CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE
JUDGEMENT
Rule 120
Judgment

■ It is the adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the
offense charged and the imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil liability, if
any. (Rule 120, Sec. 1)
Requisites of a judgment

■ 1. Written in official language

■ 2. Personally and directly prepared by the judge and signed by him
■ 3. Shall contain clearly and distinctly:
– a. Statement of the facts
– b. Law upon which it is based (Rule 120, Sec. 1)
CONTENTS OF JUDGMENT

■ Judgment of Conviction
– 1. Legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the accused
– 2. Aggravating and mitigating circumstances
– 3. Participation of the accused whether as principal, accomplice or accessory
– 4. Penalty imposed
– 5. Civil liability or damages, unless reserved or waived (Rule 120, Sec. 2)
■ Judgment of Acquittal
– 1. State whether or not evidence of the prosecution:
■ a. Absolutely failed to prove guilt
■ b. Merely failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
– 2. In either case, judgment shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability
might arise did not exist (Rule 120, Sec. 2).
Award of Indemnity Despite Acquittal

■ Unless there is a clear showing that the act from which the civil liability might arise did not
exist, the judgment must make a finding on the civil liability of the accused in favor of the
offended party (Sec. 2 (2), Rule 120)
When Two or More Offenses Contained
in a Single Information or Complaint
■ Accused may file a motion to quash.
■ If accused fails to object to it before trial, the accused is deemed to have waived the
defect and the court may convict him of as many offenses as charged and proved,
and impose a penalty for each offense. (Rule 120, Section 3)
■ While Sec. 13 of Rule 110 frowns upon multiple offenses being charged in a single
information, the failure to raise this issue during arraignment amounts to a waiver,
and the objection can no longer be raised on appeal. (Abalos v. People, G.R. No.
136994, 2002)
Judgment Rendered by Judge Who Did
not Hear the Case
■ The fact that the trial judge who rendered judgment was not the one who had the
occasion to observe the demeanor of the witnesses during trial, but merely relied in
the records of the case, does not render the judgment erroneous, especially when
the evidence on record is sufficient to support its conclusion. (People v. Alfredo, G.R.
No. 188560, 2010)
■ Where the judge who penned the decision had ceased to be a member of the
judiciary without said decision having been promulgated, and his successor caused
its promulgation to be made thereafter, such judgment is null and void. A decision
penned by a judge during his incumbency cannot be validly promulgated after his
retirement. When a judge retired all his authority to decide any case, i.e., to write,
sign and promulgate the decision thereon also retired with him. (Nazareno v. CA, et
al, G.R. No. 111610, 2002)
Variance Doctrine

■ General Rule: The accused can be convicted of an offense only when it is both charged
and proved.
■ Exception: When there is variance between the crime charged and the crime proved,
and the offense as charged is included or necessarily includes offense proved, the
accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense
charged, or of the offense charged which is included in the offense proved. (People v. Chi
Chan Liu, GR No. 189272, 2015)
PROMULGATION OF JUDGMENT; INSTANCES
OF PROMULGATION OF JUDGMENT IN
ABSENTIA
■ General Rule: The judgment must be read in the presence of the accused and any judge
of the court in which it was rendered (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
■ Exception/s:
– 1. Judgment in light offenses
■ a. May be pronounced in the presence of the accused’s counsel or representative
■ b. May be promulgated by the clerk of court if the judge is absent or outside the province
or city
– 2. Judgment if accused is confined or detained in another province or city
■ a. May be promulgated by the executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the
place of confinement or detention
■ b. Upon request of the court which rendered judgment (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
Manner of Promulgation

■ Judgment is promulgated by filing the signed copy thereof with the clerk of court who
causes true copies to be served upon the parties.
How Accused Is Notified of the
Promulgation
■ Notice shall be given personally by the clerk of court to the accused or to his
bondsman or warden and counsel
■ Notice shall be served at the accused’s last known address if the latter:
– 1. Jumped bail; or
– 2. Escaped from prison (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
If Accused Fails to Appear in the
Promulgation
■ For Acquittal
– 1. Recording the judgment in the criminal docket; and
– 2. Serving accused a copy thereof at his last known address or thru his counsel
■ For Conviction
– 1. Recording the judgment in the criminal docket; and
– 2. Serving accused a copy thereof at his last known address or thru his counsel
■ If absence without justifiable cause, accused shall lose all remedies against the judgment and
the court shall order his arrest
■ But within 15 days from promulgation, accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of
court to avail of the remedies and prove the reason of his absence. If justified, he may then
avail of the remedies within 15 days from notice
Absence of some of the accused during
promulgation of judgment
■ If an accused that is part of multiple accused in one case is absent at promulgation
of judgment, and such judgment is of conviction, he loses his remedies in law even if
an appeal is perfected by his co-accused, who was present, including his name
(People v. De Grano, G.R. No. 167710, 2009).
Modification of Judgment

■ A judgment of conviction may be modified or set aside upon motion of the accused,
before the judgment becomes final or before appeal is perfected. (Rule 120, Sec. 7).
JUDGMENT

■ General Rule: Judgment should be rendered within 90 days from submission

■ Exceptions:
– 1. It must be rendered within 30 days in cases under Summary Procedure
– 2. It must be rendered within 15 days in drug cases
WHEN DOES JUDGMENT BECOME
FINAL
■ General Rule: Judgment becomes final after:
– 1. Lapse of period for appeal
– 2. Sentence partially or totally served
– 3. Accused waives in writing his right to appeal
– 4. Accused has applied for probation
■ Exception: When the death penalty is imposed.
Probation

■ Probation is a mere privilege, and the grant is discretionary upon the court.
■ The offender should apply for probation after conviction within the period for
perfecting an appeal.
■ An application for probation may no longer be filed once the defendant has already
perfected an appeal from the judgment of conviction.
■ Probation does not release civil liability.
Appeal and Probation

■ General Rule: No application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the

defendant has perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction (Sec. 1, RA
10707).
■ Appeal and probation are mutually exclusive remedies. Implicit in an application for
probation is an admission of guilt (Almero v. PP, G.R. No. 188191, 2014).
■ Exception: When a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is
appealed or reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the imposition of a
probationable penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation based
on the modified decision before such decision becomes final (Sec. 1, RA 10707).
 NEW TRIAL OR
RECONSIDERATION
Rule 121
New Trial or Reconsideration

■ At any time before a judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may, on motion
of the accused or at its own instance but with the consent of the accused, grant a
new trial or reconsideration (Rule 121, Sec. 1).
Period to file MNT or MR

■ It should be filed within 15 days from notice of judgment or final order.

■ If an appeal has already been perfected, a motion for new trial on the ground of
newly discovered evidence may be filed in the appellate court.
Motion for Reconsideration; New Trial;
and Reopening of the Case
■ Motion for Reconsideration
– To reconsider its findings of law
– Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof
– On motion of the accused or on motion of the court but with the consent of the accused
■ New Trial
– To permit the reception of new evidence and extend the proceedings
– Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof
– On motion of the accused or on motion of the court but with the consent of the accused
■ Reopening of the Case
– To permit the reception of new evidence and extend the proceedings
– Made by the court before judgment is rendered, in the exercise of sound discretion
– May be at the instance of either party or by the court motu proprio, with a hearing in either case, for
the purpose of presenting additional evidence
Effect of Filing of Motion for New Trial or
Reconsideration
■ The filing of either motion interrupts the period for perfecting an appeal from the
time of its filing until notice of the order overruling themotion shall have been served
upon the accused or his attorney.
Formal Requirements

■ 1. In writing;
■ 2. Filed in court;
■ 3. States the grounds on which it is based;
■ 4. If MNT is based on newly discovered evidence, it must be supported by the
affidavits of the witness by whom such evidence is expected to be given or duly
authenticated copies of documents which it is proposed to introduce in evidence.
(Sec. 4, Rule 121).
GROUNDS FOR NEW TRIAL

■ A motion for new trial may be filed upon any of the following grounds:
– 1. Errors of law during trial
– 2. Irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused during trial
– 3. New and material evidence has been discovered (Rule 121, Sec. 2)
■ NOTE: The rule does not provide for amotion for new trial by the prosecution as the
reopening of the case would result in double jeopardy.
GROUNDS FOR RECONSIDERATION

■ A motion for reconsideration may be filed upon any of the following grounds:
– 1. Errors of law.
– 2. Errors of fact in the judgment (Rule 121, Sec. 3)
■ Note: Requires no further proceedings
REQUISITES BEFORE A NEW TRIAL MAY BE
GRANTED ON GROUND OF NEWLY
DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
■ Elements of Newly Discovered Evidence
■ 1. New evidence discovered after trial
■ 2. It could not have been previously discovered and produced at the trial even with
reasonable diligence
■ 3. It is new and material evidence
■ 4. If introduced and admitted, it would probably change judgment
EFFECTS OF GRANTING A NEW TRIAL
OR RECONSIDERATION
■ The effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration are the following:
■ (a) When a new trial is granted on the ground of errors of law or irregularities
committed during the trial, all proceedings and evidence affected thereby shall be
set aside and taken anew. The court may, in the interest of justice, allow the
introduction of additional evidence.
■ (b) When a new trial is granted on the ground of newly-discovered evidence, the
evidence already adduced shall stand and the newly-discovered and such other
evidence as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow to be introduced shall be
taken and considered together with the evidence already in the record.
■ (c) In all cases, when the court grants new trial or reconsideration, the original
judgment shall be set aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly.
APPEAL
Rule 122
Subject Matter for Review on Appeal

■ In a criminal case, an appeal throws the whole case open for review, and it becomes
the duty of the appellate court to correct such errors as may be found in the
judgment appealed from, whether they are made the subject of the assignment of
errors or not.
Who May Appeal

■ General Rule: Any party may appeal from a judgment or final order.
■ Exceptions:
– 1. A party may not appeal if the accused will be placed in double jeopardy
(Rule 122, Sec. 1). HENCE, the prosecution cannot appeal from a judgment of
acquittal because a verdict of that nature is immediately final and to try him on
the merits, even in an appellate court, is to put him a second time in jeopardy
for the same offense. (Central Bank of the Phils. v. CA, G.R. No. 41859, 1989)
– 2. If the judgment is for conviction and the accused fails to appear without
justifiable cause, he would use the remedy of appeal (Rule 120, Sec. 6)
Rules on Criminal and Civil Liability
When Accused Dies
■ 1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based solely
thereon.
■ 2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a
source of obligation other than delict.
– a. Law;
– b. Contracts;
– c. Quasi-contracts; and
– d. Quasi-delicts. (Civil Code, Art. 1157)
■ 3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only by
way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Rule 111, Sec. 1. This separate civil action may be enforced either against the
executor/administrator or the estate of the accused, depending on the source of obligation upon which the same is based as
explained above.
■ 4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action by prescription, in cases
where during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its extinction, the private offended party instituted together
therewith the civil action. In such case, the statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of
the criminal case, conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil Code, that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a
possible deprivation of right by prescription. (People v. Lipata, G.R. No. 200302, 2016)
WHERE TO APPEAL

■ Regional Trial Court

– In cases decided by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities,
Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court
■ Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court in the proper cases provided by law
– In cases decided by the Regional Trial Court
■ Supreme Court
– In cases decided by the Court of Appeals, CTA En Banc, and the
Sandiganbayan.
HOW APPEAL TAKEN

■ Service of Notice of Appeal

■ General Rule: It should be served upon the adverse party or his counsel by personal
service.
■ Exception: If personal service of the copy of notice of appeal cannot bemade upon the
adverse party or his counsel, service may be done by registered mail or substituted
service (Rule 122, Sec. 4).
■ The appellate court may, in its discretion, entertain an appeal notwithstanding failure to
give such notice if the interests of justice so require (Rule 122, Sec. 5).
■ The fact that no copy of the notice of appeal is served upon the adverse party is not fatal
to the perfection of the appeal as long as the notice of appeal had been filed on time.
EFFECT OF APPEAL BY ANY OF SEVERAL
ACCUSED
■ An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did
not appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and
applicable to him.
■ Appeal of the offended party of the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of
the judgment or order appealed from.
■ Upon perfection of appeal, the execution of judgment or final order appealed from
shall be stayed as to the appealing party (Rule 122, Sec. 11)
SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Rule 126
NATURE OF SEARCH WARRANT

■ An application for a search warrant is not a criminal action; and not of the same
form as that of a criminal action. It is not similar to a criminal action but is rather a
legal process that may be likened to a writ of discovery employed by no less than the
State to procure relevant evidence of a crime. It is an instrument or tool, issued
under the State’s police power and this is the reason why it must issue in the name
of the People of the Philippines. (Te v. Breva, G.R. No. 164974, 2015)
■ It is not a proceeding against a person but is solely for the discovery and to het
possession of personal property (Worldwide Web Corporation v. PP, G.R. 161106,
2014).
■ The power to issue search warrants is exclusively vested with trial judges (Skechers
USA v. Inter Pacific, G.R. 164321, 2006).
Requisites of a Search Warrant (Rule
126, Sec. 1)
■ 1. Order in writing
■ 2. Issued in the name of the People of the Philippines
■ 3. Signed by a judge
■ 4. Directed to a peace officer
■ 5. Commanding him to search for personal property described therein
■ 6. To bring the property before the court
One Search Warrant per Offense

■ No search warrant shall issue for more than one specific offense. (Rule 126, Sec. 4).
■ Thus, when a search warrant was issued for robbery, but the information however
was quashed, the things seized on the basis of such search warrant cannot be used
for re-filing of an information for qualified theft on the same case
DISTINGUISH FROM WARRANT OF
ARREST
■ Search Warrant
– Concerned with the seizure of personal property subject of the offense, stolen or
embezzled property, fruits of the offense, or those intended to be used to commit
an offense
– Applicant must show that the items sought are in fact:
■ 1. Seizable by virtue of being connected with criminal activity
■ 2. Will be found in the place to be searched
– Personal examination of the complaint and the witness is required from the judge
– Generally served at day time, unless there be a direction in the warrant that it may be
served at any time of the day or night
– Prescribes in 10 days from date of issue
– Search warrant does not require the existence of a criminal case, it may be issued prior
to the filing of the case
DISTINGUISH FROM WARRANT OF
ARREST
■ Warrant of Arrest
– Concerned with the seizure of a person so he may be made to answer for the
commission of an offense – involves taking of a person into custody
– Applicant must show:
■ 1. Probable cause that an offense has been committed and
■ 2. The person to be arrested has committed it
– Judge not required to make a personal examination but the judge must make an
independent evaluation of the records forwarded to him/her after preliminary
investigation.
– May be made at any time of the day or night
– Prescribes until served
– Issuance of a warrant of arrest presupposes the existence of a pending criminal case
that gave rise to the warrant
APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT,
WHERE FILED
■ General Rule: Before any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was
committed. (Sps. Marimla v. People, G.R. No. 158467, 2009)
■ Exception/s:
■ 1. Before any court within the judicial region where the crime was committed if the
place of the crime is known. (A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC as cited in Sps. Marimla v.
People, G.R. No. 158467, 2009)
■ 2. Before any court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced.
(A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC as cited in Sps. Marimla v. People, G.R. No. 158467, 2009)
■ 3. IF the criminal action has already been filed, the application shall be made only in the
court where the criminal action is pending (Sec. 2, Rule 126).
Requisites for the Issuance of a Search
Warrant
■ 1. There must be probable cause;
■ 2. Probable cause is to be determined personally by the judge;
■ 3. The judge must personally examine in the form of searching questions and
answers, in writing and under oath, the complainant and any witness he may
produce, on facts personally known to them
■ 4. The search warrant must particularly describe the place to be searched and the
persons or things to be seized;
■ 5. The probable cause must be in connection with one specific offense
■ 6. The sworn statements together with the affidavits submitted by the complainant
and witnesses must be attached to the record.
Duration of validity of a Search Warrant

■ It is valid for 10 days from the date of its issue. After such time, it is void.
■ General Rule: It can only be used once, thereafter it becomes functus officio.
■ Exception: When the search conducted was interrupted, in which case the same may
be continued under the same warrant the following day if not beyond the 10-day
period.
PROBABLE CAUSE FOR ISSUA

■ It refers to such facts and circumstances, which would lead a reasonably discreet
and prudent man to believe that objects sought in connection with an offense are in
the place to be searched (MHP Garments v. CA, G.R. No. 86720, Sept. 2, 1994)
■ The probable cause must be shown to be within the personal knowledge of the
complainant or the witnesses and not based on mere hearsay.
■ No exact test exists as to what acts constitute probable cause but the requirement is
less than certainty of proof, but more than suspicion or possibility.
PERSONAL EXAMINATION BY JUDGE OF
THE APPLICANT AND WITNESS
■ Personal examination by judge of the applicant and witnesses
■ 1. Examination must be personally conducted by the judge
■ 2. Examination must be in the form if searching questions and answers
■ 3. Complainant and witnesses shall be examined on those facts personally known to
them
■ 4. Statements must be in writing and under oath
■ 5. Sworn statements of the complainant and the witnesses, together with the
affidavits submitted, shall be attached to the record
PARTICULARITY OF PLACE TO BE
SEARCHED AND THINGS TO BE SEIZED
■ PLACE TO BE SEARCHED
– A description of the place to be searched is sufficient if the officer with the warrant can, with
reasonable effort, ascertain and identify the place intended and distinguish it from other places in
the community. (People v. Posada, GR. No. 196052, 2015)
– The failure to name the owner or occupant of a property in the affidavit and search warrant does
not invalidate the warrant.
■ PROPERTY TO BE SEIZED
– Description must be so particular that the officer charged with the execution of the warrant will be
left with no discretion respecting the property to be taken
– Test: whether the things described are limited to those which bear direct relation to the offense for
which the warrant is issued.
■ PERSON TO BE SEARCHED
– It may be said that the person to be searched is “particularly described” in the search warrant
when his name is stated in the search warrant, or if the name is unknown, he is designated by
words sufficient to enable the officer to identify him without difficulty
Time of serving a search warrant

■ General Rule: It must only be served during day time

■ Exception: It may be served at night if it is positively asserted in the affidavit that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered to be searched. The affidavit
making such assertion must itself be sufficient as to the fact so asserted, for if the
same is based upon hearsay, the general rule shall apply.
■ Where a search is to be made during the night time, the authority for executing the
same at that time should appear in the directive on the face of the warrant (Asian
Surety v. Herrera, G.R. L-25232,1973).
PERSONAL PROPERTY TO BE SEIZED

■ Personal property to be seized

■ 1. Subject of the offense (i.e. the gun in a case for illegal possession of firearms, the
drugs in a case for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act.)
■ 2. Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense (i.e. the stolen
watch in a case for theft)
■ 3. Instruments of the offense (i.e. the hammer used by accused to break the glass
window in a case for robbery). (Rule 126, Sec. 3)
Right to Break Door or Window

■ The searching officer may break any door or window, or any part of the house if
refused admittance (Rule 126, Sec. 7)
■ The use of a bolt cutter to gain access to the premises was, under the
circumstances, is reasonable, for after themembers of the searching team
introduced themselves to the security guards and showed them the search warrants,
the guards refused to receive the warrants and to open the premises, they claiming
that "they are not in control of the case.” (Sony Computer Entertainment v. Bright
Future Technologies, G.R. No. 169156, 2007)
Search of Premises to be Made in
Presence of Two Witnesses
■ The following should at least be present during the search:
– 1. Lawful occupant or any family member, or
– 2. In the absence of any family member, two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality
■ The absence of the lawful occupant does not taint the regularity of the search
provided that two witnesses are present. (Rule 126, Sec. 8; Lucito v. People, G.R.
No. 192050, 2013)
Receipt for Property Seized

■ The searching officer must give a detailed receipt to the lawful occupant.
■ In the absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality, leave the receipt in the
premises (Rule 126, Sec. 11).
■ In Dangerous Drugs Act cases, the two-witness rule shall not apply and shall instead
follow Section 21 of DDA. (Chain of Custody)
Non-Compliance with the Doctrine of
Chain of Custody
■ General Rule: Non-compliance is fatal; the accused’s arrest becomes illegal and the
items seized are inadmissible in evidence.
■ Exception: Non-compliance is not fatal and will not make the accused’s arrest illegal
nor render the items seized as inadmissible, provided:
– 1. There is justifiable ground; and
– 2. The integrity and evidentiary value of the items are properly preserved (R.A.
No. 9165, Sec. 21; People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 205414, 2016)
EXCEPTIONS TO SEARCH WARRANT
REQUIREMENT
■ Search warrant is not required in the following instances:
■ 1. Search incidental to lawful arrest
■ 2. Seizure of evidence in “plain view”
■ 3. Search of a moving vehicle
■ 4. Consented warrantless search
■ 5. Customs search
■ 6. Stop and frisk (Terry searches)
■ 7. Checkpoints
■ 8. Exigent and emergency circumstances
■ 9. Search of vessels and aircraft
■ 10. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire, sanitary and building regulations
Search incidental to lawful arrest

■ The arrest must precede the lawful search

■ Nevertheless, a search substantially contemporaneous with an arrest is permissible if the police have probable cause to
make the arrest at the outset of the search
■ The search is limited to the following:
– 1. For dangerous weapons
– 2. Anything which may have been used in the commission of an offense
– 3. Anything which constitute proof in the commission of the crime
■ Immediate possession and control rule
– 1. Search may be done not only on the person of the suspect but also within the permissible area within the latter’s
reach
– 2. The area from which he might gain possession of a weapon or destroy evidence is covered by a search incident
to a lawful arrest
■ Accused was caught in flagrante delicto. The arrest was valid, therefore, and the arresting policemen thereby became
cloaked with the authority to validly search his person and effects for weapons or any other article he might use in the
commission of the crime or was the fruit of the crime or might be used as evidence in the trial of the case, and to seize from
him and the area within his reach or under his control, like the jeep he was driving, such weapon or other article
Consented search

■ The consent to a warrantless search must be voluntary, that is, it must be unequivocal, specific, and intelligently given,
uncontaminated by any duress or coercion. Consent to a search is not to be lightly inferred, but must be shown by clear
and convincing evidence. It is the State which has the burden of proving, by clear and positive testimony, that the
necessary consent was obtained and that it was freely and voluntary given. (Valdez v. People, G.R. No. 170180, 2007)
■ A peaceful submission to a search and seizure is not a consent or invitation thereto, but is merely demonstration of regard
for the supremacy of the law. (People v. Nuevas, G.R. No. 170233, 2007)
■ Factors to determine in voluntariness of consent
– (1) The age of the defendant;
– (2)Whether the defendant was in a public or a secluded location;
– (3)Whether the defendant objected to the search or passively looked on;
– (4) The education and intelligence of the defendant;
– (5) The presence of coercive police procedures;
– (6) The defendants belief that no incriminating evidence would be found;
– (7) The nature of the police questioning;
– (8) The environment in which the questioning took place; and
– (9) The possibly vulnerable subjective state of the person consenting.
Search of moving vehicle

■ Justified on the ground that it is not practicable to secure a search warrant because
the vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the
warrant must be sought.
■ When a vehicle is flagged down and subjected to an extensive search, such
warrantless search has been held to be valid as long as the officers conducting the
search have reasonable or probable cause to believe prior to the search that they
would find the instrumentality or evidence pertaining to a crime, in the vehicle to be
searched. (People v Tuazon, G.R. No. 175783, 2007).
■ Exclusive reliance on an unverified, anonymous tip cannot engender probable cause
that permits a warrantless search of a moving vehicle that goes beyond a visual
search (People v. Sapla, G.R. No. 244045, 2020)
Check points; body checks in airport

■ Requisites
– 1. Passengers not subjected to body search
– 2. Limited to visual search
– 3. Under exceptional circumstances, as where:
■ a. Survival of the government is on the balance, or
■ b. Lives and safety of the people are in peril
– 4. Vehicle not searched
■ Searches conducted in checkpoints are valid for as long as they are warranted by
exigencies of public order and are conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists. For as
long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected to a body search, and
the inspection of a vehicle is limited to a visual search, said routine checks cannot be
regarded as violative of an individual’s right against unreasonable searches. (People v
Vinecario, G.R. No. 141137, 2004)
Plain view situation

■ Requisites
■ 1. A prior valid intrusion.
■ 2. Evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police.
■ The inadvertence requirement means that the officer must not have known in advance
of the location of the evidence and discovery is not anticipated
■ 3. The evidence must be immediately apparent.
■ The incriminating nature of the evidence becomes apparent if the officer, at the moment
of seizure, had probable cause to connect it to a crime without the benefit of an unlawful
search or seizure – it requires merely that the seizure be presumptively reasonable
assuming that there is probable cause to associate the property with criminal activity;
that a nexus exists between a viewed object and criminal activity
■ 4. Plain view is justified seizure of evidence without further search.
Stop and frisk situation

■ Requisites
■ 1. Police officer observes unusual conduct.
■ 2. Reasonable suspicion that person is engaged in some type of criminal activity.
■ 3. Identifies himself as a policeman upon approach.
■ 4. Makes reasonable inquiries.
■ 5. There is reasonable fear for his own or other’s safety thus he is entitled to
conduct limited search of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to
discover weapons that might be used for assault.
REMEDIES FROM UNLAWFUL SEARCH
AND SEIZURE
■ Remedies
■ 1. Motion to Quash the Search Warrant
■ 2. Motion to Suppress Evidence the object illegally taken
■ 3. Replevin, if the objects are legally possessed
■ 4. Certiorari, where the search warrant is a patent nullity.
■ 5. File a complaint for damages under Art. 32, in relation to Art. 2219 (6) and (10) of the
Civil Code;
■ 6. File an administrative case under Section 41 of R.A. No. 6975