Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 136 views

    CrimPro Case Digest Posadas Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Kristanne Louise Yu
    1) Two police officers conducted surveillance and spotted the petitioner carrying a bag and acting suspiciously. When approached, the petitioner attempted to flee. 2) The officers searched the bag and found a revolver, ammunition, and a tear gas grenade. The petitioner did not have a license to possess these items. 3) The court held that the warrantless search was valid. Under the rules of court, a person lawfully arrested can be searched for dangerous weapons or evidence without a warrant. The arrest was also lawful based on probable cause from the suspicious behavior and attempted flight. Requiring a warrant would have been futile given the situation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    CrimPro Case Digest Posadas Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Kristanne Louise Yu
    136 views1 page
    1) Two police officers conducted surveillance and spotted the petitioner carrying a bag and acting suspiciously. When approached, the petitioner attempted to flee. 2) The officers searched the bag and found a revolver, ammunition, and a tear gas grenade. The petitioner did not have a license to possess these items. 3) The court held that the warrantless search was valid. Under the rules of court, a person lawfully arrested can be searched for dangerous weapons or evidence without a warrant. The arrest was also lawful based on probable cause from the suspicious behavior and attempted flight. Requiring a warrant would have been futile given the situation.

    Original Title

    151877029-CrimPro-case-Digest-Posadas-vs-CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Two police officers conducted surveillance and spotted the petitioner carrying a bag and acting suspiciously. When approached, the petitioner attempted to flee. 2) The officers searched the bag and found a revolver, ammunition, and a tear gas grenade. The petitioner did not have a license to possess these items. 3) The court held that the warrantless search was valid. Under the rules of court, a person lawfully arrested can be searched for dangerous weapons or evidence without a warrant. The arrest was also lawful based on probable cause from the suspicious behavior and attempted flight. Requiring a warrant would have been futile given the situation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    136 views1 page

    CrimPro Case Digest Posadas Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Kristanne Louise Yu
    1) Two police officers conducted surveillance and spotted the petitioner carrying a bag and acting suspiciously. When approached, the petitioner attempted to flee. 2) The officers searched the bag and found a revolver, ammunition, and a tear gas grenade. The petitioner did not have a license to possess these items. 3) The court held that the warrantless search was valid. Under the rules of court, a person lawfully arrested can be searched for dangerous weapons or evidence without a warrant. The arrest was also lawful based on probable cause from the suspicious behavior and attempted flight. Requiring a warrant would have been futile given the situation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    POSADAS VS. COURT OF APPEALS [188 SCRA 288; G.R. NO.

    89139; 2 AUG 1990]

    Friday, February 06, 2009 Posted by Coffeeholic Writes 


    Labels: Case Digests, Political Law

    Facts: Members of the Integrated National Police (INP) of the Davao Metrodiscom assigned with the Intelligence Task
    Force, Pat. Ursicio Ungab and Pat. Umbra Umpar conducted surveillance along Magallanes Street, Davao City. While in
    the vicinity of Rizal Memorial Colleges they spotted petitioner carrying a "buri" bag and they noticed him to be acting
    suspiciously. They approached the petitioner and identified themselves as members of the INP. Petitioner attempted to
    flee but his attempt to get away was unsuccessful. They then checked the "buri" bag of the petitioner where they found
    one (1) caliber .38 Smith & Wesson revolver with Serial No. 770196, two (2) rounds of live ammunition for a .38
    caliber gun, a smoke (tear gas) grenade, and two (2) live ammunitions for a .22 caliber gun. They brought the petitioner
    to the police station for further investigation. In the course of the same, the petitioner was asked to show the necessary
    license or authority to possess firearms and ammunitions found in his possession but he failed to do so. He was then
    taken to the Davao Metrodiscom office and the prohibited articles recovered from him were indorsed to M/Sgt. Didoy
    the officer then on duty. He was prosecuted for illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions in the Regional Trial
    Court of Davao City.

    Issue: Whether or Not the warantless search is valid.

    Held: In justifying the warrantless search of the buri bag then carried by the petitioner, argues that under Section 12,
    Rule 136 of the Rules of Court a person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or anything used as
    proof of a commission of an offense without a search warrant. It is further alleged that the arrest without a warrant of
    the petitioner was lawful under the circumstances.

    in the case at bar, there is no question that, indeed, it is reasonable considering that it was effected on the basis of a
    probable cause. The probable cause is that when the petitioner acted suspiciously and attempted to flee with the buri
    bag there was a probable cause that the was concealing something illegal in the bag and it was the right and duty of the
    police officers to inspect the same.

    It is too much indeed to require the police officers to search the bag in the possession of the petitioner only after they
    shall have obtained a search warrant for the purpose. Such an exercise may prove to be useless, futile and much too
    late.

    Clearly, the search in the case at bar can be sustained under the exceptions heretofore discussed, and hence, the
    constitutional guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures has not been violated.

    You might also like