You are on page 1of 11

Certificate to File Action from the barangay required before institution of criminal actions

Except. 408 and Sec. Sec. 412 (B) of RA 7160 (Local Government Code)

 Garces v. CA, 162 SCRA 504

 People v. Forte, 223 SCRA 619

Allegations of complaints as basis

 Buaya v. Polo, 169 SCRA 471 (1989)

Venue or Territory where committed; Purpose

Sec. 18, B.P. 129

 Treῆas v. People, G.R. No. 195002, January 25, 2012

 Uy v. C.A., 276 SCRA 367 (1997)

 Campanano, Jr. Vs. Datuin, 536 SCRA 471 (2007)

 People v. Taroy, G.R. #192466, Sept. 12, 2011

Nature, scope and definition

A. Definition & Nature

Const. (1987), art. III, Secs. 2,3;

Rule 126, Secs, 1, 13

“Exclusionary Rule”

 Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 (1967);

 People v. Valdez, 341 SCRA 25 (2000)

“People not places”

 Katz v. U.S., 389 U.S. 347 (1967);

 See: Polo v. David, G.R. No. 181881, October 18, 2011**

Private searches

Governmental interference

 People v. Marti, 193 SCRA 57 (1991);

Vessel Security officer

R.R. F. 438 SCRA (2004).R. 2009 Form and content of warrant. III. No.  Microsoft Corporation v. 133917.M. 2001  People v. 2007  People v. cf. 307 SCRA 253 (1999).  People v. art. 2010 Rules on DNA Evidence A. 2007  People v. sec. sec.  People v. 136066-67. 13. Estrada. Molina G. 1. Umanito. Asuncion. 296 SCRA 383 (1998) Warrantless Search & Seizure: a. III. Person Authorized: Who determines? Const.  People v. Const. 2003 Warrantless Search of Computers & Cell Phones: . sec. April 16. 26.R. sec. 06-11-5-SC October 2. #172607 Oct. G. No. 296 SCRA 383 (1998). February 19. G.. Nos. #172607. 2. 4. Tuan. G. 2. Estrada. August 11. 176066. G. sec. Validity of warrant  People v. February 4. Binad Chua. Maxicorp.  PICOP v. Art. Rule 126. Umanito. 10.R. Search incident to lawful arrest Rule 126. lifetime Rule 126. 6. (1987). Bongcarawan. Inc. No. + Concept of probable cause in search warrants  People v. sec. (1987). 1. 384 SCRA 525 (2002)  Requisites for issuance of search warrant Rule 126.

Roadblocks & Checkpoints. G. 629 SCRA 370 (2010) Airport searches:  People v. 459 F.3d 966 (2006)  U. 136292. 508 U.S. 124 Ohio St. Consented Search  Schneckcloth v Bustamonte. vs. Ziegler. supra (2) Effect of voluntary surrender  People v. “Stop and Frisk”. Cuizon. vs. 689 (1938).S. (3) Effect of posting bail Rule 114. Locsin. 2002. No.3d 250 State vs. 366 (1993)  Esquillo v. and Other Less Intrusive Searches “Stop and Frisk”:  Minnesota v.S. sec. 65 Phil. 27. 265 SCRA 325 (1) Peaceful submission not consent to search  Garcia v.. Finley.S. Smith. January 15. 2002 Roadblocks & Checkpoints:  Caballes v. + . 2007 Cellphones: U. 474 F. Canton.R. 106 SCRA 325 (1981). Agbot. c. G. 218 (1973)  People vs. Hill. January 30. 148825. People. Dickerson. 26. Written consent:  Roan v. Court of Appeals.3d 1184 (9th Cir. Dec. No.S. 477 F. Computers:  U. vs.R. 412 U. 3d 163 (2009) b. Gonzales.

9. U. Service of warrant 1.S. 126 S.R. 356 SCRA 683 (2001) f. 278 SCRA 561 (1997)  People v. Vinecario.S. Time of search Rule 126. 471  Nix vs.S. 136292. 420 SCRA 280 (2004). July 11. De Gracia. Moving vehicles/hot pursuit +  Caballes v. No. 143944. 431 II. Bongcarawan. U. G. 1943 (2006) h. October 2. . Lacerna. 233 SCRA 716 (1994). + e. 467 U.R. Stuart. 2002. Ct. No. Private Searches & “State Expansion of Private Search”  People v. 338  Wong Sun v. No. 308 U. Williams. 1997 Checkpoints:  People vs.S.  People v. G. Salanguit. post-service procedure A. Concepts of: “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”. G. 116720. Extraordinary circumstances:  People v.  Bringham City v. 219 SCRA 743 (1993). 8. Two-witness rule Rule 126. d. sec. sec. “Plain View” Doctrine  People v. “Inevitable Discovery” (where did it come from?)  Nardone v. Encinada. January 15.S. Court of Appeals. Procedure for service of warrant. “Attenuation”. Gesmundo. 2. 2002 g.  People v. 371 U.R.

G.R. Rodriguez. Source.  People v. Delivery of property and inventory. (1987). No. Zuela. 12. 341 SCRA 25. art. Scope and Procedure 1. . III. May 4.  Miranda v. 2001. sec. 270 SCRA 193 (1997). sec. Abe Valdez. G. return and proceedings on the return. 128822. 2000. Gesmundo. 7. 341 SCRA 645 (2000)  Jesalva v.  People v. Duty of police during custodial investigation. Ordono. sec. 3. Breaking of door or window to effect search Rule 126. Definition. People GR# 187725 (2011) 2.  People v. Lacbanes.  People v. 12.  People v. Pasudag. 129296. Gesmundo. sec. 436 (1966). 323 SCRA 589 (2000). Issuance of Receipt Rule 126.  People vs.  People v. September 25. Post-service procedure  People v. No. procedure  Const. Definition  People v.  People v. 11. Arizona. 2. 334 SCRA 673 (2000). 439 SCRA 350 (2004) B.S. Obrero. supra 1. Rule 126. supra Custodial Investigation A. 332 SCRA 190 (2000).R. 384 U. Huang Zhen Hua.

222 (1971). Duero. art. Republic Act. sec. People v.  Gumabon v.  Cf. 2(a). (1987). III. Rights Involved and consequences of violation 1. 335 SCRA 299 (2000). 306 SCRA 522 (1999) 2. No. 401 U.  People v. G. sec. Rights involved Const.  Republic Act.R. 332 SCRA 190 (2000). 37 SCRA 429 (1971).  People v.  People v.  New York v. 332 SCRA 190 (2000). Director of Prisons. Waiver of right to counsel  People v. B. (d). 7438. (e) and (f). Obrero. sec. (c). Labtan. New York. Figueroa.S. Mojello. Obrero. Counsel of choice during custodial investigation  People v. 2004 ** 2. (b). Consequences of violation  Const. 339 SCRA 1 (2000). No. 104 S. 4: A.  People v. Specific requirements in case law: 1. March 9. (1987). 2626 (1984). 12 (1). III. sec. Quarles. 7438. (2). 104 SCRA 379 (1981). 12 (3)  Harris v. Ct. art. No.  People v. . 320 SCRA 140 (1999). Continente. 145566. Bacor.

4. .  Panada v. Compliance with requirement to inform person detained of rights  People v. Samulde. 7. 339 SCRA 1 (2000). 36 cf. burden on prosecution  People v. 3. Gallardo. Enrile. 34. Exceptional cases of uncounseled confessions not held to be excluded  People v.R. 14. Continente. June 27. Cruz. 307 SCRA 1 (1999). sec. 180906. Burgos. Morada. CA. Canoy. 336 SCRA 632 (2000).  People v. 141 SCRA 233 (1986). 1. of National Defense v. 6. 26. III. Pavillare. JJWA. 323 SCRA 218 (2000). (1987).  People v. Rule 114. 17.  People v. Enrile. 329 SCRA 684 (2000). 1988. Oct. Proof of voluntariness of confession. 269 SCRA 371 (1997). 2. 15. 144 SCRA 516 (1986). 35. Police line-up  Gamboa v.  Velasco v. Bail Const. RJCL. sec. 245 SCRA 677 (1995)  Moncupa v. sec. (a) Habeas Corpus Rule 102  Sec. Domantay. Jara. Manalo. 2008  Ilagan v. 307 SCRA 362 (1999).  People v. No. 328 SCRA 385 (2000). Veneracion. 4(p). 144 SCRA 1 (1986).  People v. G. art.  People v. sec. 139 SCRA 349 ( 1985). 16. 5. secs.

2012) Person prosecuting criminal action. 5 (as amended by SC AM No. III. 12.  People v. 581 SCRA 431 (2009) ** Allege elements of the offense & effect of failure  People v. Guevarra. G. 2002). sec. Pardilla. Galigao. Jr. 254 SCRA 307 (1996) Non-retroactivity of removal of “complaint” requirement in Rape  People v. Name of accused and offended party Rule 110. 32. . Mogul. 8 DOJ-NPS Manual. 663 SCRA 272 (Jan. 92 SCRA 591 (1979) **  Malto v. Sandiganbayan. Valdez. 151 SCRA 462 (1987)  Roberts v CA. Designation of offense Rule 110.Prosecution of offenses: 1. 16. sec. 33. vs. 553 SCRA 643. The complaint/ information. Madali.R. 140961-63. 179 SCRA 740 (1989) b. 2007  Lazarte. 2003 Form and content 1) Procedural a. Part III. 1987 Constitution Rule 110. o People v. People. 349 SCRA 104 (2001)  Crespo v. intervention of offended party Rule 110. JJWA. Nos. Sec. test of sufficiency Art. 02-2-07-SC. sec. 6  People v. January 14. 14 (1) & (2). April 10. 40. September 21. 7. secs. secs. Sec.

April 11. when required A. De Leon. COMELEC. Purpose. .NPS Manual. 663 SCRA 272 (Jan. DOJ. 142773. Fernandez.8:  Doromal V. Part III. 177 SCRA 354 (1989). 15. 369 SCRA 293 (2001)  Baytan v. 3.R. 2. RJCL. Definition. January 28. Buayaban. sec. secs. 396 SCRA 703 (2003). 1. G. Probable cause in preliminary investigations:  Allado v.NPS Manual. Scope and Probable Cause  Sales v. 2012) RULE 112 – PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AND INQUEST I. DOJ . 13. 414 SCRA 84 (2003)  People v. 164457. 247 SCRA 652 (1995). 2003  People v. sec. No. 11 (4) (a). Persons authorized to conduct Preliminary Investigation Rule 112. 6. Masapol. Delim. 2.  People v.  Webb v.R. People. B. 417 SCRA 371 (2003) Estafa includes falsification as means:  Patula v. Part II Definition : when required Rule 112. Diokno. sec. No. Valdez. 232 SCRA 192 (1994)  DOJ-NPS Manual. secs. Sandiganbayan. RA 6770. 2012 Consequence of failure to allege  People v. Nature. G. 1. Sandiganbayan. secs. 7. 400 SCRA 48 (2003)  People v. Part III (Preliminary Investigation).

sec.  Rodil v. Concepcion. Art. January 17. Generoso (Nov. Sec. 6. 3. In cases cognizable by RTC Conducted by prosecutor Rule 122. 206 SCRA 138 (1992). III.7 (Inquest) A. RJCL. sec. 232 SCRA 192 (1994). Bail. 1-13:  Go v CA. No. When person lawfully arrested without warrant Rule 112. Children in conflict with the law (CICL) RA 10630. Procedure in cases where preliminary investigation required A. MTC cases or those covered by summary procedure Rule 112.I. Procedure in cases not requiring a preliminary investigation A. 10. Objective of P. 2014) Rule 112. secs. sec. 7. 8. sec. 9 B. DOJ-NPS Manual. 13. sec. effect of Posting Rule 114. 104 SCRA 362 (1981). secs. Diokno. & duty of public prosecutor:  Allado v. 6 (discernment required for cases above 15 year of age below 18 before an action maybe insituted) . Garcia. Part V.M. 2005 II. A. 125. RTJ-04-1879.  Alonzo vs. RPC (purpose of waiver) Valid Warrantless arrest Pestillos v. 4. 26.

People GR# 151085 (2008) Arraignment and Plea Daan v.Ortega v. Sandiganbayan GR# 163972 -77 (2008) Direct examination  People v. Dela Cruz GR# 158717 (2011) .