RULE 113: ARREST
1. Is arrest a necessary part of
criminal proceeding? What is its purpose?
DEFINITION: Arrest is the taking of a
person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission
of an offense
PURPOSE: to make an accused answer for
the commission of an offense
2. What are the laws that govern
arrest warrants (AR)?
Section 2, Art. III, 1987 Constitution
No search warrant or warrant of arrest
shall be issued 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 places to be searched
and the persons or things to be seized.
3. What are the types of
Arrests?
(1)
Arrest with warrant
(2)
Warrantless arrest
4.
State the privilege of members of congress as far
as arrest is concerned? Does this legislative privilege mean immunity from
suit?
A senator or member of the House of
Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years of
imprisonment, be privileged 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.
5. Who are authorized to issue
warrants of arrest?
Section 6, Rule 112 of the Revised Rules
on Criminal Procedure empowers the judge of the Regional Trial Court to
evaluate the complaint or information, and may dismiss the case if the records
fail to establish probable cause, otherwise he shall issue the warrant of
arrest
6. What are the parameters for
the judge’s issuance of a warrant of arrest?
Within 10 days from the filing of the
complaint or information, the judge shall personally evaluate the resolution of
the prosecutor and its supporting evidence:
(1)
Dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly
fails to establish probable cause;
(2)
Issue a warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if
the accused has already been arrested, if there is probable cause;
(3)
In case of doubt on the existence of probable
cause, the judge may order the prosecutor to present additional evidence within
5 days from notice and the issue must be resolved by the court within 30 days
from the filing of the complaint or information
7. What is judicial
determination of probable cause? How does it differ from determination of
probable cause in the PI stage?
|
|
EXECUTIVE DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE |
JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE |
|
Who |
Made by the
public prosecutor |
Made by the judge |
|
When |
Preliminary
investigation |
Issuance of
warrant of arrest |
|
For |
To determine
whether probable cause exists and to charge those whom he believes to have
committed the crime as defined by law |
The judge must
satisfy himself that based on the evidence submitted, there is necessity for
placing the accused under custody in order not to frustrate the ends of
justice |
8. What is meant by personal
determination of probable cause by the judge?
The constitutional provision on the
issuance of warrant does not mandatorily require the judge to personally
examine the complainant and her witnesses. Instead, he may opt to personally
evaluate the report and supporting documents supporting documents submitted by
the prosecutor or he may disregard the prosecutor’s report and require the
submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses.
"What the Constitution underscores
is the exclusive and personal responsibility of the issuing judge to satisfy
himself of the existence of probable cause. In satisfying himself of the
existence of probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest, the judge
is not required to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses.
Following established doctrine and procedure, he shall: (1) personally evaluate
the report and the supporting documents submitted by the fiscal regarding the
existence of probable cause and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant of
arrest; or (2) if on the basis thereof he finds no probable cause, he may
disregard the fiscal's report and require the submission of supporting
affidavits of witnesses to aid him in arriving at a conclusion as to the
existence of probable cause.
9. Once a judge dismisses a case
for lack of probable cause, does res judicata set in?
NO. Res judicata in prison grey or Double
Jeopardy is applicable only after there is a valid complaint/information, a valid
plea, in the competent court jurisdiction and such acquittal, conviction or
dismissal has been final.
10.
What is the rule on arrest in Summary Procedure?
Whenever a case falls on under Summary
Procedure, the general rule is that the court shall not order the arrest of the
accused unless he fails to appear whenever required.
11.
At what instance when issue regarding irregularity
of arrest be raised, what would be the effect in case of failure to raise it?
Jurisprudence tells us that an accused is estopped
from assailing any irregularity of his arrest if he fails to raise the issue or
tonkove for the quashal of the information against him on this ground before
arraignment, thus, any objection involving a warrant of arrest or the procedure
by which the courtacquired jurisdiction over the person of the accused must br
made before he enters his plea otherwise the objection is deemed waived.
Nevertheless, even if appellnt's warrantless arrest were proven to be indeed
invalid, such a scenario would still jot provide salvation to appellant's cause
because jurisprudence also instructs us that the illegal arrest of an accused
is not sufficient cause for setting aside a valid judgement rendered upon a
sufficient complaint after trial free from error
12. How should arrest be carried out?
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.
(Sec.
2, Rule 113)
13. What are the duties of officers in the execution of the warrant?
It shall be the duty of the officer
executing the warrant to arrest the accused and deliver him to the nearest
police station or jail without unnecessary delay. (Sec. 3, Rule 113)
14. When is it allowed for officers making the arrest to break in into
building and enclosure, and when is it allowed to break out from building and
enclosure?
If the person to be arrested is or
reasonably believed to be within any building or enclosure in case he is
refused admittance after announcing his authority and purpose. (Sec. 11, Rule 113)
After entering the building or enclosure,
he may break out from said place if necessary to liberate himself from the same
place. (Sec. 12, Rule 113)
15. Who are authorized to implement the warrant of arrest?
a. Regular members of the National Bureau of
Investigation.
b. Regular members of the Philippine National
Police.
c. Court Sherrifs.
d. Other public officers and employees other
than those enumerated in the foregoing authorized by special laws to execute
arrest for violations of particular laws entrusted to their offices for
enforcement.
16.
What are the grounds for the quashal of Warrant of
Arrest?
A warrant of arrest may be quashed on the
ground that it was issued without probable cause. In Allado vs. Diokno (G.R.
No. 113630, May 5, 1994). In the same case, the Supreme Court found no probable
cause in the issuance of the warrant of arrest considering the following
circumstances:
(1) The accounts of the complainant and his
witnesses were incredible, laden with inconsistencies and improbabilities;
(2) The evidence thus far presented was
utterly insufficient;
(3) The judge did not personally examine the
evidence nor did he call for the complainant and his witnesses in the face of
their incredible accounts;
(4) Instead, the judge merely relied on the
certification of the prosecutors that probable cause existed; and
(5) The prosecutors themselves have similarly
misappropriated, if not abused, their discretion to determine probable cause.
17. Are all arrests be made by virtue of an arrest warrant?
GR: Warrant is needed in order to validly
effect an arrest
XPN: (Sec.
5, Rule 113)
1.
In Flagrante Delicto: in his presence the person to
be arrested has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an
offense
2.
Hot Pursuit: offense has just been committed, and
he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstance that the person to be arrested had committed it
3.
Escapee: person to be arrested is 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 escaped while being
transferred from one confinement to another
REQUISITES OF IN FLAGRANTE DELICTO:
1.
Performance of overt acts that would indicate that
a person has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an
offense
2.
Performance of overt act is done in the presence or
within the view of the arresting officer
REQUISITES OF HOT PURSUIT:
1.
An offense has been committed
2.
The person making the arrest has personal knowledge
of facts indicating that the person to be arrested has been committed
- Personal
knowledge must be based on: (1) actual belief or reasonable grounds of
suspicion; or (2) supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves
to create the probable cause of guilt of the person to be arrested
18. Is there an instance when arrest is superfluous?
(1)
When accused was arrested by virtue of a lawful
arrest without warrant
(2)
When penalty is fine only
(3)
When the case is covered in a summary procedure,
unless the accused did not appear during trial
Comments
Post a Comment