Arrest & Search and Seizure

Question 1

March 22 (Module 7-A)

Answer 1

March 22 (Module 7-A)

Question 2

when is ‘seizure’ reasonable?

Answer 2

GEN: valid warrant of arrest

Question 3

when is ‘search’ reasonable?

Answer 3

GEN: there is a ** valid search warrant**

Question 4

Section 2, Article III

Answer 4

[WHOSE RIGHT IS IT]
“the right of the PEOPLE” is different from ‘citizen’ and ‘foreigners’. Inclusive of both citizens and non-citizens.

[WHAT RIGHT]
right against searches and seizures

[INVIOLABLE]
what is inviolable is unreasonable
when the search and seizure is reasonable, then we have no right but the moment it becomes unreasonable, we have a right against it.

Question 5

Probable cause is determined by both the Prosecutor and the Judge. Which of the following statements is true concerning the foregoing sentence

A. The Prosecutor’s determination of probable cause is one made during preliminary investigation to determine whether probable cause exists to charge those whom he believes to have committed the crime as defined by law and thus should be held for trial. The Judge’s determination of probable cause, on the other hand, is one made by the judge to confirm and ascertain whether the issuance of a warrant of arrest is proper for the continued detention of the accused.

B. The Prosecutor’s determination of probable cause is one made during preliminary investigation to determine whether probable cause exists to charge those whom he believes to have committed the crime as defined by law and thus should be held for trial. The Judge’s determination of probable cause, on the other hand, is one made by the judge to ascertain whether a warrant of arrest should be issued against the accused.

Answer 5

B

Question 6

In the determining probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest, the judge must personally determine its existence. How?

A. The judge must satisfy himself of the existence of probable cause by personal examination of the complainant and his witnesses under oath or affirmation.

B. The judge must examine of the complaint and the witnesses in person and under oath or affirmation.

C. The judge must prove that the complainant and his witnesses exist and their testimonies under oath or affirmation.

D. The judge must examine the complainant and his witnesses in person.

Answer 6

A

Question 7

Which of the following is a correct restatement of the law?

A. The lack of a valid warrant of arrest automatically makes the seizure of person unreasonable.

B. Unreasonable searches and seizures are prohibited only when there is no probable cause in connection to the arrest.

C. The issuance of a warrant of arrest makes the seizure of the person a reasonable seizure consistent with the Bill of Rights.

D. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects shall be inviolable.

Answer 7

B

Question 8

Jurisdiction over the person of the accused is acquired upon:

A. The filing of a petition for bail or voluntary appearance to the court

B. The arraignment of the accused or submission of pleadings to the jurisdiction of the prosecutor

C. The issuance of a warrant of arrest or voluntary surrender to the jurisdiction of the police

D. The arrest or voluntary appearance or submission to the jurisdiction of the court.

Answer 8

D

Question 9

Why are buy-bust operations considered as a valid means of arresting violators of the Comprehensive Drugs Act?

A. It is a form of valid in flagrante delicto arrest as the police officers, based on their experience, form reasonable and strong probable cause to arrest the persons subject of a buy-bust operation.

B. It is a form of valid in flagrante delicto arrest as the persons arrested commit the crime presence of the law enforcement officers.

C. It is a form of valid in flagrante delicto arrest as the persons arrested are induced to commit the crime in the presence of the law enforcement officers.

D. It is a form of valid in flagrante delicto arrest as the police officers, based on their experience, form reasonable and strong suspicion to arrest the persons subject of a buy-bust operation.

Answer 9

B.

B. It is a form of valid in flagrante delicto arrest as the persons arrested commit the crime presence of the law enforcement officers.

Question 10

In an in flagrante delicto arrest, the police officer must see that the person to be arrest has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense. True or False?

True. The Rules of Court itself requires this for the warrantless arrest to be valid.

True. The police officer must be able to see the accused, including the preparatory acts, for the commission of a crime.

False. For a valid in flagrante delicto arrest, seeing is not important. It is the presence that matters.

False. Valid in flagrante delicto arrests require that overt acts must have been done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.

Answer 10

D

False. Valid in flagrante delicto arrests require that overt acts must have been done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.

Question 11

Mang Inting was charged with crimes of rebellion and subversion in relation to his involvement in the armed operations of the New People’s Army in Negros. Which of the following statements is true about the previous sentence?

Mang Inting can be arrested any time, even without the issuance of a valid warrant, because of the nature of the crimes committed.

Mang Inting can be arrested any time only if there is a warrant since there is a case filed already in court.

Mang Inting can be arrested any time so long as a valid warrant of arrest has been issued within 10 days from its issuance.

Mang Inting can be arrested any time, so long as the arresting officers are members of the police or the military considering the nature of the crimes committed.

Answer 11

Mang Inting can be arrested any time, even without the issuance of a valid warrant, because of the nature of the crimes committed.

Question 12

The following are the possible outcomes after the judge’s evaluation of the evidence on record to determine whether an arrest warrant must be issued or not, EXCEPT:

The judge may order the prosecutor to submit additional evidence in case he doubts the existence of probable cause

The judge may immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on record does not clearly establish probable cause.

The judge may remand the case to the prosecutor for lack of probable cause.

The judge may issue a warrant of arrest if he finds that probable cause exists.

Answer 12

C.

The judge may remand the case to the prosecutor for lack of probable cause.

Question 13

Which among the following is most indispensable requirement for an in flagrante delicto arrest?

Personal knowledge of a crime committed

Reasonable Suspicion

Probable Cause

Overt act of the arresting office

Answer 13

Personal knowledge of a crime committed [WRONG according to Rule 113 of Crim Pro]

ANSWER: in his presence

Question 14

Which of the following is NOT a correct restatement of the rule?

Particularity of description requires only that the place and object sought are identifiable during the arrest.

Without a law criminalizing an act, there could be no probable cause for the issuance of the warrant of arrest.

In all instances of determining probable cause, the judge must determine it personally after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.

In determining probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest, the judge is not required to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses

Answer 14

In all instances of determining probable cause, the judge must determine it personally after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.

Question 15

Under section 2 of the bill of rights, what is the STANDARD?

Answer 15

REASONABLENESS

not the search warrant per se since a warrantless arrest can still be made because it is reasonable in the exceptions of in flagrante delicto, hot pursuit, escapee

Question 16

It is not the SC changing the constitution (since warrantless arrest is not in the consti, it is the SC interpretating the constitution)

Question 17

If the witnesses weren’t under oath, then will the warrant of arrest?

Answer 17

the warrant is defective and hence invalid.

Question 18

in the determination of the prosecutor’s probable cause, what is the basis of their decision?

Answer 18

executive discretion

Question 19

“personally determined by the judge’ what does that mean?

Answer 19

refers to the report by the prosecutor (?)

Question 20

What is the relevance of a “subpoena”?

Question 21

when should the arrest be questioned?

Question 22

When determining PC, you need to determine two things

Answer 22

1. if there is a crime committed probably
2. person being arrested is probably the perpetrator

note
all two are needed, without one, then there is no probable cause

Question 23

in point 1, how to know that a crime is PROBABLY committed?

in point 2, how to know the person being arrested?

IOW, this question answers WON the prosecutor and judge to determine if there is probable cause

Answer 23

[A]
set of facts and circumstances that a reasonable man can ascertain that there is a crime that has been probably committed.

[B]
reasonable man to assume that that person was the offender

note
as long as there is substantial evidence (witness testimony and report) then that is probable. elements of the crime need not be satisfied

Question 24

for criminal proceedings to be valid, there are two requirements

Answer 24

1. JD over the subject matter (law)
2. JD over the person of the accused (judicial procedural due process)

Question 25

‘personally determine’ by the judge means

Answer 25

not physically do it but must be the one to determine PROBABLE CAUSE.

that’s what personally determine means

Question 26

the purpose of the determination of PC from judge and prosecutor is different.

Answer 26

PRO - for the purpose to determine a criminal information or not

JUDG - for the purpose of determining whether it is proper to issue a warrant of arrest

Question 27

warrant of arrest = authority to arrest.

directed to the police officer and it is his duty and authority to seize the person in the warrant.

the reason for the ten days is so that the police wouldn’t be bribed. the RoC mandates the police officer to return

Return - a written report specifying failure of arrest within the 10 day period. return is only when there is failure.

Answer 27

in practice, when there is a no return, the court will issue an alias warrant of arrest. whichi will be dissemeniated to several police station .

Question 28

affidavit can stil be under oath in

a. notarized
b. sworn declaration raise right hand, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Question 29

what is the effect of an INvalid warrant of arrest?

Answer 29

it becomes unreasonable insofar as Article 3 section 2 is concerned.

Question 30

relevance of “voluntary surrender” in arrest

Answer 30

arrest of warrant is not needed (?)
the RoC allow voluntary surrender. Sec 2 Art. 3 is a right and it can be WAIVED.

Question 31

if there is warrant at the time and there was no resistance to the arrest?

Answer 31

no, because the WAIVER IS NOT PRESUMED.

JP tells us that mere silence or acquisence of the person being arrested is not tantamount to a WAIVER.

be careful, this right is the only right so far that can be waived ORALLY “i voluntary surrender”

once arrested, the court has acquired JD over the person. IT HAS TO BE LAWFUL ACQUISITION (valid arrest)

Question 32

⚠️⚠️⚠️
[A]
A was arrested invalidly,

He pleaded not guilty,

he then was convicted, can he raise the illegality of his arrest?

[B]
in the same scenario, suppose that judgmenet is rendered without a plea of guilty, will it be valid?

Answer 32

once arraignment is done, and there is no question on the JD over the person of the accused by the court. that particular question, is considered WAIVED as well .

because that’s the time the court will say, “not wtithsatanding the invalidty of hte arrest, by entereing a valid plea, he surrenderd to the JD of this court” 59th minute[regardless in any validity of the arrest]

[B]
when there is illegal arrest, there is no JD over the person of the accused so there is no point in proceeding in the case anymore because it is violative of DUE PROCESS. why violate of due? because of no lawfully acquired JD.

Question 33

what is the effect of unlawful acquisition?

the effect is as if the person did not acquier JD over the person. BUT according ot JP, AFTER the arrest, the accused is given the chance to put in a PLEA. (plea of guilt or not guilty)

according to the court, the accused is given the FIRST chance to be heard (due process). arraignment cannot be dispensed with.

54th minute.

the judge orders the arraignment to tell the clerk of court or interpreter to read to the accused the infoarmation filed against him

Answer 33

the accused replying to the information in arraignment by saying ‘not guilty’ or ‘guilty’.

the reason for saying ‘not fuilty’ for wrong person, for wrong act, etc. those will be done later

once arraignment is done, and there is no question on the JD over the person of the accused by the court. that particular question, is considered WAIVED as well .

because that’s the time the court will say, “not wtithsatanding the invalidty of hte arrest, by entereing a valid plea, he surrenderd to the JD of this court” 59th minute[regardless in any validity of the arrest]

so it is not the infomrmation that should be quashed, you must first ask the court if the corut has JD over the person. when it has no JD , and if no JD over the person, the effect is that it will be quashed, that is the remedy

Question 35

VALID HOT PURSUIT AND NOT VALID HOT PURUIST

Answer 35

SC interprets it based on the standard of ‘reasonableness’. thus there are exceptions such as this hot pursuit arrest that’s why prcuring a warrant of arrest would render it impractical.

Question 36

hot pursuit needss probabl cause (crim is ocommitted probaly, and person probably committed

Answer 36

1. lead the officer to reasonably believe that a crim has been committed
2. there has to be facts and circumstances that a person sought to be arrested is PROBABLY the one who committed or perpretrated the crime.

Question 37

SEARCHES & SEIZURES

Answer 37

SEARCH & SEIZURES

Question 38

the immediate extension of our persons is also protected from unreasonable S&S which are

Answer 38

the right to be secure in areas where privacy of people naturally extends - houses, papers, effects.

Question 39

when is S&S reasonable?

Answer 39

GEN
- when there is a valid search warrant

Question 40

what are the requirements in order that a search warrant be VALID?

connect with Crim Law where there are search warrants maliciously made

Answer 40

Rule 126 Section 4 in Relation to the 1987 Constitution, the requisites are;

“A search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in connection with one (1) 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.”

1. Probable Cause in connection with of one (1) specific offense
2. Determined Personally by the Judge
3. After the examination, under oath or affirmation, of the complainant and his witnesses
4. Particularity of Description

Question 41

knowledge check: what is probable cause insofar as probable cause for a search warrant is concerned

Answer 41

the set of facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed [AND] that the object sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched

(Del Castillo v. Pp)

Question 42

What is the judge, in determining probable cause for a search warrant determine?

Answer 42

J is to consider the TOTALITY of the circumstances made known to him and NOT by a fixed and rigid formula, [AND] must employ a flexible, totality of the circumstances standard

(Del Castillo v. Pp)

Question 43

what is a scatter-shot warrant?

Answer 43

[A]
a warrant of arrest that violates the one offense rule by either issued to;
- no specific offense
- more than one specific offense

it being so abstract demonstrates the impossibility of judges to determine probable cause

Question 44

knowledge check: when is it “Pp v. Juan” & “Juan v. Pp”

Answer 44

[Pp v. Juan]
- when the state initiates a criminal action against a person

[Juan v. Pp]
- when Juan is the accused becomes the petitioner/appellant challenging the decision/action of the prosecution (appeals, habeas corpus, etc.)

Question 45

2ND REQUIREMENT: Personally Determined by the Judge

In issuing warrants of arrest (not S&S) in preliminary investigations, the investigating judge must

Answer 45

1. have examined in writing [and] under oath the complainant and his witnesses by searching questions and answers
2. be satisfied that probable cause exists
3. that there is a need to place the respondent under immediate custody in order not to frustrate the ends ojf justice.

(Mantaring v. J. Roman, 1996)

Question 46

“by searching questions and answers” meaning

Answer 46

taking into consideration the purpose of the preliminary examination which is to determine “whether there is a reasonable ground to believe that an offense has been committed and the accused is probably guilty thereof so that a warrant of arrest may be issued and the accused held for trial”, such question as have tendency to show the commission of a crime and the perpetrator thereof

Question 47

knowledge check:

preliminary investigation |v| preliminary examination

Answer 47

[PI]
- conducted by executive officer (public prosecutor
- uses executive discretion in determining probable cause
- PC is used to determine won to file a criminal information in court

[PE]
- conducted by a judicial officer (judge)
- uses judicial discretion in determining probable cause
- conducted w/ cases exceeding six (6) years of imprisonment
- PC is used to determine won a warrant of arrest should be issued

Question 48

Valid Requisites in order a search warrant be valid

4. Particularity of Description

Answer 48

1. Probable Cause in connection with of one (1) specific offense
2. Determined Personally by the Judge
3. After the examination, under oath or affirmation, of the complainant and his witnesses

Question 49

How particular must the description be?

Answer 49

What is necessary is there be a reasonable particularity and certainty in identifying the property to be searched for and seized.

technical precision is NOT required

Question 50

Purpose of the Requirement of particularlity

Answer 50

1. readily identify the properties to be seized and thus prevent seizing wrong items
2. leave said peace officers with no discretion regarding the articles to be seized, and thus, prevent unreasonable S&S.

• any description of the PLACE or thing to be searched that enables the officer doing the S&S with reasonable certainty is sufficient

(Worldwide Web Corporation v. Pp)

Question 51

KNOWLEDGE CHECK QUIZ

Answer 51

KNOWLEDGE CHECK QUIZ

Question 52

In a stop-and-frisk situation, the police has the right to:

a. stop a person who may be suspected of criminal activities and search him for evidence.

b. Search a person and his belongings provided that the policeman has reasonable grounds to believe that criminal activity may be afoot.

c. Conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons stopped in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him.

d. Confiscate immediately apparent contraband or prohibit item from the outside clothing of persons that might pose a danger to the society.

.

Answer 52

C.

Conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons stopped in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him

Question 53

When a search is conducted incidental to a lawful arrest, the arresting officer can search:

a. Only the outer clothing of the arrested person to look for concealed weapons under his immediate control and to prevent the latter from destroying evidence within reach.

b. The person and the surroundings under his immediate control may be searched.

c. The person and his companions under his immediate control may be searched.

d. The person and the location of the arrested person to look for concealed weapons under his immediate control and to prevent the latter from destroying evidence within reach.

Answer 53

B.

The person and the surroundings under his immediate control may be searched.

Question 54

A “scatter-shot warrant” is:

a. A search warrant that was issued accusing a person with more than one specific offense.

b. A search warrant that was issued without particularity of description of thing sought to be obtained and the place to be searched.

c. A search warrant that was issued in connection to offenses that are based on a vague provision of law.

d. A search warrant that was issued in connection to no specific offense.

Answer 54

D

A search warrant that was issued in connection to no specific offense.

Question 55

In determining whether there is a valid waiver of the right against unreasonable searches and seizure, the State must prove the waiver through:

a. Proof beyond reasonable doubt

b. Preponderance of evidence

c. Clear and convincing evidence

d. Substantial evidence

Answer 55

clear and convincing evidence

Question 56

The following statements are NOT true, EXCEPT:

a. The Judge, in determining probable cause for a search warrant, must consider only the evidence presented and must be approached through a fixed and rigid formula to ensure the accuracy of the issuance of the warrant.

b. The Judge, in determining probable cause for a search warrant, must consider the totality of the circumstances made known to him and not by a fixed and rigid formula, and must employ a flexible, totality of the circumstances standard.

c. The Judge, in determining probable cause for a search warrant, must determine probable cause through a fixed and rigid formula and must shy away from flexible and lax standards.

d. The Judge, in determining probable cause for a search warrant, must consider the totality of the circumstances through a flexible and liberal formula.

Answer 56

B

The Judge, in determining probable cause for a search warrant, must consider the totality of the circumstances made known to him and not by a fixed and rigid formula, and must employ a flexible, totality of the circumstances standard.

Question 57

To satisfy the requirement of particularity of description in the search warrant, the warrant must:

a. Provide sufficient details and description that will enable the officer making the search to locate the place and thing with reasonable certainty.

b. Identify the things to be seized in a precise and minute detail as to leave no room for doubt on the part of the searching authorities.

c. Describe the things to be seized in a precise and minute detail as to leave no room for doubt on the part of the searching authorities.

d. Offer enough details about the person, place, and thing to be searched in order that the implementing officers do not have discretion in the implementation.

Answer 57

A

Provide sufficient details and description that will enable the officer making the search to locate the place and thing with reasonable certainty.

Question 58

In the determination of probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant, the judge may rely on the findings of appointed commissioners. True or False?

a. False. The judge must personally determine probable cause.

b. False. The judge must determine probable cause in person only after with the appointment of commissioners.

c. False. The judge must determine probable cause by examination of the complainant and witnesses in person.

d. False. The judge must personally determine probable cause to support the findings of appointed commissioners.

Answer 58

A

False. The judge must personally determine probable cause.

Question 59

How to waive the right against unreasonable serach and seizure?

Answer 59

1. the actual intention to relinquish the right
2. knowledge, actual or constructive, of the existence of the right
3. the existence and availability of the right

Question 60

⚠️⚠️⚠️

In waiving the right against unreasonable searches and seizure, the following are required, EXCEPT:

a. The actual intention to relinquish the right.

b. The waiver reduced into writing in the presence of counsel.

c. The knowledge, actual or constructive, of the existence of the right.

d. The existence and availability of the right.

Answer 60

B

The waiver reduced into writing in the presence of counsel.

Question 61

Under the Rules of Court, the following items may be subject of a search warrant, EXCEPT:

a. Stolen or embezzled property and other proceeds or fruits of the offense

b. Property used or intended to be used as means for the commission of an offense

c. Things that are in connection with investigated offenses.

d. Items that are subject of the offense stated in the warrant.

Answer 61

C

Things that are in connection with investigated offenses.

Question 62

The following statements are NOT true, except

a. In stop-and-frisk situations, the police officer should properly introduce himself and make initial inquiries, approach and restrain a person who manifests unusual and suspicious conduct.

b. In stop-and-frisk situations, the police officer must make initial inquiries first before he can approach and restrain a person who is suspected of unusual and suspicious conduct.

c. In stop-and-frisk situations, the police officer does not need to introduce himself and make initial inquiries because of the nature of the circumstances; instead, he may immediately approach and restrain a person who manifests unusual and suspicious conduct.

d. In stop-and-frisk situations, the police officer should properly introduce himself and make initial observations concerning the conduct of a person, and then approach and restrain a person who is suspected of unusual and suspicious conduct

Answer 62

A

In stop-and-frisk situations, the police officer should properly introduce himself and make initial inquiries, approach and restrain a person who manifests unusual and suspicious conduct.

Question 63

APRIL 5 - LECTURE

Answer 63

APRIL 5 - LECTURE

Question 64

in valid search warrant,

effects mean personal belonging (phone)

Question 65

first layer of interpretation of section 2 article 3 is found in

Answer 65

Rule 126 of the rules of criminal procedure.

when answering when is a search warrant valid, do not go to the constitutional provisions but you go to this rule

Question 66

Requirements of Valid Search Warrant

Answer 66

shortened

1. probable cause
2. personally determined by the judge
3. in connection w/ a specific offense
4. particularly describing the place to be searched

Question 67

new changes 2024 on criminal procedure on record of 33th minute - https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-upholds-ombudsmans-finding-of-probable-cause-against-napoles-et-al/

requirement of issuance of warrant of arrest by the judge of probable cause

in pracctice, fiscals determine probable cause and file a case to the court (there is PC because of the filing)

in practice, the opposing party wouldn’t

Answer 67

the way it is interpreted and practiced delays its proceeding.

it will NOW be expressly prohibited for an accused/his lawyer to file a motion determine probable cause in the sala of the court.

upon receipt of the information by the judge, that alone will trigger the determiantion won by the judge there is PC.

Question 68

difference between expectation of privacy insofar as WOA and SW is concerned

Answer 68

[Warrant of Arrest]
- purpose is to seize to acquire JD over the accused. presupposing a case filed of that person

• it is clear that that person has a criminal procedure that he must answer for (not convicted automatically)

[Search Warrant]
- here, there is NO CASE

exactly why the search will be done because there is no evidence.

that distinction is a material distinction such that in WOA expectation of privacy is already DIMINISHED due to the information/case and prior determination of PC.

in SW, expectation of privacy is not yet DIMINISHED, but will be diminished after a due search.

note
they are in the same provision in the Consti “o search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except” which would let a normla person believe that the process is different.

HOWEVER, the SC interprets it differently =.

Question 69

AW - judge uses personal testimony

SW - judge personally determine probable cause and not delegate to others.

SW - this personal determination by the judge is a determination of the personal examination of the compalianant ad the witnesses he may present

• JP personal determination is attended by searching questions and examinations

Question 70

⚠️
Case law dictates that PERSONAL DETERMINATION by the judge is attended by

Answer 70

searching questions and examinations

note
judge must be convicned thru searching questions that this person is telling the truth and because of the evidence presented, there is probable cause to support the issuance of a search warrant.

this cannot be seen in sec 2 article 3. (this is an interpretation of the SC even if this was not expressly stipulated in the 1987 costitution)

Question 71

on the requirement of

3. In connection to one specific offense

Answer 71

the expectation of privacy must be protected that’s why it should only be one specific offense.

possession of dangerous drugs (correct)

possession, sale, etc,

it’s still one specific offense if the offense in the search warrant is NECESSARILY INCLUDED or includes all the other offenses

Question 72

so if the warrant is for robbery but what was found there was unlawful taking but no force and intimidation, is that now an acquital? NO

Question 73

the requirement on

4. particularity of the description…

Answer 73

a test in determining what is reasonably particular

if it describes the place, titems to be seized in a ceased trhat

Question 74

can there be three search warrants? or more

Answer 74

yes, so long as there is probable cause

it can even be simultaneous

Question 75

how to particularly describe a person in a SW

Answer 75

1. simply the full name in the search warrant, if you don’t the name, if it is male or female, John Doe or Jane Doe

• real name is unknown
  even if your name is unknown, if you can be described which such particularlity, you can then be subject of a search warrant.

2. middle-aged, resident of, muscular build, with a dragon tatoo

such that HOW the person is decsribed, the discretion of the police office r isrmeoved. since no discretoin, the police offiers are left with no chocie but to implelment the search warrant.

Question 76

1:22:00

Answer 76

if the search is based on a waiver

that is a reasonable search bc there is the consent of the person

BUT when you say w/ consent, there has to be clear demonstration of the consent, if NO clear demonstration, it is NOT a search with consent.

Question 77

⚠️⚠️⚠️

When is there consent? what are the requisites

Answer 77

1. the right exist
2. the person allegedly waiving the right must have the knowledge, either actual or constructive that the right exists (presumption is there)
3. person had an actual intention to relinquish the right.
   - is there showing that consent is given VOLUNTARILY.

mere silence - he did not object, he was silent. he let me search the bag. there was no objection during the search.

mere silence or mere inaction does NOT amount to consent. the consent must be shown positively

Question 78

the inviolable right against unreasonable search and seizure, it can also be WAIVED (some rights need certain formalities

Question 79

all exceptions you must cover in the video lectures