BILL OF RIGHTS  A person’s life may be validly claimed by the law
as when he is required to render services in
(1) DUE PROCESS OF LAW
 No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, of
property without due process of law.
o Dynamic, resilient, adaptable to every
situation calling for its application.
 SC: due process is the responsiveness to the
supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of
justice.
 Due process is a guaranty against any
arbitrariness on the part of the government,
whether committed by the legislature, the
executive, or the judiciary.
o There is due process when the
substantive and procedural aspect is
satisfied.
o If the law itself unreasonably deprives a
person of his life, or his liberty or
property, he is denied of the protection of
due process.
o Also violated if the enjoyment of right to
due process is conditioned on an
unreasonable requirement.
PERSON
 The due process clause protects all persons,
natural as well as artificial.
o Natural persons include both citizen and
alien.
 SC annulled a city ordinance requiring aliens to
obtain a work permit from the mayor as a
precondition for employment holding that “while
it is true that the Philippines as a State is not
obliged to admit aliens within its territory, once
an alien is admitted, he cannot be deprived of life,
without due process of law.
o This guarantee includes the means of
livelihood.
 Artificial persons like corporations and
partnership are also covered by the protection but
only insofar as their property is concerned.
o Because the life and the liberty of the
artificial person, as a creature of law, are
deprived from and therefore subject to
the control of the legislature.
o The State is also entitled to its day in
court.
DEPRIVATION
 To deprive is to “takeaway forcibly, to prevent
from possessing, enjoying or using something.”
o Deprivation connotes denial of the right
to life, liberty, or property.
 Deprivation per se is not necessarily
unconstitutional.
o What is prohibited is deprivation of life,
liberty, or property, without due process
of law.
defense of the State or when it is declared
forfeited for commission of a heinous offense.
o There is unlawful deprivation if he were
sentenced to death for conviction of a
petty offense.
 NO UNLAFUL DEPRIVATION: A person afflicted
with a communicable disease is confined in a
hospital or quarantined in his own home.
o where a criminal is punished with
imprisonment.
 Restriction of liberty would also be valid where
the carrying of unlicensed firearms is prohibited
or minors are not allowed to drink intoxicating
beverages, or individuals are required to first pass
the corresponding gov’t examinations before they
may practice their professions.
 VIOLATIVE: Imprisoned without trial (bill of
attainder), or is prevented from criticizing the
government in the exercise of his freedom of
expression, or is forced to follow a particular
religion.
 Private property may be VALIDLY taken where it
is offensive to the public welfare, like a building
on the verge of collapse, which may be
demolished under the police power in the interest
of public safety.
o It may also be appropriated after the
payment of just compensation.
 UNLAWFUL DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY:
destroyed by authorities even if it is not noxious
or intended for a noxious purpose, or is taken
without just compensation or is regulated in such
arbitrary manner as to deprive him of its lawful
enjoyment and use.
 SC annulled as confiscatory a municipal ordinance
prohibiting the construction on residential land of
any building that might obstruct the view of the
public plaza from the highway.
LIFE
 Life connotes the integrity of the physical person.
o It is not permissible for the government
to deprive the individual of any part of his
body, even if it be punishment for crime.
o U.S. S.C.: In sustaining the law requiring
the sterilization of incurable hereditary
imbeciles, the operation must involve
only “minimum of pain or none at all and
did not endanger the imbecile’s life or
health
 Imbong vs. Ochoa: life commences upon
conception, that is, upon fertilization.
o Hence, the obligation of the State to
equally protect the life of the mother and
the life of the unborn from conception
and to prevent the legislature from
enacting a measure legalizing abortion.
o Consistent with the constitutional policy
prohibiting abortion, and in line with the
 principle that laws should be construed
in a manner that its constitutionality is
sutained, RH Law and its implementing
Rules must be consistent with each other
in prohibiting abortion.
LIBERTY
 Liberty is the freedom to do right and never
wrong, it is ever guided by reason and the upright
and honorable conscience of the individual.
 Liberty, as guaranteed under the due process, is
not unbridled license, it is liberty regulated by
law.
 A person is free to act but he may exercise his
rights only in such manner as not to injure the
rights of others.
 An individual should be prepared to surrender
part of his freedom for the benefit of the greater
number in recognition of the time-honored
principle “salus poluli est suprema lex.”
o Civil liberty means the measure of
freedom which may be enjoyed in a
civilized community, consistently with
the peaceful enjoyment of like freedom in
others.
 The right to Liberty guaranteed by the
Constitution includes the right to exist and the
right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint
or servitude.
 Not mere freedom from physical restraint of the
person but embraces the right of man to enjoy the
faculties, subject only to such restraints which are
necessary for the common welfare.
 Liberty includes the right to be free to use his
faculties in all lawful ways; to live and work
where he will’ to earn his livelihood by a lawful
calling; to pursue any avocation, and to enter into
all contracts which may be proper.
 Chief elements:
o Right to contract
o Right to choose one’s employment
o Right to labor
o Right of locomotion
 A person is free to do as he pleases, subject only to
the reasonable restrictions of the law.
o Do anything that does not offend public
welfare.
PROPERTY
 Anything that can come under the right of
ownership and be the subject of contract.
o All things - real, personal, tangible and
intangible - that are within the commerce
of man.
 However, one cannot have a vested right to a
public office, as this is not regarded as property.
o If created by a statute, it may be
abolished by the legislature at any time,
even if the term has not yet expired.
 Mere privileges, like a license to operate a cockpit,
are not property rights and therefore revocable at
will.
 Concept of “vested right”: a consequence of the
constitutional guaranty of due process that
expresses a present fixed interest which in right
reason and natural justice is protected against
arbitrary state action; it includes not only legal or
equitable title to the enforcement of a demand but
also exemptions from new obligations created
after the right has become vested.
 Rights are considered vested when the right to
enjoyment is a present interest, absolute,
unconditional, and perfect or fixed and
irrefutable.
o While one may not be deprived of his
vested right, he may lose the same if there
is due process and such deprivation is
founded in law and jurisprudence.
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS
 This requires the intrinsic validity of the law in
interfering with the rights of the person to his life,
liberty, or property.
o Whether it is proper exercise of
legislative power.
o There must be lawful objects (pursued
for the interests of the public generally)
and lawful means which must not be
oppressive and unjust.
 The means employed must be
reasonably related to the
accomplishment of the purpose
and not unduly oppressive.
 lawful subject and lawful means
are the restriction on executive
and legislative.
 Kwong Sing Case: SC sustained to be valid the
ordinance as merely required the use of certain
languages without prohibiting the use of others.
o Its objective is to protect the public from
deceptions and misunderstandings that
might arise from their accepting receipts
in Chinese characters that they did not
understand.
 In Yu Cong Eng case: the law prohibited the use of
any language other than those prescribed. Hence,
the SC sustained its invalidity.
 Ichong v. Hernandez: SC held that the Retail Trade
Nationalization Law is a valid exercise exercise of
the police power. Object is to free the national
economy from alien control and dominance.
 Serrano Case: Violative of substantive due
process: a law which provides for a 3-month cap
on claims of overseas workers with an unexpired
portion of one year or more in their contracts, but
none on the claims of other workers with fixed-
term employment.
o Deprivation of property (monetary
benefits) without any existing valid
governmental purpose.
  TESTS: Whether a government measure would be
compliant with the basic requirements of
substantive due process:
(1) Strict scrutiny for laws dealing with freedom
of the mind or restricting the political process
(2) Rational basis standard of review for
economic legislation
(3) Immediate scrutiny
o For evaluating classifications based on
gender and legitimacy.
 Rational basis test is usually mainly applied in
analysis of equal protection challenges. Using
rational basis examination, laws or ordinances are
upheld if they rationally further a legitimate
governmental interest.
 Under intermediate review, governmental
interest is extensively examined and the
availability of less restrictive measure is
considered.
 Applying strict scrutiny, the focus is on the
presence of compelling, rather than substantial,
governmental interest and on the absence of less
restrictive means for achieving that interest.
 In terms of judicial review of statutes or
ordinances, strict scrutiny refers to the standard
for determining the quality and the amount of
governmental interest brought to justify the
regulation of fundamental freedoms.
o Strict scrutiny is used to test the validity
of laws dealing with the regulations of
certain fundamental rights.
 Laws should generally be published to have any
legal justification at all.
o Laws here means all laws and not only
those of general application, for strictly
speaking all laws relate to the people
although there are some that do not apply
to them directly.
o A law without any bearing on the public
would be invalid as an intrusion of
privacy or as class legislation or as an
ultra vires act of the legislature.
o To be valid, law must invariably affect the
public interest even if it might be directly
applicable only to one individual, and to
the public as a whole.
 Hence, ALL statutes or laws, including those of
local application and private laws, shall be
published as a condition for their effectivity.
o Publication must be in full or no
publication at all.
o Covered by this rule rule are the P.D., E.O.,
Admin. Rules and Regulations if their
purpose if for the enforcement or
implementation of existing law.
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS
 “Strike, but hear me first!”
 Justice that the procedural due process
guarantees is the one “which hears before it
condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and
renders judgment only after trial.
 The twin requirements of notice and hearing
constitute the essential elements of due process
and neither of these can be eliminated without
running afoul of the constitutional guaranty.
(1) JUDICIAL DUE PROCESS
 Requirements of procedural due process in
judicial proceedings:
(a) There must be an impartial court of tribunal
clothed with judicial power to hear and determine
the matter before it.
(b) Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over
the person of the defendant and over the property
which is the subject matter of the proceeding.
(c) The defendant must be given an opportunity
to be heard.
(d) Judgment must be rendered upon lawful
hearing.
A. IMPARTIAL AND COMPETENT COURT
 Impartial court : a court should not be affected by
bias and prejudice to render a fair and impartial
decision.
 Cold neutrality of an impartial judge is an
indispensable imperative of a judge.
 A judge must not only be impartial but also
appear to be impartial.
 Due process is intended to insure that confidence
by requiring compliance with fair play.
B. JURISDICTION
 In actions in personam, jurisdiction over the
defendant is acquired by the court by his
voluntary appearance or through service of
summons upon him.
 In actions in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction of
the court is derived from the power it may
exercise over the property. Jurisdiction over the
person is not essential.
o Notice by publication is sufficient.
 A person cannot be prejudiced by a ruling
rendered in an action or proceeding in which he
was not made a party conforms to the
constitutional guarantee of due process.
 Munoz Case: action for declaration of nullity of
title and recovery of ownership of real property
or reconveyance, is a real action but it is an action
in personam, for it binds a particular individual
only although it concerns the right to a tangible
thing.
o Any judgement is binding only upon the
parties properly impleaded.
C. HEARING
 Notice to a party is essential to enable it to adduce
its own evidence and to meet and refute the
evidence submitted by the other party.
 o Every litigant is entitled to a day in court.
o He has every right to notified of every
incident of the proceeding and to be
present at every stage so that he may be
heard by himself and counsel for the
protection of his interests.
 A decision rendered without a hearing is null and
void ab initio and may be attacked directly or
collaterally.
 No party should be made to suffer in person or
property without being given a hearing would be
brushed aside.
 Due process is not violated where a person is not
heard because he has chosen, for whatever
reason, not to be heard. If he opts to be silent
where he has a right to speak, he cannot later be
heard to complain that he was unduly silenced.
 Any defect in the observance of due process is
cured by the filing of Motion for Reconsideration.
(1) APPEAL
 The right to appeal is not essential to the right to a
hearing.
 Except when guaranteed by the Constitution,
appeal may be allowed or denied by the
legislature in its discretion.
 The requirements of due process are deemed
satisfied as long as the litigant is given his day in
court at the trial of his case, and he cannot
demand as a matter of right another day in the
appellate court.
 But as long as the law allows him to appeal, denial
of that remedy is a denial of due process.
 Legislature cannot deprive him of the right to
appeal in those case under the appellate
jurisdiction of the SC:
(1) Cases of constitutionality or validity of any
treaty, international or executive agreements, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order,
ordinance or regulation.
(2) Legality of any tax assessment
(3) Which jurisdiction of the lower court is in
issue.
(4) All criminal cases in which the penalty
imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher
(5) Cases in which only an error or question of
law is involved
 Violation of due process is a personal defense that
can only be asserted by the persons whose rights
have been allegedly violated.
(2) EXCEPTION
 There are cases which the essential requisites of
notice and hearing may be omitted without
violation of due process:
(1) Cancellation of passport of a person sought
for the commission of a crime
(2) Prevention suspension of a civil servant
facing admin. Charges
(3) Distraint of properties for tax delinquency
(4) Padlocking of restaurants found to be
unsanitary
(5) Issuances of TRO and writs of preliminary
attachments, or writs of possession
(6) Abatement of nuisances per se.
(a) Nuisances
 Nuisances per se is objectionable under any and
all circumstances because it presents an
immediate danger to the welfare of the
community.
 A nuisance per accident is objectionable only
under some but not all circumstances, there being
situations when it is perfectly legitimate and
acceptable.
o May be abated only upon judicial
authorization as it is difficult to ascertain
or identify this kind of nuisance.
o Except: when the legislature has
authorized its summary abatement,
provided the nuisance per accident is of
trifling value only.
o An industrial waste processing plant is
not a nuisance per se. Its operation may
be ordered to stopped only after judicial
proceedings.
(b) Presumptions
 As long as the presumption is based on human
experience, and provided that there is a rational
or natural connection between the fact proved
and the fact ultimately presumed from such fact, it
will not be deemed violative of due process.
(D) JUDGMENT
 Due process requires that the judgment be based
upon the lawful hearing previously conducted.
 It is the requirement of due process that the
parties to a litigation be informed of how it was
decided, with explanation of the factual and legal
reasons that led to the conclusions of the court.
(3) ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS
 In administrative proceedings, the requisites of
procedural due process are:
(1) The right to a hearing, which includes the right
to present one’s case and submit evidence in
support thereof.
(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence
presented.
(3) The decision must have something to support
itself.
(4) The evidence must be substantial.
(5) The decision must be rendered on the
evidence presented at the hearing, or at least
contained in the record and disclosed to the
parties affected.
(6) The tribunal or body must act in its or his own
independent consideration of the law and facts of
the controversy and not simply accept the views
of a subordinate.
 (7) The board or body should, render its decision
in a manner that the parties to the proceedings
can know the various issues involved, and the
reason for the decision rendered.
 Notice and hearing is not indispensable in admin.
Proceedings.
 While a day in court is a matter of right in judicial
proceedings, it is otherwise in admin. Proceedings
since they rest upon different principles.
 Due process does not, in all situations, require a
trial-type of proceeding. Litigants may be heard
through pleadings, written explanations, position
paper, memoranda and oral arguments.
 Hence, it is not legally objectionable for being
violative of due process for an admin. Agency to
resolve a case based solely on position papers,
affidavits, or documentary evidence.
 Preliminary investigation is a component part of
due process in criminal justice.
o Denial, in absence of waiver, is denial of
due process, even if the right to a
preliminary investigation is just a
statutory right.
 Equal protection of the laws is embraced in the
concept of due process but embodied in a
separate clause to provide for a more specific
guaranty against any form of undue favoritism or
hostility from the government.
 Arbitrariness may be challenged on the basis of
due process. But if the particular act assailed
partakes of an unwarranted partiality or
prejudice, the equal protection clause may be
invoked.
 It is in indefinite language to provide for more
adjustability to the “swiftly moving facts of our
changing society.
 Equal protection simply requires that all persons
or things similarly situated should be treated
alike, both as to rights conferred and
responsibilities imposed.
o Similar subjects should not be treated
differently, so as to give undue favor to
some and unjustly discriminate against
others.
 It does no require absolute equality, but merely
that all persons be treated alike under like
conditions both as to privileges conferred and
liabilities imposed.
 Substantive equality is not enough. It is required
that the law be enforced and applied equally. Even
if the law be fair and impartial on its face, it will
still violate equal protection if it is administered
with an eveil eye and an uneven hand so as to
unjustly benefit some and prejudice others.
 Private actions, no matter how discriminatory or
wrongful, cannot violate equal protection
guarantee. The equal protection erects no shield
against private conduct.
o Overweight flight attendance case.

PERSONS PROTECTED
 Equal Protection Clause is available to all persons,
natural as well as juridical. Artificial persons, are
Persons similarly situated must be similarly treated. entitled to the protection only insofar as their
They are similarly situated if they belong to the same property is concerned.
class which the class is a result of a valid classification.
CLASSIFICATION
 It does not require the universal application of the
law, that is, to operate on all people without
distinction because it might sometimes result in
unequal protection.
 The law is not required to provide for equality
among all persons if they are not similarly
situated.
o What the Constitution required is
EQUALITY AMONG EQUALS.
 The guaranty of equal protection of the laws is not
guaranty of equality in the application of the laws
upon all citizens of the state.
o It does not a requirement, in order to
avoid the constitutional prohibition
against inequality.
 It guarantees equality, not identity of rights.
(2) EQUAL PROTECTION
 The Constitution does not require that things  The classification must be enforced not only for
which are different be treated in law as though the present but as long as the problem sought to
they were the same. be corrected continues to exist.
 The equal protection clause does not forbid  Applicable to future conditions as well to be
discrimination as to things that are different. It reasonable.
does not prohibit legislation which is limited  A provision of law, initially valid, can become
either in the object to which it is directed or by subsequently unconstitutional, on the ground that
the territory within which it is to operate. its continued operation would violate the equal
 The equal protection clause allows classification. protection of the law.
o Classification in law is the grouping of
things in speculation or practice because D. APPLICABILITY TO ALL
they agree with one another in certain  The classification will be regarded as invalid if all
particulars. the members of the class are not similarly treated,
 All that is required of a valid classification is that both as to rights conferred and obligations
it be reasonable, which means that the imposed.
classification should be based on substantial  Substantial similarity will suffice.
distinctions, that it must be germane to the 
purpose of the law, that it must not be limited to
existing conditions only, and that it must apply
equally to each member of the class.
o The standard is satisfied if the
classification or distinction is based on a
reasonable foundation or rational basis
and is not arbitrary.
 The legislature is allowed to classify the subjects
of legislation. If the classification is reasonable,
the law may operate only on some and not all of
the people without violating the equal protection
clause.
 Classification is the grouping of persons or
things similar to each other in certain
particulars and different from all other in
these same particulars.

REQUIREMENTS:
 It is not enough that the members of the group
have the characteristics that distinguish them
form other. The classification must, as an
indispensable requisite, not be arbitrary. And
this classification to be reasonable, must conform
to the following:
(1) Based upon substantial distinctions
(2) Germane to the purpose of the law
(3) Not limited to existing conditions only
(4) Must apply equally to all members of the class.

A. SUBSTANTIAL DISTINCTIONS
 Superficial differences do not make for a valid
classification.
 The distinction, to be valid, must be substantial.

B. RELEVANCE TO PURPOSE OF LAW

 The classification, even if based on substantial
distinctions, will still be invalid if it is not germane
to the purpose of the law.
 If the classification is relevant to the purpose of
the law, concerns all members of the class, and
applies equally to present and future conditions,
and the classification does not violate the equal
protection guarantee.
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
C. DURATION
SCOPE OF PROTECTION
 The rights against unreasonable searched and
seizures and to the privacy of communication and
correspondence are available to all persons,
including aliens, whether accused of a crime or
not.
 Artificial persons are also entitled to the guaranty,
although they may be required to open their
books of accounts for examination by the State in
the exercise of police power or the power of
taxation.
o However, their premises may not be
searched nor may their papers and effects
be seized except by virtue of a valid
warrant.
 The rights against unreasonable searched and
seizures is personal and may be invoked only by
the person entitled to it.
o Therefore, one who is not a owner, or a
lessee of the premises searched, or who is
not an officer of a corporation whose
papers are seized cannot challenged the
validity of the search or seizure.
 The right to be left alone extends not only to the
privacy of one’s home but also to his office or
business establishment, including the papers and
effects that may be found there.
REQUISITES OF A VALID WARRANT
(1) It must be based upon probable cause.
(2) The probable cause must be determined
personally by the judge.
(3) The determination must be made after
examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
(4) It must particularly described the place to be
searched and the persons or things to be seized.
(1) EXISTENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE
 Probable cause is the knowledge of facts, actual
or apparent, strong enough to justify a reasonable
man in the belief that he has lawful grounds for
prosecuting defendant in a manner complained of,
the concurrence of facts and circumstances
reasonably warranting the belief.
o Such facts and circumstances which
would lead a reasonably prudent and
discreet man to believe that an offense
has been committed and that the objects
sought in connection with the offense are
in the place sought to be searched.
 A finding of probable cause need not be based on
clear and convincing evidence, or on evidence
beyond reasonable doubt.
o Being based merely on opinion and
reasonable belief, it does not import
absolute certainty.
 Probable cause implies probability of guild and
requires more than bare suspicion, but less than
evidence which would justify a conviction.
o A finding of probable cause does not
require an inquiry into whether there is
sufficient evidence to procure conviction.
 It merely binds over the suspect
to stand trial. It is not a
pronouncement of guilt.
 The warrant must refer to only one specific
offense.
 Once unreasonable arrest, seizures, all evidence
adduced are inadmissible.
Reasonable when:
 Validly-issued warrant of arrest or search warrant
 Valid arrest w/ot valid warrant:
o In-flagrante delicto (caught in the act)
o Hot pursuit
o Escaped persons
 Requisites of valid warrant of arrest
o Check notes.
 Distinguish probable cause for the issuance of
search warrant and warrant of arrest.
 Executive v judicial determination of probable
cause
 Warrant of arrest, no need to appear the
witness/complainant before the judge. Affidavits
are sufficient.
 Search warrant - complainant/witnesses must
personally appear for questioning by the judge.
 4th requisite - describing
o John doe warrant is void. Unless there is
some descriptive sufficient to describe
the accused.
 GN: A person may not be arrested without
warrant of arrest. What are the instances when a
person may be arrested without warrant of
arrest? Explain each.
 What does in flagrante arrest mean in layman’s
language? Caught in the act.
o Overt act? Physical acts/deed indicate an
intention to commit crime. An act which
is accompanied by an intention to commit
a crime. Committed in the presence of the
arresting officer.
o When do you say that it is committed in
the presence of an arresting officer?
Within the view or was able to hear the
disturbance of the incident or commotion
o Mere informant tip will not suffice in in
flagrante delicto for it would amount to
mere hearsay. There must be other
circumstances to not constitute hearsay.
 What is hot pursuit? Explain. Crime not
committed in the presence but someone who
witnessed the crime reported it to him.
o Difference with in flagrante delicto is,
overt act or the crime committed not in
the presence of a police officer, not
viewed and not heard. If heard and
 viewed, it is IFD. But the crime has just
been committed. Minutes. Hours.
o He can run after the accused only if it is
coupled with probable cause that the
crime has just been committed. The
knowledge of the crime committed must
be personal to the police.
 Two things to be
considered/establsihed in hot
putsuit: first, arresting officer
must have knowledge of the fact
of the commission of the crime.
That a crime has really been
committed. Confirmed that tip
from the informant, determine if
a crime has really been
committed as according to the
tip. Personal knowledge of that
fact by going to scene of the
crime and ask around.
 Second, personal knowledge of
facts that the crime has been
committed by the person to be
arrested. How? Ask around,
surveillance, investigate.
Confirmation.
 He must established that he have
a personal knowledge of the fact
of the commission of the crime.
 Escapped prisoner.
 Instances when warrantless searches and seizures
is allowed. Explain each.
o Search incidental to a lawful arrest.
Search made after a lawful arrest has
been effected.
 Person has to be lawfully
arrested. There has to be a lawful
arrest. There must be valid
warrant of arrest or in cases of
valid warrantless arrest.
 The officer may search a person.
 Search within the premises of the
commission.
o Stop and frisk - the right of the police
officer to stop a citizen and frisk. Such
when a person is suspicious unusual
conduct which will lead the police officer
to believe that a crime is about to be
committed or being committed. PO may
approach such person, introduce himself
as PO, and search and interrogate the
person. For surviellance.
 Diff with search incidental to a
lawful arrest - arrest before
search, in SaF, search before
arrest.
o Search in Plain-view -
 What is buy-bust operation?
Entrapment. Explain. What is the
basis of arrest? In flagrante
delicto or caught in the act.
o When a person is lawfully arrested, a
search may be made incidental to that
lawful arrest. Surroundings may be
search after he has been arrested
lawfully.
o One instance of plainview. Can a police
conduct a search of a moving vehicle?
 Checkpoints -can the passengers be asked to go
out and check the baggage compartment? GN:
Visual check only. It would be against the
intrusion rule which provides that every person
has right against any intrusion unless there by
virtue of a court order.
o EXN: They may be ordered to step down
from the vehicle only when there is
probable cause.
 For instance, there is a firearm
visualized inside or something
suspicious in the baggage
compartment or suspicious
person inside.
o Not the intention to look for drugs or
evidence but it come to his inadvertently.
 REQUISITES IN PLAINVIEW.
o The PO must have the right or in the
position when he had the plain view of
the object. He must have the right to be
there.
o Now in case they may visualize anything
in plain view, such that something that
may be used as evidence in a crime.
 MOVING VEHICLE, VESSELS, AIRCRAFT.
o Valid search even without valid warrant
of arrest in cases of violation of customs
and immigration laws.
o Informant tip if enough.
 Any evidence obtained against the right against
unreasonable arrest and and searches and
seizures shall be inadmissible and cannot be used
as evidence against the accused in any
proceedings.
o EXCLUSIONARY RULE.
o Fruit of the poisounous tree.
 May be subject to waiver.
o One must object otherwise waived.
o When to object? To question the legality
of the search, it must be done anytime
before judgment.
o Legality of the arrest, must be done
before arraignment.
 SECTION 6 ARTICLE 3
o (1) Liberty of abode and of changing the
same
 Right to choose and change
residence.
 Cannot be impaired.
o EXN: May be impaired if there is lawful
ordered of the court. Must be in
accordance with the law.
o (2) The right to travel
 Domestic or international.
 o EXN: If the national security, public safety
as may provided by law.
o Instance: COVID Pandemic. Proper
impairment of right to travel.
o There must be law providing for the
creation of the IATF.
o May restrict this right by virtue of valid
authority for the public health and safety.
o Another is the case of minor.
 MARCOS vs MANGLAPUS:
o RIGHT TO LIBERTY OF ABODE AND
RIGHT TO TRAVEL IS DIFFERENT FROM
THE RIGHT TO RETURN.
o Instances these rights may be impaired is
when the court issue an hold departure
order.
 Such as when a person is facing a
criminal case. Basis is the
inherent power of the court to
enforce its processes. How can
the court enforce its jurisdiction
over the person if such person is
outside the country.
 HOW: can only be stopped is the
HOLD DEPARTURE ORDER
ISSUED BY THE COURT WHERE
THE CASE IS PENDING.
 WHO CAN BE STOPPED? THOSE
CRIMES WHICH CARRIES A
PENALTY OF IMPRISONMENT
OF MORE THAN 6 YEARS. If less
than, you cannot stopped such
accused and cannot issue HDO.
More than 6 tears, RTC.
 First level courts have no
jurisdiction to issue Hold
Departure Order, only RTC.
 DOJ has no power to
issue HDO and stopped
the accused. Only the
Court.
 How about those accused which
case has not yet been filed in
court? Can they stopped? In case
of tendency of flight.
 Precautionary hold
departure order. Here,
pending case in DOJ or
Prosec. Filed court for
PHDO, to prevent the
accused/person charged
from leaving the
country.
 right
 (3) Said person had an actual intention to
Properties Subject to Seizure
 Rule 126, Section 2 of the ROC:
(1) Property subject of the offense
(2) Property stolen or embezzled and other
proceeds or fruits of the offense
(3) Property used or intended to be used as the
means of committing an offense.
 If the search is an incident of a lawful arrest,
seizure may be made of dangerous weapons or
anything that may have been used or may
constitute proof in the commission of an offense.
 Where the search and seizure is made only for the
purpose of obtaining evidence to be used against
the accused, the warrant is unlawful as it would
violate the constitutional right against self-
incrimination.
 The order for the release of property seized on the
basis of a search warrant is not to be considered
as immediately executory and may be subject to
appeal.
ADMISSIBILITY OF ILLEGALLY SEIZED EVIDENCE
 Articles illegally seized are not admissible as
evidence.
o Fruit of poisonous tree.
 The exclusion of unlawfully seized evidence was
the only practical means of enforcing the
constitutional injunction against unreasonable
searched and seizures.
 But although the properties may have been seized
in violation of the provision, it does not follow
that the owner shall be entitled to recover it
immediately.
o If said property is subject of litigation, it
will remain in custodia legis until the case
is terminated.
 Illegally seized evidence, though inadmissible,
may still be used in the judicial or administrative
action that may be filed against the officer
responsible for its illegal seizure.
 Waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does not,
however, mean a waiver of the inadmissibility of
evidence seized during the illegal warrantless
arrest.
 Objection as to the inadmissibility of an illegally
seized evidence/items must be made or raised
before arraignment, otherwise, such omission
constitutes waiver of the protection granted by
this provision.
 To constitute a valid consent or waiver of the
constitutional guarantee against obtrusive
searches:
(1) The right exists
(2) The person involved had knowledge, either
actual or constructive, of the existence of such
relinquish the right.
 The court which issued the subject warrant
would have jurisdiction over a motion to quash
the same.
 The complaint for warrantless searches no
criminal offense.
 o Conduct of warrantless arrest is not a
criminal act defined under the RPC.
 What the RPC punishes are only:
(a) search warrants maliciously
obtained and abuse in the service
of those legally obtained and (b)
searching domicile without
witnesses.
o Remedy of the petitioner against the
warrantless search is civil, under Article
32.
WARRANTLESS SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
 The following are valid warrantless searches:
(1) Consented searches;
(2) As an incident to a lawful arrest
(3) Searches of vessels and aircraft for violation of
immigration, customs, and drug laws
(4) Searches of moving vehicles
(5) Searches of automobiles at borders or constructive
borders
(6) Where the prohibited articles are in “plain view”
(7) Searches of buildings and premises to enforce fire,
sanitary, and building regulations, and
(8) “stop and frisk” operations or the “Terry search”
(9) Customs searches and
(10) Searches under emergency circumstances
(11) Also those at military checkpoints
(12) Also searches based on tipped information in
buy-bust operations or cases involving drugs in
transit.
 When one did not raise any protest when they,
together with their bags containing marijuanas,
were brought to police station for investigation
were considered as consented search.
 The right to be secure from unreasonable
searches may be waived expressly or impliedly.
 A peace officers or even a private person may,
without a warrant, arrest a person when:
(a) Such person has just committed, is
committing, or is attempting to commit an offense
in his presence,
(b) An offense has in fact been committed and he
has personal knowledge of facts indicating that
the person to be arrested has committed it
(c) The escaped prisoner
 In this circumstances, where an arrest is effected
by virtue of a valid arrest, a search may be made
as an incident to such valid search.
 Evidence obtained during a warrantless search
made before, and not after, a warranless arrest
would be inadmissible.
 Where the warrantless search was sustained
having been been done after the accused was
caught in flagrante delicto.
 If the search is an incident of a lawful arrest,
seizure may be made of dangerous weapon or
anything that may have been used or may
constitute proof in the commission of an offense.
 A wararntless search can be upheld valid if made
incident to a lawful arrest, provided the lawful
arrest must precede the search of a person and his
belongings.
 Two requisites of a valid in flagrante arrest:
(1) The person to be arrested must execute an
overt act indicating that he has just committed, is
actually committing, or is attempting to commit a
crime, and
(2) Such overt act is done in the presence or
within the view of the arresting officer.
o Even if the overt act were to be seen from
50 meter away or even if he merely hears
the disturbance, it is considered to be
committed in his presence.
 CHAIN OF CUSTODY:
o The prosecution must be able to present
through records or testimony the
whereabouts of the dangerous drugs from
the time (1) these were seized from the
accused by the arresting officer, (2) turned
over to the investigating officer, (3)
forwarded to the laboratory for
determination of their composition, and
(4) up to the time they are offered in
evidence.
 In seizures covered by search warrants, the
physical inventory and photograph must be
conducted in the place of the search warrant.
 In warrantless searches such as buy-bust
operation, the physical inventory and photograph
shall be conducted at the nearest police station
or office of the apprehending officer/team,
whenever is practicable consisted with the chain
of custody rule.
o Buy-bust operations have been
consistently held as lawful warantless
arrest, or arrests in flagrante delicto,
likewise leading to lawful warrantless
searches and seizures.
 Entrapment is legal, instigation is not.
 “decoy solicitation” or when a police officer’s act
of soliciting drugs during a buy-bust operation is
not prohibited by law and would not invalidate
that buy-bust operation.
 Prior surveillance is not necessary to render a
buy-bust operation legitimate, especially when
the buy-bust team is accompanied to the target
area by the informant.
o Also the no test buy is not necessary.
o What is controlling is the compliance
with the chain of custody procedures
to preserve the integrity of the
evidence seized, during the prosecution
of every drug-related offense.
 Warrantless arrests made on the basis alone of
tips and reliable information have been considered
as not sufficient for them to be considered as
lawful.
 o The rule requires that the accused
perform some overt act that would
indicate that he has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit
an offense.
 Warrantless arrest of the accused which were
based solely on a report from a civilian asset or
mere information were also declared as unlawful
by the SC.
 A waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does
not carry with it a waiver of the
inadmissibility of evidence seized during the
illegal warrantless arrest.
 HOT PURSUIT: Requirements
(1) An offense has just been committed
(2) The person making the arrest has personal
knowledge of facts indicating that the person to
be arrested has committed it.
 A warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest
may be made only within the permissible area of
search, or the place within the immediate control of
the person being arrested.
 An arrest may also be made without warrant
where the right is waived by the person arrested,
provided he knew of such right and knowingly
decided not to invoke it.
 But no waiver is to be presumed where the
person merely submits to the arresting officer
in manifestation of his respect for authority or
where he allows entry into his home as a sign of
hospitality and politeness.
 Posting of bail bond constitutes waiver of any
irregularity attending the arrest of a person
and estops him from questioning its validity.
 PLAINVIEW DOCTRINE: Requisites:
(1) The law enforcement officer in search of
evidence has a prior justification for an
intrusion or in a position from which he can view
a particular area.
(2) The discovery of the evidence in plain view is
inadvertent.
(3) It is immediately apparent to the officer that
the item he observes may be evidence of a crime,
contraband, or otherwise subject to seizure.
 The object must open to eye and hand and its
discovery inadvertent.
 The element of inadvertence would not be
present If the “police officer intentionally entered
the house with no prior surveillance or
investigation before they discovered the accused
with the subject items.
 The apprehending offices should have first
conducted a surveillance then determining the
existence of probable cause, then search warrant
should have been secured prior to effecting
arrest and seizure.
 Objections as to the illegality of arrest must be
raised before arraignment or entering a plea.
 The legality of the arrest affects only the
jurisdiction of the court over his person.
o Appellant’s warrantless arrest therefore
cannot be the basis of his acquittal.
 The illegality of the warrantless arrest cannot
deprive the State of its right to prosecute the
guilty when all other facts on record point to their
culpability.
PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND
CORRESPONDENCE
 The right to privacy is the right to be free from
unwarranted exploitation of one’s person or from
intrusion into one’s private activities in such a
way as to cause humiliation to a person’s ordinary
sensibilities.
o Right to be let alone.
 The rule on searches and seizures are applicable
only to tangible searches.
 Anti-Wire Tapping Act: prohibits any person, not
being authorize by all the parties to any private
communication or spoken word, to tap any wire
or cable to secretly overhear or record the same.
o The use of these records is permitted only
in civil and criminal proceedings
involving certain specified offenses,
mainly those affecting national security.
o These acts may be done only upon
previous (1) written authorization by the
court, to be issued upon compliance with
the constitutional requirements for the
issuance of warrant, and shall be (2)
effective only for only 60 days.
o Any evidence obtained in violation of the
law is also not admissible in any
proceedings.
 To determine whether there is a violation of the
right to privacy, use the reasonable expectation
of privacy test.
o This test determines whether a person
has a reasonable expectation of privacy
and whether the expectation has been
violated.
 The reasonableness of a person’s expectation of
privacy depends on “two-part test”:
(1) Whether, by his conduct, the individual has
exhibited an expectation of privacy, and
(2) This expectation is one that society recognizes
as reasonable.
 Reasonableness of a person’s expectation is a
case-to-case basis since it depends on the factual
circumstances surrounding the case.
 THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY IS NOT ABSOLUTE.
o A limited intrusion may be permissible
when a person is a public figure and the
information to be elicited from him is a
matter of public character.
 Right to privacy cannot be invoked to resist
publication or dissemination of matter of public
interest.
  The interest sought to be protected by the right to
privacy is the right to be free from unwarranted
publicity, from the wrongful publicizing of private
affairs and activities of an individual which are
outside the realm of legitimate public concern.
 The right of the people to access information on
matter on public concern prevails over the right
to privacy of financial transactions.
THREE STRANDS OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY
(1) Locational or situational privacy -
(2) Informational privacy - refers to the interest in
avoiding diclosure of personal matters.
TWO ASPECTS.
(a) The right not to have private information
disclosed
(b) The right to live freely without surviellance
and intrusion
(3) Decisional privacy - involves the right to
independence in making certain important
decisions
TWO-FOLD TEST whether a matter is entitled to the
right to privacy:
 SUBJECTIVE TEST:
o Where one claiming the right must have
the actual or legitimate expectation of
privacy over a certain matter.
 OBJECTIVE TEST:
o Where his expectation of privacy must be
one society is prepared to accept as
objectively reasonable.
WRIT OF HABEAS DATA
 Not only confined to cases of extralegal killings
and enforced disappearances, but also a remedt
available to person whose right to privacy in life,
liberty and security is violated or threated by an
unlawful acts or omission of a public official, or a
private individual, engaged in gathering,
collecting, or storing data.
 Independent and summary remedy designed to
protect the image, privacy, information and it
seeks to protect a person’s right to control
information regarding oneself.
 Protect an individual’s right to informational
privacy.
 Availment of the writ requires the existence of
nexus between the right to private and the right to
life, liberty or security on the other.
 Without actionable entitlement to the right to
informational privacy, a habeas data will not
prosper.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION
 This right ensures free and effective
communication of ideas.
o Freedom of the press, assembly, petition,
religion, right of association, to access to
information on matters of public concern,
and the right not to be detained solely by
reason of one’s political beliefs and
aspirations.
 Freedom of expression is available only insofar as
it is exercised for the discussion of matters
affecting the public interest.
o Purely private matters do not come
within the guaranty.
 Our Constitution provides that sovereignty
resides in the people, this sovereignty would be
negated if they are denied the opportunity to
participate in shaping of public affairs.
SCHOOL OF THOUGHTS/THEORY
(1) Deliberative democracy - the include the right of the
people to participate in public affairs, including the right to
criticize government actions.
(2) Free speech - which should be encourage.
(3) Free-speech likewise involved self-expression that
enhances human dignity - this right is a means of assuring
individual self-fulfillment
(4) Free expression
(5) Bill of rights
 The freedom to speak includes the right to be
silent.
MODES OF EXPRESSION:
 Language, oral, written.
 Speech is not limited to vocal communication.
Conduct/symbolic speech is also included.
ELEMENTS:
(1) Freedom from previous restraint or censorship
(2) Freedom from subsequent punishment
 Restraint here may either be content-based or
content-neutral.
 Content-based or censorship of the restriction is
based on the subject matter of the utterance or
speech.
o Content-based restraint is aimed at the
contents or idea of the expression.
o This bears a heavy presumption of
invalidity and is measured against the
clear and present danger rule.
 Under this rule, the evil
consequences sought to be
prevented must be substantive,
extremely serious and the degree
of imminence extremely high.
 Content-neutral regulation if it is merely
concerned with the incidents of the speech, or
merely controls the time, place, or manner and
under well defined standards.
o Without restraint on the message of the
expression.
 o Here, only a substantial governmental
interest is required for its validity.
o Because they are not designed to
suppress any particular message, they are
not subject to the strictest scrutiny but an
INTERMEDIATE APPROACH (requires
mere rationality and promote
governmental interest unrelated to the
suppression of expression)
 Content-based laws are treated as more suspect
that content-neutral laws because of judicial
concern with discrimination in the regulation of
expression.
 Pass the clear and present danger rule and there
must be compelling and substantial state interest
endangered by such speech/expression.
 A facial challenge may be raised against any
restraint upon freedom of expression.
o Restraint may be suppressed if found to
be overbreadth or vague.
 Overbreadth doctrine applies when a statute
restrains even constitutionally guaranteed rights.
o Under this doctrine, a proper
governmental purpose, constitutionally
subject to state regulation, may not be
achieved by means that unnecessarily
sweep its subject broadly, thereby
invading the area of protected freedoms.
 When a penal statute encroaches upon the
freedom of speech, a facial challenge grounded on
the void-for-vagueness doctrine is acceptable.
 A statute can be impermissibly vague for either of
two reasons:
(a) If it fails to provide people of ordinary
intelligence a reasonable opportunity to
understand what conduct it prohibit.
(b) If it authorizes or even encourages arbitrary
and discriminatory enforcement.
(1) FREEDOM FROM CENSORSHIP
 Censorship conditions the exercise of freedom of
expression upon the prior approval of the
government.
 Absence of evidence to the contrary,
governmental regulation of the content of speech
is more likely to interfere with the free exchange
of ideas than to encourage it.
 Censorship need not partake of total suppression;
even restriction of circulation is unconstitutional.
 Any system of prior restraints of expression bears
the heavy presumption against its validity.
o The government thus carries a heavy
burden of showing justification fro the
enforcement of such restraint.
 INC Case: MTRCB had the power to review
programs and clear them for showing on TV. But
on the second issue, the SC held that they did not
attack but merely criticized the other religions in
the exercise of its freedom of expression and
religion. These criticisms did not create a clear
and present danger requiring prior restraint of
the State,
(2) FREEDOM FROM PUNISHMENT
 This includes freedom after the speech.
 Without this assurance, the citizen would hesitate
to speak his mind for the fear he might provoke
the vengeance of the officials he criticized.
 Freedom of expression is not absolute and is
subject to police power and may be properly
regulated in the interest of public.
TESTS TO DETERMINE LIABILITY:
(1) Clear and present danger rule
(2) The dangerous tendency doctrine, and
(3) The balancing test
(A) CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER RULE
 Whether the words used in such circumstances
and are of such nature as to nature clear and
present danger that they will bring about
substantive evil that the State has a right to
prevent.
 The danger created must not only be clear and
present but also traceable to the ideas expressed.
o Unless this is established, one may not be
held accountable.
 The clear refers to the causal connection of the
substantive evil caused by the utterance. Present
refers to the time element, imminent and
immediate danger. The danger must not only be
probable but very likely inevitable.
 Picketing general is not subject to injunction or
punishment but it may be validly prohibited and
penalized when set in a background of violence.
o Violent picketing create a clear and
present danger to the safety of persons
and the public order, hence, not entitled
to the protection of the Constitution.
 Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify
suppression of free speech and assembly.
 To justify suspension of free speech, there must
be reasonable ground to fear serious evil and
imminent danger.
(B) DANGEROUS TENDENCY DOCTRINE
 Most used test prior to the adoption of clear and
present danger rule.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
(1) CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
 Restricted to criminal cases only and to their
procedural requirements.
 Preliminary investigation is purely statutory and
not mandatory. Denial of it, in the absence of a
valid waiver is denial of due process.
o When an accused pleads to the charged,
he deemed waived the right to
preliminary investigation and the right to
question any irregularities.
 Rstriction on procedural due process (on
juidical/court)
 Penal law must be published in the official gazette
or under newspaper of general circulation.
 o Such waiver must be intelligently and
(2) SELF-INCRIMINATION
 This right is available not only in criminal
proceedings but also in all other government
proceedings. It may be claimed not only by the
person accused but by any witness to whom an
incriminating question is addressed.
SCOPE
 As long as the question will tend to incriminate,
the witness is entitled to the privilege.
 He may not refuse provided: the question is
relevant even if the answer may tend to
embarrass him or subject to him civil liability; as
to past criminality for which he can no longer be
prosecuted; fact of previous grant of immunity
under a validly enacted statute.
 This right is against not all compulsion but
testimonial compulsion only.
 The prohibition under this right is the prohibition
of the use of physical or moral compulsion to
extort communications from him, not an exclusion
of his body as evidence when it may be material.
o This applies to the compulsion for the
production of documents, papers and
chattels that may be used against him,
except where the State has the right to
inspect the same.
o Also protects the accused against any
attempt to compel him to furnish a
specimen of his handwriting in
connection with his prosecution for
falsification.
 The court finds no valid justification for
mandatory drug testing fro persons accused of
crimes, this is violative of this right and the right
to privacy.
 When does a question tend to incriminate?
 Juridical persons cannot be accused in criminal
cases. Only natural.
 
WHEN AVAILABLE
 This privilege may be invoked only when an self-
incriminating question is asked. (In case of
ordinary witness)
 But in case of the accused himself, he may refuse
at the outset under the reasonable assumption
that the purpose of interrogation will to be
incriminate him.
o May refuse to take the witness stand. May
be asked Qs during his direct examination.
WAIVER
 This right may be waived, either directly or by a
failure to invoke it.
willingly made.
o Voluntary surrender of docs - waiver
o
 Mere physical activity - blood test case (find in
book)
 Transactional immunity -
 Use and fruit immunity - all cases connected to his
testimonity may be used this immunity.
 This right can be invoked in criminal cases, and all
other cases of proceedings.
(3) CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
 This means any questioning initiated by law
enforcement officers after a person has been
taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his
freedom of action in any significant way.
 This begins when there is no longer a general
inquiry and the investigation has started to focus
on a particular person.
 This right may not be invoked in situations where
the statements are spontaneously made, as when
it was the accused himself who went to the police
station and voluntarily made the statement.
 Statements made without the assistance of
counsel, during his preliminary investigation is
inadmissible.
 Evidence obtained when the accused were not
informed of his Miranda rights are inadmissible.
 Right to counsel may not be invoked in
administrative proceedings since the admin
bodies is under no duty to provide the person
with counsel because assistance of counsel is not
an absolute requirement.
 Amicable settlement is not and does not partake
of the nature of an extrajudicial confession of
admission but is a contract between the parties.
 “mere uncounseled statement” without any proof
that the same was used as prosecution evidence,
cannot serve to invalidate the trial.
An extrajudicial confession to be admissible must
be voluntary, with assistance of counsel, in
writing and express.
 The prosecution may not use statements from
custodial interrogation unless it demonstrates the
use of procedural safeguards effective to secure
the privilege against self-incrimination.
 o By custodial interrogation means the
questioning initiated by the law
enforcement officer when he was taken
into custody or deprived of his freedom
of action in any significant way.
o Procedural safeguards mean that he was
informed of his right to remain silent, that
any statement does make may be used as
evidence against him and that he has a
right to request for asssitance of an
attorney.
o This may be waived provided the waiver
was knowingly, intelligently made.
 Mere informing the accused, when no adequately
educated, without explaining these rights to him
do not reveal compliance with the requirement.
 Allegation of violation of rights during custodial
investigations is relevant and material only when
made as basis of conviction.
 Claims of torture cannot be given credence
UNLESS substantiated by competent and
independent evidence like medical certificate.
o Failure to show evidence of compulsion
and where no physical evidence of
violence, his extrajudicial statement is
considered voluntarily executed.
o Police line-up is not part of custodial
investigation.
PROCEDURE FOR “OUT-OF-COURT
IDENTIFICATIONS”
 This is conducted by the police thru show-ups
where the suspect alone is brought face-to-face
with the witness for identification.
 In resolving the admissibility of and relying on
out-of-court identification of suspects, TOTALITY
OF CIRCUMSTANCES TEST is adopted by court:
(a) The witness’ opportunity to view the
criminal at the time of the crime,
(b) The witness’ degree of attention at that
time
(c) The accuracy of any prior description
given by the witness
(d) The level of certainty demonstrated by the
witness at the identification
(e) The length of time between the crime and
the identification
(f) The suggestiveness of the identification
procedure.
 Effective and vigilant assistance of counsel is
required.
 Given an option to be represented by a counsel of
his own choice but when he neglects or refuses to
exercise this option then the court shall appoint
one for him.
 Any violation with respect to violation of his right
must be raised before arraignment.
(4) BAIL
 Bail is the security given for the release of a
person in custody of law conditioned upon his
appearance before any court as may be required
by court.
 Only persons under detention may petition for
bail. However, bail cannot be denied simply
because the person detained or in custody has not
yet been formally charged in court but is still
under investigation for the crime.
o As a matter of right.
 There must be written application for bail, no
verbally granted bail.
 Right to bail even if the privilege of habeas corpus
is suspended.
 No bail in offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when the evidence of guilt is strong.
o Entitled to bail when the evidence of guilt
is NOT strong (which the prosecution has
to prove)
 A hearing for bail is separate from the initial
hearing to determine the existence of probable
cause.
o Prosecution must be given a chance to
show the strength of its evidence
otherwise there’s denial of due process.
 Notice and hearing are required whether the bail
is a matter of right to discretion.
 The prosecution's recommendation for bail is not
binding and the discretion to grant bail still lies in
the judge.
DUTIES OD THE JUDGE once application for bail is
filed:
(1) In all case whether the bail is a matter of rigth or
discretion, notify the prosecution of the hearing of the
application for bail and require him to submit his
recommendation.
(2) Where the bail is a matter of discretion, conduct a
hearing whether or not the prosecution refuses to present
evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is trong.
(3) Decide whether the guilt of the accused is strong based
on the summary of the evidence of the prosecution.
(4) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the
accused upon the approval of the bail bond, otherwise, the
petition should be denied.
 Mere probability of escape does not warrant
denial of the right to bail; the remedy is to
increase the bail, provided it is not excessive.
o After conviction, the accused may be
denied if there is risk of his absconding.
 SC also grant bail even if the evidence is strong in
view of illness requiring his hospitalization.
Things to be considered by the judge in fixing the
amount of bail:
(1) Financial ability of the accused
(2) Nature and circumstances of the offense
(3) The penalty of the offense charged
(4) Character and reputation of the accused
(5) Age and health
(6) Weight of evidence
(7) Probability of appearance.
  The grant of bail is a matter of discretion UPON
CONVICTION.
 Bail is not intended as punishment nor as in
satisfaction of civil liability.
 Application for or admission to bail shall not bar
the accused from challenging the validity of his
arrest or the legality of the warrant issued.
 The power to order the release or transfer of a
person under detention by legal process is vested
in the court, not in provincial government.
(5) PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
 Every accused shall be presumed innocent until
the contrary is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
o The burden lies on the prosecution to
overcome such presumption of innocence
which must rest on the strength of it s
own evidence and must not rely on the
weakness of the defense.
o Failure to overcome such presumption
results to acquittal of the accused.
 But this constitutional presumption of innocence
may be overcome by contrary presumptions
based on the experience of human conduct.
 The presumption of regularity in the performance
of official cannot by itself affect this consti
presumption of innocence.
o In case of conflict, the latter prevails.
o This presumption of innocence cannot be
overcome by presumption of regularity
when the latter is accompanied by
stronger evidence supporting the guilt of
the accused.
(6) RIGHT TO BE HEARD
 This includes the right to present evidence and
the right to present and defend oneself.
(1) Assistance of Counsel
 This right beings from the time the accused is
taken into custody or deprived of his freedom of
action in any significant way.
 Right to counsel never subject of waiver in
criminal proceedings.
o Because in criminal cases there can be no
fair hearing unless the accused be given a
chance to be heard by counsel.
o Denial of this right is denial of due
process.
 Counsel de oficio should still, despite the objection
of the accused, be appointed by the court to
represent him.
o The right to counsel is not absolute as
when the accused repeatedly asks for
postponement of the trial on the ground
that he still looking for his counsel de
parte, the court would be justified in
appointing counsel de oficio.
NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION
 Accused cannot be convicted of an offense not
charged in the complaint or information.
THREE (3)-FOLD PURPOSE:
(1) To furnish him with such description of the charge
against him will enable him to make his defense.
(2) To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for
protection against further prosecution for the same cause;
and
(3) To inform the court of the facts alleged.
 An information is sufficient if it states the name of
the accused, the designation of the offense given
by the statute, the acts and omissions complained
of as constituting the offense, the name of the
offended party, the approximate date of the
commission of the offense, and the place where it
was committed.
TEST OF SUFFICIENCY OF INFORMATION:
 Whether it enables the person of common
understanding to know the charged against him,
and the court to render judgment properly.
o Purpose is to allow the accused to fully
prepare for his defense.
o The DESCRIPTION and NOT the
designation of the offense is
CONTROLLING.
 The amendment of the complaint and information
is allowed only on substantial matters and should
not prejudice the rights of the accused.
o TEST: When the rights of the accused are
prejudiced by the amendment when a
defense under the original complaint is
no longer available and the evidence
inapplicable after the amendment.
o Amendment w/o leave of court: before
the accused enters his plea.
o W/ leave of court: after plea and during
the trial.
TRIAL (Speedy, impartial, and public trial)
 This right requires the neutrality of the judge to
insure that justice is one to the defendant.
 Publicity of the trial is necessary to prevent
abuses that may be committed by the court to the
prejudice of the defendant.
o This rule is however not absolute, the
court may still bar the public in certain
cases like rape.
 Speedy trial has been defined as one free from
oppressive and nonsense delays and intended to
relieve the accused of needless inconveniences
before sentence is pronounced upon him.
 Inordinate delay in resolving criminal cases is
violative of due process and to the speedy
disposition of cases, warrants dismissal of the
criminal case.
 The right to speedy trial is distinct from that
speedy disposition of cases.
 o The speedy trial is available only to an
accused in criminal law, while the latter
may be tapped in any proceedings.
o Dismissal of the case for violation of this
right is the general rule. Said dismissal is
tantamount to an acquittal.
 The right to speedy trial cannot be quantified to
specified number of days but must be examined in
the light of the surrounding circumstances of the
case.
 FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED:
(1) The length of the delay
(2) The reasons for the delay
(3) The assertion or failure to assert such right by
the accused and
(4) The prejudice caused by the delay.
 The right to be present at the trial is a personal
right and may be waived.
TRIAL IN ABSENTIA
 After arraignment, the trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the accused
provided that he has been duly notified and his
failure to appear is unjustifiable.
 REQUISITES:
(1) The accused has already been arraigned,
(2) He has been duly notified of the trial; and
(3) His failure to appear in unjustified.
 Trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions
of the ROC regarding forfeiture of the bail bond if
the accused fails to appear at his trial.
THE RIGHT OF CONFRONTATION
 This right intended to prevent conviction of the
accused upon deposition or ex parte affidavits,
and to preserve the right of the accused to meet
the recollection of the witnesses in the exercise of
the right to cross-examination.
 Basically right to cross-examination.
 It is held specifically to
 What is prohibited is the absence of the
opportunity to cross-examine, not necessarily an
actual cross-examination but merely an
opportunity of exercise the right to CE.
COMPULSORY PROCESS
 The accused is entitled to the issuance of
subpoena nad subpoena duces tecum for the
purpose of compelling the attendance of the
witnesses and the production of evidence he may
need for his defense.
o Failure to obey this process is punishable
as contempt of court, if necessary, the
witness may even be arrested so he can
give the needed evidence.
 This right must be invoked during the trial.
o Failure constitutes a waiver that cannot
be rectified or undone on appeal.
PROHBITED PUNISHMENTS
 Right against excessive fines and cruel and
inhumane punishments.
 Must be proportionate to the offense.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY
 This rights prohibits the prosecution again of any
person fro a crime of which he has previously
been acquitted or convicted.
o This sets the effect that the first
prosecution forever at rest.
 This finds no application in administrative cases.
REQUISITES:
(1) Valid complaint or information
(2) Filed before a competent court
(3) To which the defendant had pleaded
(4) Of which he had been previously acquitted or
convicted or which was dismissed or otherwise
terminated without his express consent.
(A) COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
 Invalid one cannot lead to a valid judgment hence
cannot put the accused under jeopardy.
(B) COMPETENT COURT
 A court without jurisdiction cannot render a valid
judgment, hence, a person charged before it
cannot pleaded double jeopardy when tried anew
for the same offense
 Where an information was motu proprio
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction where in fact the
court is actually competent to hear it, the
dismissal will entitled the accused to double
jeopardy.
(C) VALID PLEA
 A defendant is never placed under double
jeopardy until after he shall have pleaded to the
charge against him during the arraignment.
(C) TERMINATION OF CASE
 Dismissal of a case with the express consent of the
accused will not bar another prosecution for the
same offense or an appeal by the prosecution
from such dismissal.
o Such when the accused succeeds in
having dismissed the case on the ground
that the information is insufficient or fro
lack or jurisdiction.
APPEAL OF PROSECUTION
 A judgment of acquittal is final and not
reviewable.
o It cannot be reconsidered because it
places the accused in double jeopardy.
o But an MOR is possible on grave abuse of
discretion to lack of jurisdiction.
  The prosecution can appeal where the accused is
deemed to have waived or is estopped from
invoking his right against double jeopardy.

CRIMES COVERED
 If the four elements of double jeopardy are
present, then the accused may not be prosecuted
anew for the same offense charged.

(a) DOCTRINE OF SUPERVENING EVENT

 Under this doctrine, an accused may be
prosecuted for another offense if a subsequent
development changes the character of the first
indictment under which he may have already
been charged or convicted.
 The conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to
another prosecution for an offense which
necessarily includes the offense charged in the
former complaint under any of the following
instances:
o The graver offense developed due to
supervening facts arising from the same
act or omission constitution the former
charge;
o The facts constituting the graver charge
became known or were discovered only
after the filing of the former complaint or
information;
o The plea of guilty to the lesser offense
was made without the consent of the
prosecutor and of the offended party.

(b) INSEPARABLE OFFENSES

 Where one offense is inseparable from another
and proceeds from the same act, they cannot be
subject to separate prosecutions.
 However, one act can give rise to several crimes
which should be prosecuted separately provided
the elements of the several crimes are not
identical.

ACT VIOLATING LAW AND ORDINANCE

 If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance,
conviction or acquittal under either shall
constitute bar to another prosecution for the
same act.