Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    Pp. vs. Manlulu Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    unbeatable38
    This document summarizes a court case, People v. Manlulu. According to the facts, a NARCOM agent named Alfaro was stabbed and shot during a drinking spree. Two men, Manlulu and Samson, were arrested 19 hours later based on information provided by another witness. During the arrest, the police officer seized a gun and watch belonging to the victim without obtaining a warrant. The court held that the warrantless arrest was invalid because it did not occur immediately after the crime. However, the court found eyewitness testimony from another witness to be credible enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt despite flaws with the arrest.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Pp. vs. Manlulu Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    unbeatable38
    1K views1 page
    This document summarizes a court case, People v. Manlulu. According to the facts, a NARCOM agent named Alfaro was stabbed and shot during a drinking spree. Two men, Manlulu and Samson, were arrested 19 hours later based on information provided by another witness. During the arrest, the police officer seized a gun and watch belonging to the victim without obtaining a warrant. The court held that the warrantless arrest was invalid because it did not occur immediately after the crime. However, the court found eyewitness testimony from another witness to be credible enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt despite flaws with the arrest.

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case, People v. Manlulu. According to the facts, a NARCOM agent named Alfaro was stabbed and shot during a drinking spree. Two men, Manlulu and Samson, were arrested 19 hours later based on information provided by another witness. During the arrest, the police officer seized a gun and watch belonging to the victim without obtaining a warrant. The court held that the warrantless arrest was invalid because it did not occur immediately after the crime. However, the court found eyewitness testimony from another witness to be credible enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt despite flaws with the arrest.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    1K views1 page

    Pp. vs. Manlulu Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    unbeatable38
    This document summarizes a court case, People v. Manlulu. According to the facts, a NARCOM agent named Alfaro was stabbed and shot during a drinking spree. Two men, Manlulu and Samson, were arrested 19 hours later based on information provided by another witness. During the arrest, the police officer seized a gun and watch belonging to the victim without obtaining a warrant. The court held that the warrantless arrest was invalid because it did not occur immediately after the crime. However, the court found eyewitness testimony from another witness to be credible enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt despite flaws with the arrest.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Myla Ruth N.

    Sara

    People v. Manlulu

    FACTS:

    Alfaro, a NARCOM agent, was stabbed and shot in a drinking spree. His drinking
    companions, Manlulu and Samson were arrested nineteen hours after the incident. Patrolman
    Perez arrested Manlulu on the information given by Manlapaz, who was also drinking with the
    accused and the victim. Patrolman Perez seized from Manlulu the .45 cal. Pistol and Casio
    wristwatch said to belong to Alfaro, without a warrant and without informing Manlulu of his right
    to counsel.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the arrest and seizure of the gun and the watch was valid.

    HELD:

    The warrantless arrest was invalid. The killing took place at one o’clock in the morning.
    The arrest and the consequent search and seizure came at around seven o’clock that evening,
    some nineteen hours later. This instance cannot come within the purview of a valid warrantless
    arrest. Paragraph (b) Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure provides that the
    arresting officer must have “personal knowledge” nor was the offense “in fact just been
    committed.” While Pat. Perez may have personally gathered the information which led to the
    arrest of Manlulu, that is not enough. The law requires “personal knowledge”. Obviously,
    “personal gathering of information” is different from personal knowledge. The rule requires that
    the arrest immediately follows the commission of the offense, not some nineteen hours later.

    However, the flaw, fatal as it may be, becomes moot in view of the eyewitness account of
    Manlapaz which the Court found credible. In spite of the nullification of the arrest of accused
    Manlulu, and the exclusion of real evidence, as well as his extra-judicial confession which was
    taken in violation of the Constitution, still the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of the
    accused beyond reasonable doubt.

    You might also like