BREAKING: Kennedy Rhys was acquitted by the court due to lack of evidence. On April 25, 2022, the PNP received an anonymous tip alleging his possession of dangerous drugs. He was recently seized with a sachet of marijuana and arrested without a warrant. Therefore, the evidence obtained in violation of the right against unreasonable searches and seizures was inadmissible.
"There are three (3) grounds that will justify a warrantless arrest. Rule 113, Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides:
Section 5. Arrest Without Warrant; When Lawful. -A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
(b) 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
(c) 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.
The first kind of warrantless arrest is known as an in flagrante delicto arrest. The validity of this warrantless arrest requires compliance with the overt act test as explained in People v. Cogaed:
For a warrantless arrest of in flagrante delicto to be affected, "two elements must concur: (1) the person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he [or she] 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."
Failure to comply with the overt act test renders an inflagrante delicto arrest constitutionally infirm. In Cogaed, the warrantless arrest was invalidated as an in flagrante delicto arrest because the accused did not exhibit an overt act within the view of the police officers suggesting that he was in possession of illegal drugs at the time he was apprehended.
Likewise in People v. Verdiano, petitioner's arrest could not be justified as an inflagrante delicta arrest under Rule 113, Section 5(a) of the Rules of Court. He was not committing a crime at the checkpoint. Petitioner was merely a passenger who did not exhibit any unusual conduct in the presence of the law enforcers that would incite suspicion. In effecting the warrantless arrest, the police officers relied solely on the tip they received. Reliable information alone is insufficient to support a warrantless arrest absent any overt act from the person to be arrested indicating that a crime has just been committed, was being committed, or is about to be committed.
The warrantless arrest cannot likewise be justified under Rule 113, Section 5(b) of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. The law enforcers had no personal knowledge of any fact or circumstance indicating that petitioner had just committed an offense.
A hearsay tip by itself does not justify a warrantless arrest. Law enforcers must have personal knowledge of facts, based on their observation, that the person sought to be arrested has just committed a crime. This is what gives rise to probable cause that would justify a warrantless search under Rule 113, Section 5(b) of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure."
Read more:
The People of the Philippines v. Victor Cogaed y Romana [G.R. No. 200334] https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jul2014/gr_200334_2014.html
Mario Veridiano y Sapi v. People of the Philippines [G.R. No. 200370] https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/jun2017/gr_200370_2017.html
YOU ARE READING
Murdered by an Idol | Epistolary ✓
Mystery / Thriller"Online diary who? Alam ko namang hanggang message request mo lang ako. Pero don't get me wrong, ah. I'm a fan of yours. Hahaha maiintindihan mo kaya 'to if ever? 3ih kung magjeje aq d mo na mattranls4t3 hahaha pinoy sakalam" Anne Margaret was a sen...
