You are on page 1of 36

Rule 126

SEARCH AND
SEIZURE
Group 7
Frances Ivy Yu
Jose Ronald Magsino
Venus Santillan
Rommel Julius
Mataragnon
Daniel Baltazar
Queenie Ann Dupaya

Rule 126- Section 1


Search Warrant Defined
An order in Writing
Issued in the Name of People of the Philippines
Signed by a Judge
Directed to a Peace Officer
Commanding the Peace Officer to search for personal

property described in it and bring it before the court.


Refined from the Constitution Art III Section 2 and 3.

Rule 126- Section 2


Where to File application of search
warrant.
In Any court where the crime was committed or where it has

territorial jurisdiction over the crime committed.


With Compelling reasons, Any court within the Judicial Region where
the crime was committed or where the warrant will be enforce.
In case a criminal complaint has been filed, the application will only
be filed on the court where the criminal action is pending.
Cases : MALALOAN vs CA GR 104879

Sony Computer Entertainment Inc vs Supergreen Inc GR 161823

Rule 126- Section 3


Personal property to be Seized
Subject of the Offense
Stolen or Embezzled and other proceeds, fruits of

the offense
Used or intended to be used as a means in the
commission of the offense.
Cases : Kho vs Macalintal

Rule 126- Section 4


Requisites for issuing search warrant
SEC. 4. Requisites for Issuing Search
Warrant. A search warrant shall not issue
except upon probable cause in connection
with one specific offense to be determined
personally by the judge after examination
under oath or affirmation of the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be
searched and the things to be seized which
may be anywhere in the Philippines.

Rule 126- Section 4


Requisites for issuing search warrant
Requisites of a valid search warrant:
1. Must be issued upon probable cause;
2. Probable cause must be determined by the issuing judge personally;
3. The judge must have personally examined, in the form of searching

questions and answers, in writing and under oath, the applicant and
his witnesses on facts personally known to them;
4. The warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be searched
and the persons or things to be seized;
5. It must be in connection with one specific offense; and
6. The sworn statements together with the affidavits submitted by
witnesses must be attached to the record.
.Well settled is the rule that the legality of a seizure can be contested

only by the party whose rights have been impaired thereby, and that the
objection to an unlawful search and seizure is purely personal and
cannot be availed of by third parties (Stonehill v. Diokno)

Rule 126- Section 4


Requisites for issuing search warrant
Remedies from an Unlawful Search
1. A motion to quash the search warrant;
2. A motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally

taken (EXCLUSIONARY RULE any evidence obtained


through unreasonable searches and seizures shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding); and
3. Replevin, if the objects are legally possessed
.The remedies are alternative. If a motion to quash is denied,

a motion to suppress cannot be availed of subsequently.


Where the search warrant is a PATENT NULLITY, certiorari lies
to nullify the same.

Rule 126- Section 4


Requisites for issuing search warrant
The illegality of the search warrant does not call for the return

of the things seized, the possession of which is prohibited by


law. However, those personalities seized in violation of the
constitutional immunity whose possession is not of itself illegal
or unlawful ought to be returned to their rightful owner or
possessor.
Any

evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional


immunity against unreasonable searches and seizures are
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding

There is no need for a certification of non-forum shopping in

the application for search warrant. The Rules of Court as


amended requires such certification only from initiatory
pleadings, omitting any mention of applications

Rule 126- Section 4


Requisites for issuing search warrant
Probable Cause refers to the facts and circumstances which could lead a

reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been
committed and that the objects sought in connection with the offense are in
the place sought to be searched.
Basis of Probable Cause: The basis must be the personal knowledge of
the complainant or the witnesses he may produce and not based on mere
hearsay. The test of sufficiency of a deposition or affidavit is whether it has
been drawn in a manner that perjury could be charged thereon and the
affiant be held liable for damage caused.
Mere affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses are not sufficient. The
examining judge has to take depositions in writing of the complainant and
the witnesses he may produce and attach them to the record. (Mata v.
Bayona)
The oath required must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal
knowledge of the petitioner or his witnesses, because the purpose thereof
is to convince the committing magistrate, not the individual making the
affidavit and seeking the issuance of the warrant, of the existence of
probable cause. (Alvarez v. CFI)

Rule 126- Section 4


Requisites for issuing search warrant
Factors in Determination of Probable Cause:
1. Time of the application in relation to the alleged offense committed.
The nearer the time at which the observation of the offense is
alleged to have been made, the more reasonable the conclusion of
establishment of probable cause (Asian Surety Insurance v.
Herrera);
2. Need for competent proof of particular acts or specific omissions in
the ascertainment of probable cause (Stonehill v. Diokno);
3. The facts and circumstances that would show probable cause must
be the best evidence that could be obtained under the
circumstances. If such best evidence cannot be obtained, the
applicants must show a justifiable reason therefor upon judges
examination (People v. Judge Estrada)
Probable cause must be determined personally by a judge.

However, this rule does not extend to deportation proceedings.

Particularly describing the place to be searched

and the persons of things to be seized: The


purpose of the rule is to leave the officers of the law
with no discretion regarding what articles they shall
seize, to the end that unreasonable searches and
seizures may not be made - that abuses may not be
committed (Stonehill v. Diokno)
Test to determine particularity:
1. When the description therein is as specific as the
circumstances will ordinarily allow (People v. Rubio);
2. When the description expresses a conclusion of fact
not of law which the warrant officer may be guided in
making the search and seizure;
3. When the things described are limited to those which
bear direct relation to the offense for which the warrant
is being issued.

The warrant must name the person upon whom it is to be

served EXCEPT in those cases where it contains a descriptio


personae such as will enable the officer to identify the
person. The description must be sufficient to indicate clearly
the proper person upon whom it is to be served (People v.
Veloso)
The absence of a probable cause for a particular article does

not generally invalidate the warrant as a whole but may be


severed from the rest which meets the requirements of
probable cause and particularity (People v. Salanguit)
Multi-factor Balancing Test in determining Probable

Cause: One which requires the officer to weigh the manner


and intensity of the interference on the right of the people,
the gravity of the crime committed, and the circumstances
attending the incident (Allado v. Judge Diokno)

Rule 126- Section 5


Examination of Complainant

SEC. 5. Examination of Complainant;


Record. The judge must, before
issuing the warrant, personally examine
in the form of searching questions and
answers, in writing and under oath, the
complainant and the witnesses he may
produce on facts personally known to
them and attach to the record their
sworn statements, together with the
affidavits
submitted.

Manner on how a judge should examine a witness

to determine the existence of probable cause:


1. The judge must examine the complainant and
2.
3.

4.
5.
6.

witnesses personally;
The examination must be under oath;
The examination must be reduced to writing in the
form of searching questions and answers (Marinas
v. Siochi);
Examination must be on the facts personally
known to the applicant and his witnesses;
It must be probing and exhaustive, not merely
routinary or pro forma (Roan v. Gonzalez);
It is done ex-parte and may even be held in the
secrecy of chambers (Mata v. Bayona);

Such personal examination is necessary order

to enable the judge to determine the existence


or non-existence of a probable cause.
The matters that may be raised in a motion to

quash a search warrant must not go beyond the


immediate, limited issue of the existence or
non-existence of probable cause at the time of
the issuance of the warrant. Matters of defense
should properly be raised at the criminal action
and not at the hearing of the motion to quash
the search warrant (Department of Health v. Sy
Chi Siong, Inc)

Rule 126- Section 6


Issuance and Forms of Search Warrants
SEC. 6. Issuance and Form of Search Warrant. If
the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts upon
which the application is based or that there is
probable cause to believe that they exist, he shall
issue the warrant, which must be substantially in
the
form
prescribed
by
these
Rules.

Rule 126- Section 6


Issuance and Forms of Search Warrants
The Constitution ordains that no warrant shall issue

EXCEPT upon probable cause supported by oath or


affirmation
The search warrant must be in writing and must contain

such particulars as the name of the person against


whom it is directed, the offense for which it was issued,
the place to be searched and the specific things to be
seized
Search warrant cannot issue against diplomatic officers

(WHO v. Aquino)

Rule 126- Section 7


Right to Break the Door or
Window to effect search
Sec. 7. Right to break door or window to effect search.
The officer, if refused admittance to the place of directed
search after giving notice of his purpose and authority,
may break open any outer or inner door or window of a
house or any part of a house or anything therein to
execute the warrant to liberate himself or any person
lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein.

Rule 126- Section 8


Search in the presence of 2
Witness
Sec. 8. Search of house, room, or premises to be made in
presence of two witnesses. No search of a house, room, or
any other premises shall be made except in the presence of the
lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family or in the
absence of the latter, two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality.

Rule 126- Section 9


Time of Making a Search
Time of Making Search

GR: The warrant must direct that it be served in


the day time.
Exception: Unless the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place
ordered to be searched, in which case a
direction may be inserted that it be served at
any time of the day or night.

Rule 126- Section 10


Validity of Search Warrant
Validity of Search Warrant- A search warrant

shall be valid for ten (10) days from its date.


Thereafter, it shall be void.

Rule 126- Section 10


Validity of Search Warrant
Mustang Lumber, Inc vs. Court of
Appeals

Facts:

. A search warrant was secured on a certain date and

enforced the same on the same day.


. But the raiding team could not finish the search in one
day, so they postponed it.

Issue:
. Can you still continue tomorrow? Or must you finish

everything today?

Held: Yes, you can still continue

Rule 126- Section 11


Receipt for the Property Seized
Section 11. Receipt for the property seized. The officer seizing property under the
warrant must give a detailed receipt for the same to the lawful occupant of the
premises in whose presence the search and seizure were made, or in the absence of
such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found
the seized property. (10a)
The rule, as drafted, requires the officer conducting the search and seizure
proceedings to give a detailed receipt of the property seized to the person on whom
or in whose possession it was found, or in default of the latter, leave such receipt in
the place where the property so seized was found in the presence of two witnesses
(People vs. Vacani, 61 Phil. 803)
And there must be proof that constitutional requisites for admission of confession
were complied with (People vs. Deocariza, 219 SCRA 488)

Rule 126- Section 12


Delivery of Property Seized
Section 12. Delivery of property and inventory thereof to court; return and proceedings
thereon. (a) The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who
issued the warrant, together with a true inventory thereof duly verified under oath.
(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain
if the return has been made, and if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant
was issued and require him to explain why no return was made. If the return has been
made, the judge shall ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule has been complained
with and shall require that the property seized be delivered to him. The judge shall see
to it that subsection (a) hereof has been complied with.
(c) The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian of the log
book on search warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return, the result, and
other actions of the judge.
A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of court.(11a)

Rule 126- Section 12


Delivery of Property Seized
Duties of the officers conducting the search
As already stated, the law imposes upon the person making the
search the duty to issue a detailed receipt for the property
seized. Additionally, he is likewise required to make a return of
the warrant to the court which issued it, together with an
inventory of the property seized (People vs. Vacani, 61 Phil.
803)
The warrant must also command that the goods or other
articles to be searched for, if found, together with the party in
whose custody they are found, be brought before the
magistrate, to the end that, upon further examination into the
facts, the goods and the party into whose custody they were,
may be disposed of according to law (Amarga vs. Abbas, 98
Phil. 739)
The property seized must be surrendered to the court that
issued the search warrant, not to the prosecutor or any other
officer. Goods seized on the basis of a search warrant issued by
the court are maintained under the custody and control of the

Rule 126- Section 12


Delivery of Property Seized
Duties of the issuing judge
The issuing judge shall see to it also that the return on the search warrant shall be
filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on search warrants who shall enter
therein the dated of the return, the result, and other actions taken by him.
It is to be noted that the duties imposed upon the judge is after ten (10) days
because the search warrant has only a validity of ten (10) days from its issuance.
Thereafter, it shall be void.

Rule 126- Section 13


Search Incidental to Lawful arrest

Sec. 13. Search incident to lawful arrest. A person


lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous
weapons or anything which may have been used or
constitute proof in the commission of an offense
without a search warrant.

Rule 126- Section 13


Search Incidental to Lawful arrest

Jurisprudence recognized five generally accepted


Exceptions
A search incidental to a lawful arrest, as when the person being

arrested is frisked for weapons he may otherwise be able to use


against the arresting officers
A search of moving vehicle
Consented Search knowingly agreeing to be searched or waiver of
objections to illegal search
Seizure of evidence in plain view
Persons exercising police authority under the custom law may
effect search and seizure without a search warrant in the
enforcement of custom laws, except in a dwelling house.

Rule 126- Section 13


Search Incidental to Lawful arrest

Additional Exception
Justice Reynato Puno:
Exigent Circumstances
Stop and Frisk

Rule 126- Section 14


Motion To Quash
Sec. 14. Motion to quash a search warrant or to
suppress evidence; where to file. A motion to
quash a search warrant and/or to suppress
evidence obtained thereby may be filed in and
acted upon only by the court where the action has
been instituted. If no criminal action has been
instituted, the motion may be filed in and resolved
by the court that issued search warrant. However, if
such court failed to resolve the motion and a
criminal case is subsequently filed in another court,
the motion shall be resolved by the latter court.

Rule 126- Section 14


Quashing
a Search
Motion
To Quash

Warrant

A judge who issued the search warrant, no

case has been filed, has authority to quash


the search warrant which he issued, for lack of
probable cause on the ground that there was
no crime committed even if there already a
complaint pending preliminary investigation
before the prosecution

Rule 126- Section 14


Motion To Quash
Effect of the Quashal of the search warrant on the
preliminary investigation
The effect if the quashal of the warrant on the ground

that no offense has been committed is to render the


evidence obtained by virtue of the warrant
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding
including the preliminary investigation

Rule 126- Section 14


Motion To Quash

Transmittal of property where case is pending


All personal property seized under the warrant

shall forthwith be transmitted by it to the court


wherein the criminal case is pending, with the
necessary safeguards and documentation
therefor.

Rule 126- Section 14


Motion To Quash
Exception to the rule against Replevin as remedy
This rule applies only where the property is

lawfully held, that is, seized in accordance with


the rule against warrantless searches and seizures
or its accepted exceptions

Rule 126- Section 14


Motion To Quash
Limited Authority of the court
Search warrant court is not authorized to transfer

ownership.

END