You are on page 1of 9

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras A.

Police Power- is the power vested in the legislature by the Constitution to make, ordain, establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws for the good and welfare of the State and its people. ( ERMITA MALATE HOTEL VS. CITY MAYOR, July 31, 1967) The basic purposes of police power are:

a. to promote the general welfare, comfort and convenience of the people; (ASSOCIATION OF SMALL LANDOWNERS VS. SECRETARY, 175 SCRA 343; US VS. TORIBIO, 15 Phil. 85 b. to promote and preserve public health; (VILLANUEVA VS. CASTANEDA, September 21, 1987; DECS VS. SAN DIEGO, 180 SCRA 533 [NMAT]; LORENZO VS. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH, 50 Phil. 595apprehend and confine lepers in a leprosarium) c. to promote and protect public safety; (AGUSTIN VS. EDU, 88 SCRA 195; TAXICAB OPERATORS VS. JUINIO, 119 SCRA 897 ) d. to maintain and safeguard peace and order; (GUAZON VS. DE VILLA) e. to protect public morals; f. to promote the economic security of the people. (ICHONG VS. HERNANDEZ, 101 Phil. 11155)

Due Process (Sec.1 No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law) is a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial (Per Daniel Webster in the DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE It means essentially a fair and impartial trial and reasonable opportunity for the preparation of the defense. It is a guaranty against any kind of abuse and arbitrariness, by anyone in any of the branches of Government. Purpose: a. To prevent undue encroachment against the life, liberty, and property of individuals b. To secure the individual from the arbitrary exercise of powers of government, unrestrained by the established principles of private rights and distributive justice.

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras c. To protect property from confiscation by legislative enactments from seizure, forfeiture, and destruction without a trial and conviction by the ordinary modes of judicial procedures. Requirements of Due Process: a. Substantive Due Process- guarantees that life, liberty and property shall not be taken away from anyone without due process of law. Requirements: a.a. there must be a valid law upon which it is based. a.b. the law must have been passed or approved to accomplish valid governmental objective. a.c. the objective must be pursued in a lawful manner a.d. the law as well as the means to accomplish the objective must be valid and not oppressive. b. Procedural Due Process- refers to the regular methods of procedure to be observed before ones life, liberty and property can be taken away from him. Guarantee to obtain fair trial in a court of justice. Two aspects of Procedural Due Process: b.a. Procedural Due Process in Judicial Proceedings: (Banco Filipino v. Palanca 37 Phil. 921) i. there must be an impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it. ii. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant and over the property which is the subject matter of the proceeding. iii. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard; and iv. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing. b.b Procedural Due Process in Administrative Proceedings (Ang Tibay v. CIR, 69 Phil. 635)-the essence of Due Process is simply the opportunity to explain ones side. It is not identical with judicial process i. the right to a hearing, which includes the right to present ones case and submit evidence in support thereof. ii. the tribunal must consider the evidence presented iii. the decision must have something to support itself iv. the evidence must be substantial v. the decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected; vi. the tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of the subordinate in arriving at a decision; and

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras vii. the board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the reason for the decision rendered. Due process has different requisites in: 1. Due process before judicial bodies or judicial due process; 2. Due process before administrative bodies; 3. Due process before the labor tribunals; and 4. Due process involving students. (1) The students must be informed in writing of the nature and cause of any accusation against them; (2) They shall have the right to answer the charges against them and with the assistance if counsel, if desired; (3) They shall be informed of the evidence against them; (4) They shall have the right to adduce evidence in their own behalf; and (5) the evidence must be duly considered by the investigating committee or official designated by the school authorities to hear and decide the case. Equal Protection Clause (..nor shall any person be denied the equal protection clause.) -guarantee that all persons are equal before the law which means that what the constitution guarantees is not absolute equality of all individuals but only equality and opportunity, or protection given by law to persons or classes of persons who are similarly situated and who are therefore belong to a certain classification made by law. adherence to precedents, mandates that once a case has been decided one way, then another case involving exactly the same point at issue should be decided in the same manner. This doctrine is one of policy grounded on the necessity for securing certainty and stability of judicial decisions. Requirements of a valid and reasonable classification: a. It must rest on substantial distinctions- it must be a valid distinction founded on good and justifiable reasons. Otherwise, it may be considered arbitrary and unreasonable b. It must be germane to the purpose of the law- classification must not only be based on substantial distinctions but should also be relevant to the purpose which the law seeks to achieve.

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras c. It must be limited to existing conditions only- classification will continue to be valid and effective for as long as the conditions sought to be addressed or corrected by the law continue to exist. It must apply equally to all members of the same class- the law should not treat a person differently from another who is similarly situated or SC elaborated- no person or class of persons shall be deprived of the same protection of the laws which is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in the same place and in like circumstances; (Pp vs. Cayat 68 Phil. 12)


Search and Seizure ( Sec.2. the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witness he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.)- all persons including aliens under Sec.2, whether accused of a crime or not. It is also a protection of sanctity and privacy of a person himself, and of inviolability of a persons home and his possessions. Exceptions to the 2nd portion of Sec 2. a. Warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest b. Seizure of evidence in plain view doctrine, elements are; b.a. a prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless arrest in which the police are legally present in the pursuit of their official duties; b.b. the evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who had the right to be where they are; b.c. the evidence must be immediately apparent; b.d. plain view justified mere seizure of evidence without further search. The plain view doctrine, which may justify a search without warrant, APPLIES ONLY WHERE THE POLICE OFFICER IS NOT SEARCHING FOR EVIDENCE AGAINST THE ACCUSED, BUT INADVERTENTLY COMES ACROSS AN INCRIMINATING OBJECT. (pp vs. valdez 341 scra 25) Search of a Moving Vehicle. Consented warrantless Search Customs search Stop and frisk Exigent and emergency circumstances

c. d. e. f. g.

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras

Probable Cause- such reasons supported by facts and circumstances, as will warrant a cautious man in the belief that his actions, and the means in presenting it, are legally just and proper (Corro vs. Lising 137 scra 541) Requirements: a. The judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally examines the complainant and the witnesses in the form of searching questions and answers. b. The examination must be under oath c. The examination must be in writing d. The complainant and the witnesses must be examined on facts personally known to them e. The judge must attach to the record sworn statements of the complainants and the witnesses together with their affidavit submitted. THERE ARE TWO (2) KINDS OF PROBABLE CAUSE

1. The executive determination of probable cause on whether a crime was allegedly committed and file a criminal case in court; and 2. Judicial determination of probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest. The place to be searched AS INDICATED in the warrant is controlling Valid Warrantless Search and Seizure- there can be valid warrantless search and seizure in the following instances: a. A person caught in flagrante delicto selling prohibited or regulated drugs may be searched as an incident of the arrest. Valid search and seizure incidental to a lawful arrest b. An unlicensed firearm may be seized from a person arrested as an incident of the arrest. c. The searched and seizure of a prohibited article in plain view of an officer may be effected as an incident to a lawful arrest. d. A moving vehicle maybe searched without a warrant e. THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY Section 3. The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law. Any

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. Coverage of the Guarantee Tangible objects- include letters, telegrams, signals, cables, telephone, clients file, and other documents. Intangible objects- RA4200Anti- Wiretapping Act, it is illegal for any person, not authorized by all the parties to any private communication, to secretly record such communication by means of tape recorder.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PRESS, EXPRESSION, etc. Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for the redress of their grievances. . Obscenity; test Tests: a. Whether the average person applying to contemporary community standards would find the work appeals to prurient interest; b. Whether the work depicts or describes a patently offensive sexual conduct; c. Whether the work as a whole lacks serious literary , artistic, political or scientific value Public Assembly Act SEC. 5. Application requirements.-- All applications for a permit shall comply with the following guidelines:

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras

1. The applications shall be in writing and shall include the names of the leaders or organizers; the purpose of such public assembly; the date, time and duration thereof, and place or streets to be used for the intended activity; and the probable number of persons participating, the transport and the public address systems to be used. 2. The application shall incorporate the duty and responsibility of applicant under Section 8 hereof. 3. The application shall be filed with the office of the mayor of the city or municipality in whose jurisdiction the intended activity is to be held, at least five (5) working days before the scheduled public assembly. 4. Upon receipt of the application, which must be duly acknowledged in writing, the office of the city or municipal mayor shall cause the same to immediately be posted at a conspicuous place in the city or municipal building.

Section 6 of the Public Assembly Act reads: Section 6. Action to be taken on the application (a) It shall be the duty of the mayor or any official acting in his behalf to issue or grant a permit unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the public assembly will create a clear and present danger to public order, public safety, public convenience, public morals or public health. (b) The mayor or any official acting in his behalf shall act on the application within two (2) working days from the date the application was filed, failing which, the permit shall be deemed granted. Should for any reason the mayor or any official acting in his behalf refuse to accept the application for a permit, said application shall be posted by the applicant on the premises of the office of the mayor and shall be deemed to have been filed. (c) If the mayor is of the view that there is imminent and grave danger of a substantive evil warranting the denial or modification of the permit, he shall immediately inform the applicant who must be heard on the matter.

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras

(d) The action on the permit shall be in writing and served on the application [sic] within twenty-four hours. (e) If the mayor or any official acting in his behalf denies the application or modifies the terms thereof in his permit, the applicant may contest the decision in an appropriate court of law. (f) In case suit is brought before the Metropolitan Trial Court, the Municipal Trial Court, the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, the Regional Trial Court, or the Intermediate Appellate Court, its decisions may be appealed to the appropriate court within forty-eight (48) hours after receipt of the same. No appeal bond and record on appeal shall be required. A decision granting such permit or modifying it in terms satisfactory to the applicant shall, be immediately executory. (g) All cases filed in court under this Section shall be decided within twenty-four (24) hours from date of filing. Cases filed hereunder shall be immediately endorsed to the executive judge for disposition or, in his absence, to the next in rank. (h) In all cases, any decision may be appealed to the Supreme Court. (i) Telegraphic appeals to be followed by formal appeals are hereby allowed. (underscoring supplied) Prior restraint refers to official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination. While any system of prior restraint comes to court bearing a heavy burden against its constitutionality, not all prior restraints on speech are invalid.

At the same time, jurisprudence distinguishes between a contentneutral regulation, i.e., merely concerned with the incidents of the speech, or one that merely controls the time, place or manner, and under well defined standards; and a content-based restraint or censorship, i.e., the restriction is based on the subject matter of the utterance or speech. Content-based laws are generally treated as more suspect than content-neutral laws because of judicial concern with discrimination in the regulation of

Constitutional Law II (Midterm Reviewer) University of the Cordilleras expression. Content-neutral regulations of speech or of conduct that may amount to speech, are subject to lesser but still heightened scrutiny. Clear and Present Danger- If he is of the view that there is such an imminent and grave danger of a substantive evil, the applicants must be heard on the matter. Thereafter, his decision, whether favorable or adverse, must be transmitted to them at the earliest opportunity. Thus if so minded, they can have recourse to the proper judicial authority.- Limitations:

Dangerous Tendency Rule- this rule may be epitomized as follows: **If the words uttered create a dangerous tendency which the state has a right to prevent, then such words are punishable. It is not necessary that some definite or immediate acts of force, violence, or unlawfulness be advocated. It is sufficient if the natural tendency and probable effect of the utterance be to bring the substantive evil which the legislative body seeks to prevent. (Gitlow vs NY 268 U.S.652)

Balancing of Interest Test- two rights competing with each other. (Read Lagunzad v Gonzales and Ayer production vs Capulong)