Scribd
Upload
40 views1 page

Remedies Mata v. Bavona, 128 SCRA 388 (1984)

The search warrant issued against Soriano Mata was invalid for the following reasons: 1) The search warrant was based solely on an application and joint affidavit, without the judge examining under oath or taking depositions from the complainant and witnesses. 2) Under the Constitution and rules of court, the judge must personally examine the complainant and any witnesses under oath and take their depositions in writing before issuing a search warrant. 3) Taking written depositions is necessary for the judge to properly determine probable cause and hold those providing false declarations accountable for perjury. The failure of the judge to take written depositions invalidated the search warrant.

Uploaded by

LoveAnne
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
40 views1 page

Remedies Mata v. Bavona, 128 SCRA 388 (1984)

The search warrant issued against Soriano Mata was invalid for the following reasons: 1) The search warrant was based solely on an application and joint affidavit, without the judge examining under oath or taking depositions from the complainant and witnesses. 2) Under the Constitution and rules of court, the judge must personally examine the complainant and any witnesses under oath and take their depositions in writing before issuing a search warrant. 3) Taking written depositions is necessary for the judge to properly determine probable cause and hold those providing false declarations accountable for perjury. The failure of the judge to take written depositions invalidated the search warrant.

Uploaded by

LoveAnne
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

REMEDIES

Mata v. Bavona, 128 SCRA 388 (1984)

FACTS: The contention is that the search warrant issued by respondent Judge was based merely
on application for Search Warrant and a joint affidavit of private respondents which were wrongfully
allegedly subscribed, and sworn to before the Clerk of Court. Furthermore, there was allegedly a
failure on the part of the respondent Judge to attach the necessary papers pertinently under PD
810, as amended by PD1306, the information against him alleging that Soriano Mata offered, took,
and arranged bets on the Jai Alai game by selling illegal tickets knows as Masiao tickets without
any authority from the Philippine Jai Alai and Corporation or from the government authorities
concerned.

ISSUE: Is the search warrant valid?

RULING: NO. We hold that the search warrant is tainted with illegality for being violative of the
Constitution and the Rules of Court.

Under the Constitution no search warrant shall issue but upon probable cause to be
determined by the Judge or such other responsible officer as may be authorized by law after
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
More emphatic and detailed is the implementing rule of the constitutional injunction, Section 4 of
Rule 126 which provides that the judge must before issuing the warrant personally examine on
oath or affirmation the complainant and any witnesses he may produce and take their depositions
in writing, and attach them to the record, in addition to any affidavits presented to him.

Mere affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses are thus not sufficient. The
examining Judge has to take depositions in writing of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce and to attach them to the record. Such written deposition is necessary in order that the
Judge may be able to properly determine the existence or non-existence of the probable cause,
and to hold liable for perjury the person giving it if it will be found later that his declarations are
false. We, therefore, hold that the search warrant is tainted with illegality by the failure of the Judge
to conform with the essential requisites of taking the depositions in writing and attaching them to
the record, rendering the search warrant invalid.

You might also like