Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 15

Delfin, Mary Nespher CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE
La Madrid, Rafael ATTY. BYRON SAN
PEDRO
Panganiban, Shanna Mae
ARELLANO LAW
Pinlac, Jairus
Ramarama, Jico
Toledo, Madeline
___________________________________________-
______________________________________________________________________
RULE 113 ARREST
Section 1. Definition of Arrest- Arrest is the taking of a person into
custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of
an offense.

Arrest

1. Deprivation of liberty of the citizen = interest of society


2. Liberty of an individual is properly infringed when:
Authorized by law
In the interest of society

Diplomatic and Parliamentary Immunity

1. Diplomatic representatives: ambassadors and ministers


Not including: consuls, vice-consuls and other commercial
representatives of foreign nations
Punishment: expulsion from country

2. Sec. 11, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution

A senator or member of the House of Representatives shall in all


offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be
privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session

Violation is penalized under Article 145 of the Revised Penal


Code

When is arrest not necessary?

1. When accused VOLUNTARILY APPEARS after complaint is filed


against him
CASE:

RULE 113 - ARREST 1


People vs. Joson (G.R. No. 22366)
Moreover, it may be added that when the defendants voluntarily
appeared after the complaint was presented against them and gave
bonds for their appearance at any time they may be called, no arrest is
necessary. Voluntary appearance relieves the necessity of an actual
arrest.
Warrant of Arrest

1. Sec. 2, Article III of the 1987 Constitution

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,


and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature
and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of
arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by
the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and
the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be
searched and the persons or things to be seized.

2. Guidelines:
CASES:
Callanta vs. Enage (G.R. No. L-27695)
The questioned order directing the issuance of a warrant for the
arrest of the accused after the proceeding conducted by the
respondent Judge, without prior notice to the accused but which
the respondents claim to be the preliminary examination and
preliminary investigation required by the rule, was without any
legal basis and, therefore, null and void.

Ho vs. People (G.R. No. 106632)


There should be a report and necessary documents supporting
the Fiscals bare certification. All of these should be before the
Judge. The judge, before issuing a warrant of arrest, must satisfy
himself that based on the evidence submitted there is sufficient
proof that a crime has been committed and that the person to be
arrested is probably guilty thereof.

People vs. Barba (G.R. No. L-27615-16)


Their objective, as clearly observed by the lower court, was not
to inflict loss of freedom to the complainants but to weaken
management resistance so that it would give in to their demands.
While no doubt to be deplored, such conduct cannot be made a
basis for a finding of probable cause that the crime penalized by
the codal provision in question was committed.
Remedy for warrants improperly issued

1. Petition to Quash

RULE 113 - ARREST 2


CASE:
Ilagan vs, Enrile (G.R. No. 70748)
If the detained attorneys question their detention because of
improper arrest, or that no preliminary investigation has been
conducted, the remedy is not a petition for a Writ of Habeas
Corpus but a Motion before the trial court to quash the Warrant of
Arrest, and/or the Information.
2. Appropriate time to raise Objection

a) Right after the arrest:


De Asis vs Romero (G.R. No. L- 33125)
De Asis could have, right after his arrest, objected to the
regularity of the issuance of the warrant of arrest in question.
Instead he not only filed a petition for bail with the lower court,
thereby accepting the court's jurisdiction over his person, but he
also pleaded, on arraignment, to the information filed against
him.

b) Before the accused enters his plea


People vs. Marquez (G.R. No. L-23654)
The settled doctrine in this jurisdiction is that the right to the
preliminary investigation petition itself must be asserted or
invoked before the plea, otherwise, it is deemed waived.

Section 2. Arrest, how made- An arrest is made by an actual restraint of a


person to be arrested, or by his submission to the custody of the person
making the arrest.

No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. The


person arrested shall not be subject to a greater restraint than is
necessary for his detention.

What constitutes arrest?

1. Actual restraint of a person to be arrested


2. Submission to the custody of the person making the arrest

Reasonable amount of force ay be used to effect arrest


CASES:

People vs. De Lima (G.R. No. L-18660)


That killing was done in the performance of a duty. The deceased
was under the obligation to surrender, and had no right, after
evading service of his sentence, to commit assault and
disobedience with a weapon in the hand, which compelled the

RULE 113 - ARREST 3


policeman to resort to such an extreme means, which, although it
proved to be fatal, was justified by the circumstances.

Aballe vs. People (G.R. No. L-64086)


"an officer making an arrest may take from the person arrested
any money or property found upon his person which was used in
the commission of the crime or was the fruit of the crime or
which might furnish the prisoner with the means of committing
violence or escaping, or which may be used in evidence in the
trial of the cause . . ."
Employment of violence or unnecessary force not allowed

CASES:

People vs. Oanis (G.R. No. 47722)


It may be true that Balagtas was a notorious criminal, a life-termer,
a fugitive from justice and a menace to the peace of the
community, but these facts alone constitute no justification for
killing him when, in effecting his arrest, he offers no resistance, or
in fact no resistance can be offered, as when he is asleep.

US vs. Campo (G.R. No. 4092)


The accused could not allege that he acted in the compliance of a
duty or in the lawful exercise of a right, because in the case in
question he was not authorize to shoot in order to capture an
individual who was fleeing and who offered no resistance
whatever.

Reported by: PANGANIBAN, S

Section 3. Rule 113: Duty of Arresting Officer It shall be the duty of the
officer executing the warrant of arrest the accused and deliver him to the
nearest police station or jail without unnecessary delay.

Duty of arresting officer:

A duly issued warrant not only authorizes the proper, officer to make an
arrest there under but also makes it his duty to carry out without delay the
commands thereof. It is the duty of the officer to execute a warrant which
is valid in form and issued by a court by a competent jurisdiction, and
where a warrant is valid on its face, the officer is under no duty to inquire
further into its basis or alleged invalidity before making the arrest.

Once arrest is made:

The officer executing the warrant is directed to deliver the person

RULE 113 - ARREST 4


arrested to the nearest police station or jail.

It shall be the duty of arresting officer:

a. Inform him of the reason of the arrest;


b. Show the warrant of arrest if any;
c. Inform of his constitutional rights to remain silence and to
counsel and that any statement he might make could be used
against him.

Reported by: RAMARAMA, J


Section 3. Rule 113: Execution of warrant. The head of the office to
whom the warrant of arrest was delivered for execution shall cause the
warrant to be executed within ten (10) days from its receipt. Within ten
(10) days after the expiration of the period, the officer to whom it was
assigned for execution shall make a report to the judge who issued the
warrant. In case of his failure to execute the warrant, he shall state the
reasons therefor. (4a)

Once the judge issues the warrant of arrest, the head of the office
to whom the warrant of arrest was delivered for execution has the duty
to make sure the warrant is served within 10 days from its
receipt. Once the period expires, the officer to whom it was assigned for
execution shall make a report to the judge who issued the warrant. In
case of his failure to execute the warrant, he shall state the reasons
therefor.

The reason for the mandatory 10-day to execute and report after
expiration of said 10 days is to hope that it would remedy the delay in the
disposition of criminal cases. But there is no penalty for the failure to
serve the warrant of arrest in the said period. However, be it noted that
no time limit is fixed for validity of an arrest warrant; it is subsistent and
continues to be in force even if not served within the mandatory 10-days
as long as it has not been recalled, or the person named therein arrested
or otherwise submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court.

CASES:

People vs. Givera,


The Supreme Court held that the accused-appellant claims that
his arrest at the East Avenue Medical Center on May 4, 1996 was
made without a warrant. This is not true. He was arrested by
virtue of a warrant issued by the court on April 27, 1995.
However, as the records show, the warrant of arrest was returned
unserved by the arresting officer on June 7, 1995 as accused-
appellant could not be found. He was finally found only on May

RULE 113 - ARREST 5


4, 1996. Now, no alias warrant of arrest is needed to make the
arrest. Unless specifically provided in the warrant, the same
remains enforceable until it is executed, recalled or quashed.
The ten-day period provided in Rule 113, Sec. 4 is only a directive
to the officer executing the warrant to make a return to the court.

Sec 5. Arrest without warrant, when lawful. A peace officer or a private


person may, without a warrant, arrest a person:

When in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is


actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;

When an offense has just been committed and he has probable


cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; and

When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from


a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or
is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped
while being transferred from one confinement to another.

In cases falling under paragraphs (a) and (b) above, the person arrested
without a warrant shall be forthwith delivered to the nearest police
station or jail and shall be proceeded against in accordance with section 7
of Rule 112.

Burden of Proof
In the arrest of a person without a warrant, the burden of proof is with
the person arresting or causing the arrest to show that the arrest
was lawful.

Rationale
To hold that no criminal can, in any case, be arrested and searched
without a warrant, would be to leave society, to a large extent, at the
mercy of the shrewdest, the most expert, and the most depraved of
criminals facilitating their escape in many instances.
People v. Malasugui (63 Phil 221)

Note
The warrantless arrest must fall within the provisions of Rule 113,
Section 5.
Alih v. Castro (151 SCRA 279)

Warrantless Arrest under Paragraph (a)

RULE 113 - ARREST 6


Elements
1. The person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing,
or is attempting to commit an offense; and

2. Such is in the presence of the peace officer or private person to make


the arrest.

In the presence, definition


An offense is committed in the presence or within the view of the
person making the arrest when he sees the offense, although at a
distance, or hears the disturbances created thereby and proceeds at
once to the scene thereof; or the offense is continuing, or has been
consummated, at the time the arrest is made.
People v. Evaristo (216 SCRA 431)

CASES:

People v. Caco, 222 SCRA 49:


Held: The arrest is valid. The legality and validity of the search
and seizure is beyond dispute. Appellant was caught in flagrante
selling marijuana to the poseur-buyer. Under Section 5, Rule 113
of the Revised Rules of Court, she could be, as in fact she was,
lawfully arrested without a warrant because she was then
committing or has just committed a crime in the presence of the
policemen.

Warrantless Arrest under Paragraph (b)

Elements
1. An offense has just been committed
2. The person to make the arrest has probable cause to believe,
based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances, that
the person to be arrested has committed it.

CASES:

People v. Malasuqui, 63 Phil 221:


Facts: A Chinese merchant was found lying on the ground with
several wounds in the head. He received a wound on the upper
part of his forehead, and died as a result of this wound shortly
afterward in the hospital. When Tan Why was found on the
morning in question, he was still alive and able to answer
laconically "Kagui. The appellant was known by this name in the
area, whereupon a lieutenant of the Constabulary ordered his
immediate arrest.

RULE 113 - ARREST 7


Held: The arrest is valid. Peace officers may make arrests
without judicial warrant, not only when a crime is committed or
about to be committed in their presence but also when there is
reason to believe or sufficient ground to suspect that one has
been committed and that it was committed by the person
arrested by them.

Personal knowledge, concept


The person making the arrest must have personal knowledge of
certain facts or circumstances indicating that the person to be
taken into custody has committed the offense.

Alih v. Castro (151 SCRA 279)


Personal knowledge must be based on probable cause which
means an actual belief or reasonable grounds of
suspicion. The grounds of suspicion are reasonable when, in the
absence of actual belief of the arresting officers, the suspicion
that the person to be arrested is probably guilty of committing
the offense is based on actual facts, i.e., supported by
circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to create the
probable cause of guilt of the person to be arrested.

A reasonable suspicion therefore must be founded on


probable cause, coupled with good faith on the part of the
peace officers making the arrest.

Warrantless Arrest under Paragraph (c)

Elements:
1. The person to be arrested is a prisoner
2. Said prisoner escaped from a penal establishment or place
where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily
confined while his case is pending, or while he is being
transferred from one place to another.

Founding principle
At the time of arrest, the escapee is in the continuous act of
committing a crime, i.e., the evasion of service of sentence.

Parulan v. Director of Prisons (22 SCRA 638)


Facts: Petitioner was confined in the state penitentiary serving a
sentence. He was then transferred to the military barracks under

RULE 113 - ARREST 8


the custody of the Stockade Officer of the said military barracks.
In that month, while still serving his prison term as aforesaid, he
effected his escape from his confinement. Petitioner was
recaptured.
Held: The arrest is valid. It may not be validly said that after the
convict shall have escaped from the place of his confinement the
crime is fully consummated, for, as long as he continues to evade
the service of his sentence, he is deemed to continue committing
the crime, and may be arrested without warrant, at any place
where he may be found. Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Court
may be invoked in support of this conclusion, for, under section
6[c] thereof, one of the instances when a person may be arrested
without warrant is where he has escaped from confinement.

Persons authorized to conduct warrantless arrest


1. Private citizens
2. Peace officers:
a. Police officers (RA 6945)
b. NBI agents (RA 157)
c. Philippine Constabulary officers (Sec. 848, Administrative
Code)
d. Municipal Mayors (US v. Vicentillo, 19 Phil 118)
e. Barangay captains (US v. Fortaleza, supra)

Arrests made by peace officers


Unless acting in bad faith, they are not criminally liable even if
in the process they have committed a mistake.
Suarez v. Platon (69 Phil 556)

US v. Santos (36 Phil 853)


Facts: Dionisio Santos, a policeman, acting under the orders of his
chief who desired to put a stop to pilfering in a certain locality,
patrolled this district, and about midnight, seeing two persons in
front of an uninhabited house and then entering an uninhabited
camarin, arrested them without warrant, although no crime had
been committed, and took them to the municipal presidencia
whereby they were detained in the jail for six or seven hours
when they were released.
Held: The arrest is valid. One should however not expect too much of
an ordinary policeman. He is not presumed to exercise the subtle
reasoning of a judicial officer. Often he has no opportunity to
make proper investigation but must act in haste on his own belief
to prevent the escape of the criminal. To err is human. Even the

RULE 113 - ARREST 9


most conscientious officer must at times be misled. If, therefore,
under trying circumstances and in a zealous effort to obey the
orders of his superior officer and to enforce the law, a peace
officer makes a mere mistake in good faith, he should be
exculpated. Otherwise, the courts will put a premium on crime
and will terrorize peace officers through a fear of themselves
violating the law.

Duty of person making the arrest

Person arrested under par. (a) and (b), offense


recognizable by RTC
Person must be delivered to the nearest police station or jail, and a
complaint or information filed against him in accordance with Sec. 7,
Rule 112.
Person arrested under par. (a) and (b), offense
recognizable by MTC
Person must be delivered to the nearest police station or jail, and
the corresponding charge against him with the proper court.

Reported by: LA MADRID, RAFAEL


Section 6. Time of making arrest. An arrest may be made on any day at
any time of the day or night.

Unlike a search warrant which must be served only in daytime, an arrest may
be made on any day and at any time of the day, even on a Sunday. This is
justified by the necessity of preserving the public peace.

Section 7. Method of arrest by officer by virtue of warrant. When making an


arrest by virtue of a warrant, the officer shall inform the person to be arrested of
the cause and the fact that a warrant has been issued for his arrest, except when
he flees or forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform him, or
when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest. The officer need not
have the warrant in his possession at the time of the arrest but after the arrest, if
the person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be shown to him as soon as
practicable.

GENERAL RULE is: the officer must inform the person to be arrested of

1. The cause of the arrest; and


2. The fact that a warrant has been issued for his arrest.

EXCEPTIONS: In the following instances, the failure of the arresting

RULE 113 - ARREST 10


officer to inform the arrestee of the above is excusable:

1. When the person to be arrested flees; or


2. When the person to be arrested forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him of the cause of his arrest and of the fact
that a warrant has been issued for his arrest; or
3. When the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.

Under this rule, an arrest may be made even if the police officer is not in
possession of the warrant prior to the arrest. Exhibition of the warrant of prior to
the arrest is not necessary. However, if after the arrest, the person arrested so
requires, the warrant shall be shown to him as soon as practicable.

MALLARI V CA
(December 9, 1996)

HELD: This is not a case of a warrantless arrest but merely an instance of an arrest
effected by the police authorities without having the warrant in their possession at
the precise moment. Finding as it does, this court deems it unnecessary to delve
into the applicability of Section 5, rule 113 of the Rules of Courts and on the merits
of both the petitioners and the Office of the Solicitor Generals arguments with
respect thereto. The applicable provision is not Section 5 on Rule 113 on
warrantless arrest, but Section 7, Rule 113.
Section 8. Method of arrest by officer without warrant. When making an
arrest without a warrant, the officer shall inform the person to be arrested of his
authority and the cause of his arrest, unless the latter is either engaged in the
commission of an offense, is pursued immediately after its commission, has
escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform
him, or when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.

GENERAL RULE: the officer must inform the person to be arrested of:

1. His (arresting officers) authority; and


2. The cause of the arrest

EXCEPTIONS: In the following instances, the officers failure to apprise


the arrestee of his authority and the cause of the arrest is justified:

1. When the person to be arrested is then engaged in the commission of


an offense;
2. When the person to be arrested is pursued immediately after its
commission;
3. When the person to be arrested is pursued immediately after escape;
4. When the person to be arrested flees;

RULE 113 - ARREST 11


5. When the person to be arrested forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him;
6. When the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.

PEOPLE v MAHINAY
February 1, 1999

HELD: The Court, as a guardian of the rights of the people lays down the
procedure, guidelines, and duties which the arresting, detaining, inviting or
investigating officer or his companions must do and observe at the time of making
an arrest and agaisn at the time of the custodial interrogation in accordance with
the Constitution, jurisprudence and Republic Act 7438.

Reported by:
Toledo, Madeline S.

Section 9, Rule 113: Method of arrest by private person. When making


an arrest, a private person shall inform the person to be arrested of the
intention to arrest him and cause of the arrest, unless the latter is either
engaged in the commission of an offense, is pursued immediately after its
commission, or has escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the person
making the arrest has opportunity to so inform him, or when the giving of
such information will imperil the arrest.

As a rule:

Private person making an arrest:


(1)Should inform the person to be arrested of the intention; and

(2) to arrest and cause of arrest

Except:
Person to be arrested:

(a) Engaged in the commission of an offense, (in flagrante delicto)

(b)Pursued immediately after its commission; (hot pursuit) or

RULE 113 - ARREST 12


(c) Has escaped, flees; or

(d)Forcibly resists before the person making the arrest has opportunity
to so inform him; or

(e) Giving information will imperil the arrest

Application of last paragraph of Section 5, Rule 113

Section 10, Rule 113: An officer making a lawful arrest may orally
summon as many persons as he deems necessary to assist him in
effecting the arrest. Every person so summoned by an officer shall assist
him in effecting the arrest when he can render such assistance without
detriment to himself.

- Only an officer making the arrest may orally or in writing (which is more legally
effective):

Summon persons deemed necessary to effect the arrest (Aid of Citizens)


- Person called on to assist an officer in making arrest may do what officer himself
might lawfully do; and

- He acts with all the authority of a formally deputized officer.

Person whose sought was aid:

- Can render it w/o detriment to himself; and


- No sanction against private citizen who shall refuse to render
assistance

Art. 149, RPC

Reported by: RAMARAMA, J

Section 11. Right of officer to break into building or enclosure. An


officer, in order to make an arrest either by virtue of a warrant, or without
a warrant as provided in section 5, may break into any building or
enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to
be, if he is refused admittance thereto, after announcing his authority
and purpose.

Requisites:

1. The person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be inside the building


or enclosure.

RULE 113 - ARREST 13


2. The officer had already announced his authority AND purpose.
3. He was denied admittance to said building or enclosure.

Note:

A lawful arrest may be made anywhere, even on a private property or in a


house. This rule is applicable both where the arrest is under a warrant, and
where there is a valid warrantless arrest.

Section 12. Right to break out from building or enclosure. Whenever an


officer has entered the building or enclosure in accordance with the
preceding section, he may break out therefrom when necessary to
liberate himself.

Note: This is only applicable to officers.

Section 13. Arrest after escape or rescue. If a person lawfully arrested


escapes or is rescued, any person may immediately pursue or retake him
without a warrant at any time and in any place within the Philippines.

Where a person lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued, any person


may immediately pursue or retake him without a warrant at any time
and in any place within the country. The pursuit must be immediate.

Section 14. Right of attorney or relative to visit person arrested. Any


member of the Philippine Bar shall, at the request of the person arrested
or of another acting in his behalf, have the right to visit and confer
privately with such person in the jail or any other place of custody at any
hour of the day or night. Subject to reasonable regulations, a relative of
the person arrested can also exercise the same right.

RA 7438 defined certain rights of persons arrested, detained, or under


custodial investigation, with the penalties for violations thereof.

Section 2. Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial


Investigation; Duties of Public Officers.

(a) Any person arrested detained or under custodial investigation


shall at all times be assisted by counsel.

(b) Any public officer or employee, or anyone X X X X X X.

(f) Any person arrested or detained or under custodial

RULE 113 - ARREST 14


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

As used in this Act, "custodial investigation" shall include the practice


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

RULE 113 - ARREST 15