
v. issued in connection with one specific offense
only
b. Partially defective SWs: legal effect
c. Illegality of search and seizure does not ipso
jure result in return of seized items
6. Warrants of Arrest
a. Requisites
i. existence of probable cause
ii. probable cause determined personally by the
judge

iii. particularity of description of the person to be

arrested

b. Examination of complainant & witness not

required for WOA
7. Warrantless search and seizure

a. Search incident to a lawful arrest

b. Stop-and-frisk (“Terry” search)

c. Consented warrantless search

d. Customs search; search of vessels

e. The plain view doctrine

f. Warrantless search of moving land vehicles

i. Check points
g. Warrantless search under urgent and exigent
circumstances

h. Warrantless search during “on-the-spot

apprehensions” with probable cause
8. Warrantless arrests (Sec. 5, Rule 113, The
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)

a. In flagrante arrest (person to be arrested has

committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to
commit an offense)

b. Hot pursuit arrest (an offense has just been

committed and arresting officer has probable cause to
believe based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed the offense)

c. Arrest of prisoner who has escaped

9. Issue of legality of search and seizure

a. Who may raise
b. When to raise

10. The exclusionary rule & the “fruit of the

poisonous tree” doctrine
11. Disposal of seized items

12. Instances of non-availability of right against

unreasonable search & seizure
a. Search at the instance of private entities
b. In disbarment proceedings filed by private
persons against a lawyer