Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 324 views

    People vs. Exala (HR Bendo)

    Uploaded by

    Mae Clare Bendo
    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled that a search and seizure can be conducted without an arrest preceding it. In this case, the defendants were stopped at a police checkpoint for a routine inspection of their vehicle. When the police officer noticed a bulging bag and the defendants became nervous, it provided probable cause to conduct a further search. Upon opening the bag, marijuana was discovered, allowing for a lawful arrest. The Court found the search was valid as checkpoints can conduct stop-and-searches without warrants to inspect for prohibited items, and the defendants' behavior provided grounds to widen the search before an arrest. Therefore, a search and seizure does not inherently require an arrest first under certain circumstances like this checkpoint inspection.

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Exala (HR Bendo)

    Uploaded by

    Mae Clare Bendo
    324 views1 page
    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled that a search and seizure can be conducted without an arrest preceding it. In this case, the defendants were stopped at a police checkpoint for a routine inspection of their vehicle. When the police officer noticed a bulging bag and the defendants became nervous, it provided probable cause to conduct a further search. Upon opening the bag, marijuana was discovered, allowing for a lawful arrest. The Court found the search was valid as checkpoints can conduct stop-and-searches without warrants to inspect for prohibited items, and the defendants' behavior provided grounds to widen the search before an arrest. Therefore, a search and seizure does not inherently require an arrest first under certain circumstances like this checkpoint inspection.

    Original Title

    19. People vs. Exala (HR Bendo)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled that a search and seizure can be conducted without an arrest preceding it. In this case, the defendants were stopped at a police checkpoint for a routine inspection of their vehicle. When the police officer noticed a bulging bag and the defendants became nervous, it provided probable cause to conduct a further search. Upon opening the bag, marijuana was discovered, allowing for a lawful arrest. The Court found the search was valid as checkpoints can conduct stop-and-searches without warrants to inspect for prohibited items, and the defendants' behavior provided grounds to widen the search before an arrest. Therefore, a search and seizure does not inherently require an arrest first under certain circumstances like this checkpoint inspection.

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Exala (HR Bendo)

    Uploaded by

    Mae Clare Bendo
    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled that a search and seizure can be conducted without an arrest preceding it. In this case, the defendants were stopped at a police checkpoint for a routine inspection of their vehicle. When the police officer noticed a bulging bag and the defendants became nervous, it provided probable cause to conduct a further search. Upon opening the bag, marijuana was discovered, allowing for a lawful arrest. The Court found the search was valid as checkpoints can conduct stop-and-searches without warrants to inspect for prohibited items, and the defendants' behavior provided grounds to widen the search before an arrest. Therefore, a search and seizure does not inherently require an arrest first under certain circumstances like this checkpoint inspection.

    Copyright:

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

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.

    RODELIO C. EXALA, RESTITUTO B. BOCALAN and JAIME P. FERNANDEZ


    G.R. No. 76005. April 23, 1993

    FACTS:
    A private jeep driven by accused-appellant Restituto B. Bocalan with his co-accused
    Fernandez and Exala, was stopped at a police checkpoint for routine inspection regarding unlicensed
    firearms and other prohibited items. Pfc. Ricardo Galang went near the jeep and asked the occupants
    if there were firearms inside. They answered in the negative. Pfc. Galang proceeded to inspect the
    vehicle by beaming a flashlight inside and noticed a black leather bag with its sides bulging. When he
    asked what it contained there was deadening silence. The 3 suddenly became fidgety. Suspicious,
    Pfc. Galang ordered the bag opened and found marijuana. The 3 remained motionless and appeared
    petrified with fear. They were brought to the police station that same night for further investigation.

    Bocalan contends that the trial court erred in admitting the bag as evidence against him since it
    was obtained through a warrantless search. Since the search was conducted prior to the arrest,
    Bocalan argues that it was not incident to a lawful arrest.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not a search and seizure can be effected without being preceded by an arrest.

    RULING:
    Yes. A search and seizure can be effected without being preceded by an arrest.

    The Court has held that there are indeed instances where search and seizure can be effected
    without necessarily being preceded by an arrest. An illustration would be the "stop-and-search"
    without a warrant at military or police checkpoints. Vehicles are generally allowed to pass through
    these checkpoints after a routine inspection and answering a few questions. If vehicles are stopped
    and extensively searched it is because of some probable cause which justifies a reasonable belief of
    those manning the checkpoints that either the motorist is a law-offender or the contents of the vehicle
    are or have been instruments in the commission of an offense.

    Here, the arrest of the three was lawful because it was made upon the discovery of the
    prohibited drug in their possession. There was no need for a warrant; the arrest was made while a
    crime was committed. This is one of the situations envisioned by Sec. 5, par. (a), of Rule 113 of the
    1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, as amended, when a warrantless arrest may be made. The
    accused were caught in the act of dispatching in transit or transporting marijuana, in violation of Sec.
    4, Art. II, of R.A. 6425, as amended. The checkpoint in the instant case was established in line with
    "Operational Bakal" the main object of which was to search for unlicensed firearms and other
    prohibited items in the possession of unauthorized persons passing through it. The accused clearly
    appeared to be in abject fear of being discovered. Such peculiar apprehensiveness if not restrained
    reaction of the accused, which did not appear normal, provided the probable cause justifying a more
    extensive search that led to the opening of the bag and the discovery of the prohibited stuff.
    Significantly, there was no sign of any protest or objection to the search. The accused remained silent
    even after their arrest. Their submissive stance after the discovery of the bag of marijuana, as well as
    the absence of any protest on their part when arrested, not only casts serious doubts on their
    professed innocence but also confirms their acquiescence to the search. Clearly then, there was
    waiver of the right against unreasonable search and seizure

    Therefore, the search and seizure can be effected without being preceded by an arrest. Hence
    it is valid.

    You might also like