Go Vs Court of Appeals  

                               G.R. No. 101837                Feb. 11, 1992

FACTS:

                On July 2 1991, Eldon Maguan was allegedly shot to death by accused Rolito Go due to a traffic altercation when

petitioner’s car and the victim’s car nearly bumped each other. The Security Guard of the “Cravings Bake Shop” saw the whole

incident and point herein petitioner as the gunman, which he positively identified when questioned by the authorities. Being

convinced of the suspect’s identity, the police launched a manhunt operation that caused petitioner to present himself before the

San Juan Police Station to verify the said issue; he was then detained by the police.

ISSUE:

 Whether or not herein petitioner’s arrest valid?

RULING:

                The reliance of both petitioner and the Solicitor General upon Umil v.Ramos is, in the circumstances of this case,

misplaced. In the instant case, the offense for which petitioner was arrested was murder, an offense which was obviously

commenced and completed at one definite location in time and space. No one had pretended that the fatal shooting of Maguan was

a "continuing crime."

                ..... none of the "arresting" officers had any "personal knowledge" of facts indicating that petitioner was the gunman

who had shot Maguan. The information upon which the police acted had been derived from statements made by alleged

eyewitnesses to the shooting — one stated that petitioner was the gunman; another was able to take down the alleged gunman's

car's plate number which turned out to be registered in petitioner's wife's name. That information did not, however, constitute

"personal knowledge."