Week 1 - Arrest Flashcards
Definition; Types - With Warrant; Warrantless; John Doe Warrants; Rule 113 Rules of Court
What is the definition of an arrest?
Under Rule 113 Sec. 1, an arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense.
How is an arrest made?
Under Rule 113 Sec. 2. An arrest is made by: (1) an actual restraint of a person to be arrested; or (2) by his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.
What are the limits upon an arresting officer when making an arrest?
Under Rule 113 sec. 2 par. 2. No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. The person arrested shall not be subjected to a greater restraint than is necessary for his detention.
What is the level of restraint used in making an arrest?
Under Rule 113 Sec. 2. par. 2. the level of restraint shall not be greater than what is necessary for the detention of the person to be arrested.
Is the application of an actual force necessary in order for the act of an officer to be deemed as an arrest?
No. In Sanchez v. Demetriou, application of actual force, manual touching of the body, physical restraint or a formal declaration of arrest is not required. It is enough that there be an intent on the part of one of the parties to arrest the other and an intent on the part of the other to submit, under the belief and impression that submission is necessary.
People v. Sequino GR 117397, 1996
An arrest “is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense,” and it is made “by an actual restraint of the person to be arrested, or by his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.”
Defensor-Santiago v. Vasquez GR 99289-90 , 1992
It is a long-standing doctrine that writs of injunction or prohibition will not lie to restrain a criminal prosecution for the reason that public interest requires that criminal acts be immediately investigated and prosecuted for the protection of society, except in specified cases among which are to prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner, and to afford adequate protection to constitutional rights.
Cojuangco v. Sandiganbayan GR 134307 , 1998
The rule is well-settled that the giving or posting of bail by the accused is tantamount to submission of his person to the jurisdiction of the court.
When is the right to speedy trial violated? (Cojuangco v. Sandiganbayan 1998)
The right to a speedy disposition of a case, like the right to speedy trial, is deemed violated only when the proceeding is attended by vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delays. It should be emphasized that the factors that must be taken into account in determining whether this constitutional rights has been violated are as follows: (1) the length of delay; (2) the reason for such delay; and (3) the assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused, and (4) the prejudice caused by the delay.
What is the immunity granted to members of the legislative branch?
CONST. Art. VI. Sec. 11. A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be priviliged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.
Who are granted legislative immunity by the Constitution?
CONST. Art. VI Sec. 11. grants immunity to Senators and Members of the House of Representatives.
What offenses are covered by legislative immunity?
Under Art VI Sec 11 of CONST, legislative immunity covers: (1) offenses punishable by not more than six years impriosnment (only applies when Congress is in session); and (2) any speech or debate in Congress or in any committee thereof.
Whe will legislative immunity apply?
Under Art VI Sec 11 CONST, legislative immunity applies when Congress is in session.
What is the general rule under Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations Art. 31?
The general rule under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Art. 31. - A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State. He shall also enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction.
What is the exception to the general rule of the Art. 31 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations?
Art. 31 Vienna Conv. on Dip. Rel. - A diplomatic agent shall enjoy […] immunity from its civil administrative jurisdiction EXCEPT in case of: (1) A real action relating to private immovable property situated in the territory of the receiving State, UNLESS he holds it on behalf of the sending State for the purposes of the mission; (2) An action relating to succession in which the diplomatic agent is involved as executor, administrator, heir or legatee as a private person and NOT on behalf of the sending State; (3) An action relating to any professional commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent in the receiving State outside his official functions.
Is a diplomatic agent obliged to give evidence as a witness?
No. Under Art. 31 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, a diplomatic agent is not obliged to give evidence as a witness.
Is a diplomatic agent exempted from the jurisdiction of the sending State?
No. Under Art. 31 of the Vienna Conv. on Dip. Rel., the immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt him from the jurisdiction of the sending State.
CONST. Art. III. Sec. 2.
T R O T P T B S I N T P, H, P, A E A U S A S O W N A F A P S B I, A N S W O W O A S I E U P C T B D P B T J A E U O O A O T C A T W H M P A P D T P T B S A T P O T T B S.
What is the constitutional requirement for the issuance of a warrant of arrest?
Probable cause. CONST. Art. III. Sec. 2 requires that no warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination upon oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witness he may produce.
What is the meaning of probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest?
Probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest has been defined as “such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed by the person sought to be arrested.” (Riano citing Ocampo v Abando GR 176830)
Does the Constitution require that the judge personally examine the witnesses?
No, citing the case of Soliven v Makasiar, the Court in AAA v Carbonell explained that his constitutional provision does not mandatorily require the judge to personally examine the complainant and his wintesses. Instead, he may opt to personally evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the prosecutor or he may disregard the prosecutor’s report and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses. (Riano)
What are the options of the judge in making an examination for the issuance of warrant of arrest?
The options of the judge are: (1) personally examine the complainant and the witness under oath or affirmation; (2) personally evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the prosecutor; or (3) disregard the prosecutor’s report and require the submission of suppoting affidavits of witnesses. (Riano citing AAA v Carbonell)
Rule 113 Sec 2. Arrest; how made.
A A I M B A A R O A P T B A O B H S T T C O T P M T A // N V O U F S B U I M A A. T P A S N B S T A G R T I N F H D
How is an arrest made?
An arrest is made by: (1) an actual restraint of a person to be arrsted; or (2) by his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.(Rule 113 Sec 2)
