Crim pro
rasm
DIGESTS
Posadas v Ombudsman (341
SCRA 388)
Dizon (NBI Chief of Special Operns
Grp) & his men went to UP to
attempt to arrest Taparan & Narag on
d basis of positive identificatn of 2
alleged eyewitnesses to d slaying of
Dennis Venturina. Posadas, then
Chancellor of UP & Atty Villmor
counsel for d suspects objected on d
ground that d NBI did not have
warrants of arrest w/ them. They
promisd, though, that they will deliver
d 2 to d NBI ofc d nxt day. Dizon
filed a complaint against Posadas,
etc to d Special Prosecutor, w/ violn
of PD 1829—w/c makes it unlawful
for anyone to obstruct d d window. They saw d suspects
apprehension & prosecutn of crim
offenders. Special Prosecutor
recommended dismissal. Recomm
was disapprovd.
Whether attempted arrest cld b
validly made w/o warrant
Whether Posadas violatd PD 1829
1) NO d warrantless arrest would not
have been valid!
The sitn did not fall under d
categories to w/c one may conduct a
valid warrantless arrest.
Personal knowledge of facts
in warrantless arrests must b based
on probable cause, w/c means an
actual belief or reasonable grounds
of suspicion. The grounds of
suspicion are reasonable when in d
absence of actual belief of d
arresting officers, d suspicion that d
person to b arrested is probably
guilty of committing d offense is
based on actual facts, i.e. supportd
by circumstances sufficiently strong
Nakakainis ang law school!
rasm
in themselves to create d prob cause
of guilt of d person accused.
A reasonable suspicion
therefore must b founded on prob
cause, coupld w/ good faith on d part
of d peace officers making d arrest.
2) NO PC to prosecute w/ violn of PD
1829
Posadas etc. had d right to
object to d arrest of d students, b/c d
arrest that wld have been made was
illegal.
Ppl v Bolasa
There was a tip from an informer that
a man & a woman were repacking
MJ at a house in Valenzuela. The
police went to d house & peepd thru
repacking marijuana. Police arrested
couple & confiscated d MJ. TC
convicted them.
Whether arrest & S&S were valid
Arrest & S&S were INVALID. The sitn
did not fall under any of d categories
enumerated for a valid warrantless
arrest.
The officers shld have conducted 1st
a surveillance considering that d
identities & address of d suspected
culprits were already ascertaind.
After d surveillance & determining d
prob cause, they shld have secured
a search warrant prior to effecting a
valid arrest & seizure.
BOLASA ACQUITTED!
Office of Court Administrator v
Pascual
Tigas wrote a letter to d Office of d
Court Administrator of d SC charging
irregularities against Judge Pascual.
NBI was orderd to conduct a discreet
 Crim pro
rasm

investigatn. NBI found out that Tigas

was a fictitious character. NBI then
went to Candido Cruz who believd
that d downgrading of his offense by
Pascual would b in exchange for
P2T. NBI decided to entrap Pascual.
Cruz tried to give d money during d
gradn. He later went to Pascual’s
ofc t give d P2T markd money. NBI
found money in Pascual’s
possession, and they arrested him.
Pascual says that he was outraged
when Cruz decidd to bribe him & he
screamd for Cruz to leave, w/c Cruz
did.

HELD: The only bases for d Report

and Recomm submittd by d Exec
judge consists of: d complaint, d
answer, d memorandum & d TSN of
d hearing of d bribery case of
Pascual at d Sandiganbayan.
Pascual was not afforded d right to
open trial where Pascual can
confront d witnesses against him &
present evid against him shld b
competent & shld b derivd fr direct
knowledge.
The judiciary to w/c d
respondent belongs demands no
less. B4 any of its mems cld b
faulted, it shld only be after due
investigation & aftr presentatn of
competent evidence, especially since
d charge is penal in character.

D NBI’s version of d story also had a

lot of inconsistencies in it.

Nakakainis ang law school!

rasm