Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. U.S., 251 U.S. 385, 40 S.Ct.

182 (1920)

FACTS: Silverthorne, owner of the company was cited for contempt for refusing to produce books and
documents before the Grand Jury.

Silverthorne had been indicted and arrested. While Silverthorne were detained, a U.S. Marshal “without a
shadow of authority,” went to their company and seized all books and papers held there.

ISSUE: WON Is it permissible for the government to benefit from an unlawful act?

HOLDING: No

DISCUSSION: The Court agreed that it “reduces the Fourth Amendment to a form of words” by allowing
the government to use the knowledge obtained unlawfully. The Court agreed that “[I]f knowledge of them
(the evidence) is gained from an independent source they may be proved like any others, but the
knowledge gained by the Government’s own wrong cannot be used by it in the way proposed.”
PEOPLE v. ROSA ARUTA Y MENGUIN, GR No. 120915, 1998-04-03
Facts:
Issues:
that the warrantless search resulting to the arrest of accused-appellant violated the latter's constitutional
rights.
Ruling:
Principles:
a search may be conducted by law enforcers only on the strength of a search warrant validly issued by a
judge as provided in Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution
This constitutional guarantee is not a blanket prohibition against all searches and seizures as it operates
only against "unreasonable" searches and seizures.
searches and seizures are normally unreasonable unless authorized by a validly issued search warrant or
warrant of arrest.
articles which are the product of unreasonable searches and seizures are inadmissible as evidence
pursuant to the doctrine pronounced in Stonehill v. Diokno.
between person and police must stand the protective authority of a magistrate clothed with power to issue
or refuse to issue search warrants or warrants of arrest.
the State cannot simply intrude indiscriminately into the houses, papers, effects, and most importantly, on
the person of an individual. The constitutional provision guaranteed an impenetrable shield against
unreasonable searches and... seizures. As such, it protects the privacy and sanctity of the person himself
against unlawful arrests and other forms of restraint.
A statute, rule or situation which allows exceptions to the requirement of a warrant of arrest or search...
warrant must perforce be strictly construed and their application limited only to cases specifically provided
or allowed by law.
Warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest recognized under Section 12, Rule 126
Seizure of evidence in "plain view,"... a prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless arrest...
evidence was inadvertently discovered... evidence must be immediately apparent,... "plain view" justified
mere seizure
Search of a moving vehicle.
the vehicle's inherent mobility reduces expectation of privacy especially when its transit in public
thoroughfares
Consented warrantless search;
Customs search;
Stop and Frisk;
Exigent and Emergency Circumstances.
The above exceptions, however, should not become unbridled licenses for law enforcement officers
The essential requisite of probable cause must... still be satisfied before a warrantless search and seizure
can be lawfully conducted.
Although probable cause eludes exact and concrete definition, it generally signifies a reasonable ground of
suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious man to
believe that the person accused is guilty of the offense with... which he is charged.
existence of such facts and circumstances which could lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to
believe that an offense has been committed and that the item(s), article(s) or object(s) sought in
connection with said offense or... subject to seizure and destruction by law is in the place to be searched.
in determining probable cause, the average man weighs facts and circumstances without resorting to the
calibrations of our rules of evidence
Before a search warrant can be issued, it must be shown by substantial evidence that the items sought are
in fact seizable by virtue of being connected... with criminal activity, and that the items will be found in the
place to be searched.
People v. Rondero G.R. No. 125687, December 9, 1999

Facts: Mylene Doria, a nine year old was missing. She was found lifeless on a cemented pavement near
the canteen of the school. She was naked from the waist down and had several contusions and abrasions
on different parts of her body. The accused-appellant, Rondero was formally charged with the special
complex crime of rape with homicide. The NBI sent a fax message to the Dagupan City Police Station
saying that it could not conduct an examination on the hair strands because the proper comparative
specimens were not given.

Issue: Whether the taking of some hair strands from the accused without his consent and submitted to the
NBI for investigation, in violation of his right against self incrimination.
 

Held: No, right against self incrimination actually proscribed is the use of physical or moral compulsion to
extort communication from the accused-appellant and not the inclusion of his body in evidence when it
may be material.