POLICE POWER - The Legislature (inherent)

- President (by delegation)

Specific Coverage - Administrative boards (by delegation)
(1) Public Health - Lawmaking bodies on all municipal levels, including
(2) Public Morals barangay (by delegation)
(3) Public Safety - Municipal governments/LGUs (conferred by statute –
(4) Public Welfare
general welfare clause of RA 7160)
Test of Reasonability
(1) Lawful subject EMINENT DOMAIN
(2) Lawful means
Taking in the constitutional case:
(3) Least restrictions of individual right
Owner is deprived of his proprietary rights there is taking of
Limitations when police power is delegated: when police private property; includes:
power is delegated (1) diminution in value;
(1) Express grant by law [e.g. Secs. 16, 391, 447, 458 (2) prevention of ordinary use;
and (3) deprivation of beneficial use.
468, R.A. 7160, for LGUs]
(2) Limited within its territorial jurisdiction [for local Requisites
government units] (1) Private property
(3) Must not be contrary to law. (2) Genuine necessity - inherent/presumed in legislation,
but when the power is delegated (e.g. local government
Additional limitations (when exercised by delegate) units), necessity must be proven.
(3) For public use - Court has adopted a broad definition
- Express grant by law of “public use,” following the U.S. trend
- Within territorial limits (LGUs) (4) Payment of just compensation
- Must not be contrary to law (5) Due process [Manapat v. CA (2007)]
- For municipal ordinances:
o must not contravene the Constitution or any statute Requisites of taking in eminent domain:
o must not be unfair and oppressive
1. Expropriator must enter a private property
o must not be partial and discriminatory 2. Entry must be for more than a momentary period
o must not prohibit, but may regulate, trade 3. Entry must be under warrant or color of legal authority
o must not be unreasonable 4. Property must be devoted to public use or otherwise
o must be general in application and consistent with informally appropriated or injuriously affected
public policy 5. The utilization of the property for public use must be in
such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of
Tests for Validity of Exercise of Police Power beneficial enjoyment of his property
(1) Lawful Subject: Interest of the general public (as
distinguished from a particular class required exercise). Requisites for LGU to exercise eminent domain:
This means that the activity or property sought to be
regulated affects the general welfare 1. Enactment of an ordinance and not a resolution
(2) Lawful Means: Means employed are reasonably 2. Must be for a public use, purpose or welfare or for the
necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose, and benefit of the poor and the landless
are not unduly oppressive. [Tablarin v. Gutierrez (1987)] 3. Payment of just compensation
(3) Least Restrictions of Individual Rights: It must also be 4. Its exercise must be preceded by a valid and definite
evident that no other alternative for the accomplishment offer made to the owner who rejects the same
of the purpose less intrusive of private rights can work.
Characteristics:
TAXATION
- Most pervasive Purpose:
- Least limitable (1) To raise revenue
- Most demanding (2) Tool for regulation
- Dynamic (3) Protection/power to keep alive
- Not static
- Must move with the moving society it is supposed to General Limitations
regulate (1) Power to tax exists for the general welfare; should be
exercised only for a public purpose
(2) Might be justified as for public purpose even if the
immediate beneficiaries are private individuals
Who may exercise:
(3) Tax should not be confiscatory: If a tax measure is so (4) The passport of a person sought for a criminal
unconscionable as to amount to confiscation of property, offense may be cancelled without hearing, to compel his
the Court will invalidate it. But invalidating a tax measure return to the country he has fled.
must be exercised with utmost caution, otherwise, the (5) Filthy restaurants may be summarily padlocked in the
State’s power to legislate for the public welfare might be interest of the public health and bawdy houses to protect
seriously curtailed the public morals. [Ynot v. IAC (1987)]
(4) Taxes should be uniform and equitable
Procedural Due Process requisites:
Specific Limitations In Civil Proceedings
(1) Uniformity of taxation (1) An impartial court of tribunal clothed with judicial
General Rule: simply geographical uniformity, meaning power to hear and determine the matter before it.
it operates with the same force and effect in every place (2) Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person
where the subject of it is found of the defendant and over the property subject matter of
Exception: Rule does not prohibit classification for the proceeding
purposes of taxation, provided the ff requisites are (3) The defendant must be given an opportunity to be
met: (SNAGAE) heard
(a) standards used are Substantial and Not Arbitrary (4) Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing and
(b) if the classification is Germane to achieve the must clearly explain its factual and legal bases
legislative purpose
(c) if that classification Applies to both present and In Administrative Proceedings
future conditions, other circumstances being equal The Ang Tibay Rules:
(d) applies Equally to members of the same class. (1) Right to a hearing to present own case and submit
(2) Tax Exemptions evidence in support thereof.
No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed (2) Tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
without the concurrence of a majority of all the (3) Decision rendered must have support.
Members of Congress [Sec. 28 (4), Art. VI] (4) Evidence which supports the finding or conclusion is
substantial (such relevant evidence as a reasonable
Constitutional exemptions [sec. 28(3), Art. VI] mind accept as adequate to support a conclusion).
Requisite: Exclusive Use (5) The decision must be rendered on the evidence
(a) Educational institutions: presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the
(b) Charitable institutions record and disclosed to the parties affected.
(c) Religious property (6) The tribunal or any of its judges, must act on its or his
own independent consideration of the law and facts of
Delegation the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a
(1) legislature (primarily) subordinate in arriving at a decision.
(2) local legislative bodies [Sec. 5, Art. X] (7) The tribunal should, in all controversial questions,
(3) President (to a limited extent, when granted render its decision in such a manner that the parties to
delegated the proceeding can know the various issues involved,
tariff powers under Sec. 28 (2) Art. VI and the reasons for the decision rendered. [AngTibay v.
CIR (1940)]
DUE PROCESS
In Academic Disciplinary Proceedings
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (1) The students must be informed in writing of the
Due process of law guarantees: nature and cause of any accusation against them;
(1) Notice and (2) They shall have the right to answer the charges
(2) Opportunity to be heard against them, with the assistance of counsel, if desired;
(3) To persons who would be affected by the order or act (3) They shall be informed of the evidence against them;
contemplated. (4) They shall have the right to adduce evidence in their
own behalf;
Noted exceptions to due process (5) The evidence must be duly considered by the
(1) The conclusive presumption, bars the admission of investigating committee or official designated by the
contrary evidence school authorities to hear and decide the case
(2) There are instances when the need for expeditious
action will justify omission of these requisites, (because Criminal Due Process:
of the immediate danger it poses to the safety and lives Requisites:
of the people.) (1) Accused is heard by a court of competent jurisdiction;
(3) Pornographic materials, contaminated meat and (2) Accused is proceeded against under the orderly
narcotic drugs are inherently pernicious and may be process of law;
summarily destroyed. (3) Accused is given notice and opportunity to be heard;
 (4) Judgment rendered is within the authority of a themselves are sufficient to induce a cautious man to
constitutional law. rely on them and act in pursuance thereof.
Search Warrant – Such facts and circumstances which
Substantive Due Process would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to
Laws which interfere with life, liberty or property satisfy believe that an offense has been committed and that the
substantive due process when there is: objects sought in connection are in the place sought to
(1) Lawful object – the interests of the public in general be searched. [Burgos v. Chief of Staff (1984)]
require the intervention of the State, and (2) Determination of probable cause personally by the
(2) Lawful means – means employed are reasonably judge.
necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and (3) After personal examination under oath or affirmation
not unduly oppressive on individuals of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
(a) Mere affidavits of the complainant and his
Governmental functions are classified into: witnesses are thus not sufficient.
(1) Constituent – are compulsory in nature (i.e. public (b) The examining Judge has to take depositions in
order, administration of justice and foreign relations) writing of the complainant and the witnesses he may
(2) Ministrant – are merely optional on the part of the produce and attach them to the record.
State (i.e. public education, public charity and (c) Such written deposition is necessary in order that
regulations of trade and industry) the Judge may be able to properly determine the
existence or non-existence of the probable cause, to
In such instances, judicial hearing may be omitted w/o hold liable for perjury the person giving it if it will be
violation of DP in view of: found later that his declarations are false
(d) It is axiomatic that the examination must be
1. Nature of property probing and exhaustive, not merely routine or
2. Urgency of need to protect the general welfare from a proforma, if the claimed probable cause is to be
clear & present danger established.
(e) The examining magistrate must not simply rehash
the contents of the affidavit but must make his own
EQUAL PROTECTION inquiry on the intent and justification of the
Requisites for valid classification application. [Roan v. Gonzales (1984)]
(1) It must rest on substantial distinctions which make (4) On the basis of their personal knowledge of the facts
real differences; they are testifying to.
(2) It must be germane to the purpose of the law; (5) The warrant must describe particularly the place to
(3) It must not be limited to existing conditions only. be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
(4) Apply equally to all members of the same class
GENERAL WARRANT
Standards for judicial review One that:
1) Whether the State was justified in making a (1) Does not describe with particularity the things subject
classification at all. (Three-level scrutiny) of the search and seizure; and
(a) Rational basis test – the classification should bear (2) Where probable cause has not been properly
a reasonable relation to the government’s purpose established. It is a void warrant.
(b) Strict scrutiny test – in which a legislative
classification which impermissibly interferes with the Exception to General Warrants: General descriptions will
exercise of a fundamental right not invalidate the entire warrant if other items have been
(c) Intermediate scrutiny test – Court accepts the particularly described.
articulated purpose of the legislation but it closely
scrutinizes the relationship between the classification Conduct of the Search [Sec. 7, Rule 126, ROC]
and the purpose based on a spectrum of standards (1) In the presence of a lawful occupant thereof or any
(2) Whether the classification was valid. (4-pronged test member of his family, OR
of Valid classification in People v. Cayat) (2) If occupant or members of the family are absent, in
the presence of 2 witnesses of
SEARCHES AND SEIZURE (a) sufficient age
Warrant requirement (b) discretion
PURPOSE (c) residing in the same locality
(1)Search Warrant- to gain evidence to convict (3) Force may be used in entering a dwelling if justified
(2) Warrant of Arrest- to acquire jurisdiction by Rule 126 ROC.

REQUISITES Warrantless searches recognized by jurisprudence

(1) Existence of probable cause Quick Look [People v. Aruta, supra]
Warrant of Arrest – Such facts and circumstances (1) Search incident to a lawful arrest
antecedent to the issuance of the warrant that in (2) Plain view doctrine
(3) Search of a moving vehicle (2) The arrest warrant must describe particularly the
(4) Consented search person to be seized.
(5) Customs search (a) By stating the name of the person to be arrested.
(6) Stop and frisk (b) If not known, then a “John Doe warrant” may be
(7) Exigent and emergency circumstances issued, with some descriptio persona that will enable
(8) Visual search at checkpoints the officer to identify the accused.

Search incident to a lawful arrest Requisites of a Valid Warrantless Arrest

Test for validity (1) When in his presence, the person to be arrested has
(1) Item to be searched was within the arrester’s committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to
custody; commit an offense; (in flagrante delicto)
(2) Search was contemporaneous with the arrest (2) When an offense has just been committed and he
has probable cause to believe based on personal
Plain view doctrine: things seized are w/in plain view of a knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to
searching party be arrested has committed it;
Requisites: Requisites:
(1) Prior valid intrusion into a place; (1) Offense had JUST been committed;
(2) Evidence: (2) Person making the arrest has probable cause to
(a) inadvertently discovered believe based on personal knowledge.
(b) by police who had the right to be where they were; (3) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who
(3) Evidence must be immediately apparent and has escaped from a penal establishment or place where
(4) Noticed without further search he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined
while his case is pending, or has escaped while being
Valid express waiver made voluntarily & intelligently transferred from one confinement to another
Requisites:
(1) Must appear that right exists; Additional Exceptions (Not in the Rules):
(2) Person involved had actual/ constructive knowledge (1) When the right is voluntarily waived (estoppel).
of the existence of such right; (2) Violent insanity
(3) Said person had an actual interest to relinquish the
right; RIGHT TO PRIVACY & PRIVACY IN
(4) Waiver is limited only to the arrest; COMMUNICATION
(5) Waiver does not extend to search made as an Requisites of existence of privacy right
incident thereto, or to any subsequent seizure of (1) Subjective: A person has exhibited an actual
evidence found in the search. expectation of privacy; and
(2) Objective: The expectation be one that society is
Properties subject to seizure prepared to recognize as reasonable.
General Rule: Only the articles particularly described in
the warrant may be seized. Intrusion, when allowed
(1) Property subject of an offense (1) By lawful order of the court
(2) Stolen or embezzled property and other proceeds or (2) When public safety or public order requires
fruits of an offense otherwise, as may be provided by law.
(3) Used or intended to be used as a means of
committing an offense [Sec. 2 Rule 126, ROC] Forms of correspondence covered
(1) letters
WARRANTLESS ARRESTS (2) messages
Requisites for Issuance of a Valid Arrest Warrant (3) telephone calls
(1)Personally evaluate the report and the supporting (4) telegrams, and the like [Bernas]
documents submitted by the fiscal regarding the
existence of probable cause and, on the basis thereof, Tests of reasonable expectation of privacy:
issue a warrant of arrest; or (1) Whether by his conduct, an individual has exhibited
(2)If he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the an expectation of privacy;
fiscal's report and require the submission of supporting (2) Whether such expectation is one that society
affidavits of witnesses to aid him in arriving at a recognizes as reasonable
conclusion as to the existence of probable cause.
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (SPEECH,
Determination of probable cause personally by the judge PRESS, ASSEMBLY & PETITION)
as to warrant of arrest: Components
(1) On the basis of the witnesses’ personal knowledge of Speech, expression, and press include:
the facts they are testifying to. (1) Written or spoken words (recorded or not)
 (2) Symbolic speech (3) the regulation must advance government interest;
(3) Movies (4) the regulation must not be overbroad.

Examples of Valid Subsequent Restraints: FREEDOM OF RELIGION

(1) Libel.
Exceptions: Free exercise clause
(a) private communication in the performance of any Dual aspect
legal, moral or social duty (1) Freedom to believe - absolute
(b) fair and true report of any judicial, legislative or (2) Freedom to act on one’s belief – subject to regulation
other official proceedings
(2) Obscenity. Tests
(3) Contempt for criticism/publications tending to impede, 1. Clear & present danger
obstruct, embarrass or influence the courts in 2. Benevolent neutrality-compelling state interest
administering justice in a pending suit or proceeding 3. Conscientious objector
4) Imputation of irregularities in the judiciary must strike Criteria:
a balance between the right to free press and the (1) There must be belief in God or a parallel belief
reputation of judges occupying a central place in the believer’s life
(5) Right of students to free speech in school premises (2) Religion must involve a moral code transcending
must not infringe on the school’s right to discipline its individual belief; cannot be purely subjective
students (3) Demonstrable sincerity in belief must be shown, but
Exceptions: court cannot inquire into its truth or reasonableness
(1) Fair comment on matters of public interest. (4) There must be some associational ties.
(2) Criticism of official conduct is given the widest
latitude. RIGHT TO TRAVEL (Liberty of Abode & Travel)
LIMITATIONS
Criteria for liability of the individual for ideas expressed Who may impair and when rights may be curtailed
by him Liberty of abode
1. Clear and present danger rule Who: courts (lawful order)
2. Dangerous tendency Doctrine When: within limits prescribed by law
3. Balance-of-Interest test
4. Direct incitement test Right to travel
5. Grave-but-improbable danger test Who: courts (lawful order) or by the appropriate
executive officer.
Miller Test (CCA-SL) To determine obscenity: When: in the interest of national security, public safety or
(1) Whether the average person, applying Contemporary public health
Community standards would find that the work, taken as
a whole, Appeals to prurient interest ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION
(2) Whether the work depicts or describes in a patently Scope of right to access information
offensive way, sexual conduct Specifically defined by the Essence: matters of public concern
applicable state law (1) Official records
(3) Whether the work, taken as a whole, Lacks serious, (2) Documents pertaining to official acts
literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (3) Gov’t research data used as basis for policy
development
O’Brien Test (C-GUN) – determine whether content-
based or content-neutral: Limitations
Restrictions to the right to information may be:
1. If it was within the Constitutional power of the gov’t (1) Based on kinds of information
2. If it furthers an important/substantial Gov’t interest Exempted information:
3. If the gov’t interest is Unrelated to the suppression of (a) Privileged information rooted in separation of
free expression powers
(b) Information of military and diplomatic secrets
If the incidental restriction is No greater than is essential (c) Information affecting national security
to the furtherance of that interest (d) Information on investigations of crimes by law
enforcers before prosecution
(e) Offers exchanged during diplomatic negotiations
Requirements for protection of commercial speech: (2) Based on access
(1) speech must not be false, misleading or proposing an (a) opportunity to inspect and copy records at his
illegal activity; expense
(2) government interest sought to be served by b) not the right to compel custodians of official
regulation must be substantial; records to prepare lists, summaries and the like.
 3) Based on reasonable regulation for the convenience (2) That any statement he makes may be used as
of and for order in the office that has custody of the evidence against him; and
documents (3) That he has a right to the presence of an attorney,
(4) Based on Availability either retained or appointed.

RIGHT TO FORM UNIONS, ASSOCIATIONS OR Availability

SOCIETIES (1) When the person is already under custodial
An organization may remove a member if: investigation
(2) Custodial investigation involves any questioning
1. it is engaged in some form of expression, whether public initiated by law enforcement
or private (3) During “critical pre-trial stages” in the criminal
2. the forced inclusion of a member would significantly process
affect the organization’s ability to advocate public or
Rule on waiver
private viewpoints
(1) Must be in writing
CONTRACT CLAUSE (2) Made in the presence of counsel

Requisites: BAIL

1. Substantial impairment Who may avail

a. Change the terms either in time or mode of General: All persons under custody of the law
Exceptions:
performance
(1) Those charged with capital offense when evidence of
b. Impose new conditions
guilt is strong
c. Dispenses w/ expressed conditions (2) Military men
d. Authorizes something different form that provided in When available
the terms General rule: From the very moment of arrest up to the
2. Affects rights of parties w/ reference to each other & not time of conviction by final judgment
w/ respect to non-parties Exceptions:
(1) When charged with an offense punishable by
Modification of private contracts reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong
(2) Traditionally, the right to bail is not available to the
3 part test (Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas power &
military, as an exception to the bill of rights
Light)

1. state regulation must not substantially impair a

contractual relationship
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
2. the State "must have a significant and legitimate purpose In order that circumstantial evidence may warrant
behind the regulation, such as the remedying of a conviction, the following requisites must concur:
broad and general social or economic problem.” (1) There is more than one circumstance
3. the law must be reasonable and appropriate for its (2) The facts from which the inferences are derived are
intended purpose proven
(3) The combination of all the circumstances is such as
When non-impairment clause prevails: to produce conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
(1) against power of taxation
(2) regulation on loans Elements of the Right to Counsel
(1) Court’s duty to inform the accused of right to counsel
When non-impairment clause yields: before being arraigned;
(1) Invalid exercise of police power (2) It must ask him if he desires the services of counsel;
(2) Statute that exempts a party from any one class of (3) If he does, and is unable to get one, the Court must
taxes give him one; if the accused wishes to procure private
(3) Against freedom of religion counsel, the Court must give him time to obtain one.
(4) Judicial or quasi-judicial order (4) Where no lawyer is available, the Court may appoint
any person resident of the province and of good repute
for probity and ability
MIRANDA RIGHTS
The person under custodial investigation must be
warned that:
(1) He has a right to remain silent; THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Availability (2) A Complaint/Information sufficient in form &
(1) A prime specification of an application for a writ of habeas corpus substance to sustain a conviction;
is involuntary restraint of liberty. (3) Arraignment and plea by the accused;
(2) Voluntary restraint of liberty i.e right of parents to regain custody (4) Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal of the case without
of minor child even if the child is in the custody of a third person of
her own free will
the express consent, of the accused.
(3) Illegal arrest with supervening event when restraint of liberty is
already by virtue of the complaint or information When subsequent prosecution is barred
(a) The issuance of a judicial process preventing the discharge of (1) Same offense
the detained person. (2) Attempt of the same offense
(b) Another is the filing of a complaint or information for the (3) Frustration of the same offense
offense for which the accused is detained. (4) Offense necessarily included in the 1st offense (All
(4) Where a sentence imposes punishment in excess of the power of the elements of the 2nd constitute some of the elements
the court to impose, such sentence is void as to the excess of the 1st offense)
(5) Offense that necessarily includes the 1st offense (All
Conditions for valid suspension:
the elements of the 1st constitute some of the elements
(1) Presence of invasion, insurrection or rebellion
of the 2nd offense)
(2) Public safety requires it
Exceptions
(1) The graver offense developed due to "supervening
SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES
facts" arising from the same act or omission constituting
Availability the former charged.
(1) When proceeding is attended by vexatious, apricious (2) The facts constituting the graver charge became
and oppressive delays known or were discovered only after the filing of the
(2) When unjustified postponements of the trial are former complaint or information.
asked for and secured (3) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made
(3) When without cause or justifiable motive, a long without the consent of the fiscal and the offended party.
period of time is allowed to elapse without the party
having his case tried. When defense of DJ is available
(1) Dismissal based on insufficiency of evidence;
Unreasonable delay weighed by following factors: (2) Dismissal because of denial of right to speedy trial;
(1) Length of delay (3) Accused is discharged to be a state witness.
(2) Reason for delay
Double jeopardy provides three related protections:
(3) Assertion/failure to assert right by the accused
(1) Against a second prosecution for the same offense
(4) Prejudice caused by the delay
after acquittal;
CRUEL AND INHUMAN PUNISHMENT (2) Against a second prosecution for the same offense
after conviction; and
What is a cruel punishment? (3) Against multiple punishments for the same offense.
(1) Involves torture or lingering death
(2) Not only severe, harsh or excessive but flagrantly EX POST FACTO LAWS AND BILL OF
and plainly oppressive ATTAINDER
(3) Wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense
as to shock the moral sense of the community Ex post facto laws
(1) Makes an action done before the passing of the law
NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT and w/c was innocent when done criminal, punishes
such action.
Scope (2) Aggravates a crime or makes it greater than when it
(1) Debt was committed.
(2) Poll Tax (3) Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
DOUBLE JEOPARDY punishment than the law annexed to the crime when it
was committed.
Termination of jeopardy (4) Alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less or
(1) By acquittal different testimony than the law required at the time of
(2) By final conviction the commission of the offense in order to convict the
(3) By dismissal without express consent of accused defendant.
(4) By “dismissal” on the merits (5) Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only
but in effect imposes a penalty or deprivation of a right
Requisites which when done was lawful.
(1) Court of competent jurisdiction;
(6) Deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful
protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a
proclamation of amnesty