1|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING FROM ST.
THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2 OUTLINE
BASIC PRINCIPLES: LIMITATIONS ON
STATE POWER
1. Provisions of the Bill of Rights are
self-executing;
When a provisions states As
provided by law then it is not Self-
Executory. (Examples are Art. 3
Sections 6-7.)
2. They can only be invoked against
the State;
3. Basic Human Rights are superior
to Property Rights; and
4. Its provisions have no retroactive
application.
CONCEPT OF RIGHTS
A bill of rights may be defined as a
declaration and enumeration of a persons
rights and privileges which the Constitution
is designed to protect against violations by
the government, or by individual or groups
of individuals.
It is a charter of liberties for the
individual and a limitation upon the power of
the State.
Its basis is the social importance
accorded to the individual in the democratic
or republican state, the belief that every
human being has intrinsic dignity and worth
which must be respected and safeguarded.
CLASSES OF RIGHTS
NATURAL RIGHTS
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
STATUTORY RIGHTS
CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS
POLITICAL RIGHTS
CIVIL RIGHTS
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED (SEC.
12 & 14)
Section 1: No person shall be deprived of
life, liberty or property without due process
of law, nor shall any person be deprived the
equal protection of laws.
Not covered as property:
1. Permits and Licenses [CM Timber]
2. Private Employment [Serrano]
3. Public Office
Outline of Section 1: (Due Process &
Equal Protection)
A. Due Process (Procedural DP &
Substantive DP)
1. Procedural
Procedural Due Process relates to
the mode of procedure which
government and application of
laws.
Exemption:
o Rule-making / quasi legislative
power; and
o Abatement of nuisance per se
Sec.1: Procedural Due Process
Due Process in Administrative Proceedings:
1) The right to a hearing which includes the
right of a party interested or affected to
present his on case and submit
evidence in support thereof;
2) The tribunal must consider the evidence
presented;
3) The decision must have something to
support itself;
4) The evidence must be substantial;
5) The decision must be based on the
evidence presented at the hearing or at
least contained on the records and
disclosed to the party affected;
6) The tribunal or body or any of its judges
must act on its or his own independent
consideration of the law and facts of the
controversy and not simply accept the
views of a subordinate in arriving at a
decision; and
7) The board or body should, in all
controversial questions, render its
decision in such a manner that the
parties to the proceeding can know the
various issues involved and the reason
for the decision.
2. Substantive
Substantive Due Process pertains
to the intrinsic validity of the law
interfering with life, liberty and
property.
Question:
o Is the law reasonable or is it
and undue interference on life,
liberty or property?
o Is it a valid exercise of Police
Power?
 2|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING
POLICE POWER
The power of the government to
prescribe regulations to promote
health, morals, education, good
order or safety and the general
welfare of the people.
Test for Valid Exercise of Police Power:
1. That the interest of the public
generally as distinguished from those
of a particular class requires such
interference.
2. That the means are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of
the purpose and not unduly
oppressive upon individuals.
B. Equal Protection
Equal Protection pertains to the
requirement that laws must treat
all persons or things similarly
situated alike, bot as to similarities
conferred and liabilities imposed.
Two (2) Ways of Violating:
1. Classifying without basis; and
2. Failure to classify when
distinction exists.
When is Classification Permissible?
Two (2) ways of justifying:
1. When the Constitution allows it; or
2. When it passes the four (4) tests for
a valid classification
Four (4) Tests for Valid Classification:
1. It must rest on a substantial distinction;
2. It must be germane to the purpose of
the law;
3. It must not be limited to existing
conditions only;
4. It must apply equally to members of the
same class.
Section 2: The right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers and
effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
except upon probable cause 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 persons or
things to be seized.
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
Arrest, Search and Seizure:
1. Search Warrant
2. Arrest Warrant
3. Warrantless Searches
4. Warrantless Arrests
5. Exclusionary Rule
Requisites for a Valid Search Warrant:
1. It must be based upon probable
cause;
2. The probable cause must be
determined personally by the judge;
3. The determination must be made
after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and
the witnesses he may produce; and
4. It must particularly describe the place
to be searched and the persons or
things to be searched.
Probable Cause:
Probable cause are such facts and
circumstances which would 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.
A Search Warrant must specifically
describe:
1. The place to be searched
2. The objects to be seized; and
3. Issue only for one specific offense.
Rules on description of place
illustrated:
1. If the place is under the control of
one person, a general description
may be sufficient;
2. If the place is a compound occupied
by various persons, the warrant must
specifically indicate the unit to be
searched;
3. The police can only search the place
described in the warrant, not an
adjoining one; and
4. Once the place is specifically
described, there is no need to name
the occupant or owner.
Rules on description of object:
1. Objects need not be described in
precise details;
2. Minor discrepancies in between the
objects described in the warrant from
 3|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING
those actually taken do not nullify the
warrant for as long as they are of the
same kind and nature;
3. Where a warrant contains a specific
description of some objects and a
general description of others, the
entire warrant is not voided;
4. Objects not specifically described in
the warrant but are considered
contraband may be seized in plain
view and are admissible in court.
Specific Doctrines on One Offense
rule:
1. When related offenses are punished
by different provisions of the same
law, issuance of a single warrant is
justified;
2. Where there are several counts of
one specific offense, issuance of one
search warrant is sufficient;
Territorial Validity:
1. Any court within whose territorial
jurisdiction the crime was committed;
2. For compelling reasons stated in the
application, any court within the
judicial region where the crime was
committed or where the warrant shall
be served; and
3. Any court, subject to the requirement
of territorial jurisdiction, can issue
any warrant for any offense.
Warrantless Searches:
(Generally Void)
1. Failure to object to evidence during
trial results to waiver; and
2. Only the person whose right was
invaded can invoke illegal search.
Valid Warrantless Searches:
(I.C.P.S.M.C.E.A.P.P.)
1. Incident to Lawful Arrest
2. Consented Search
3. Plain View
4. Stop and Frisk
5. Moving Vehicles
6. Customer Laws / CL Enforcement
7. Exigency
8. Airport Security
9. Prison Search / Jail Search
10. Private Individual
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
1. Incident to Lawful Arrest
Rules:
Contemporaneous to Arrest
Placee under his immediate
control
2. Consented Search
Principles:
Only the person whose right has
been invaded can give consent;
Consent has to be given
expressly;
The search cannot extend beyond
the purpose for which consent was
given
3. Plain View
Requisites:
There must be a prior justification
for the intrusion;
The police inadvertently came
across the evidence; and
The illegality must be immediately
apparent.
4. Stop and Frisk
It must be based on probable
cause, that is that the person is
acting suspiciously, which must
not be based on the subjective
perception of the police. His
unusual behaviour must suggest a
crime
Reports do not constitute probable
cause.
5. Moving Vehicles
Vehicles may be stopped at check
points and subjected to visual
search only;
Extensive search is permissible
only if there is probable cause;
Probable cause can be a report
that contraband is being
transported, or it can be that the
person is acting suspiciously.
Failure to object is equivalent to
consent, unless under the
circumstances we cannot expect
the person to object.
6. Customer Laws / CL Enforcement
Requisites:
It must be conducted by persons
exercising police authority under
the custom laws;
There must be probable cause;
 4|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING
It is limited to persons, vehicles,
vessels, aircrafts, land enclosure,
warehouse, stores, but not
dwelling houses; and
Only dutiable or prohibited goods
can be seized.
7. Exigency
Emergency; Demand, want,
need or imperativeness.
8. Airport Security
Johnson: Reduced expectation of
privacy, minimum intrusiveness
and gravity of safety interest is
involved.
Canton (R.A. 6235) Ticket:
holder thereof is subject to
search for and seizure Holder
refusing to be searched shall not
be allowed to board aircraft.
9. Prison Search / Jail Search
Conde: Seizure of knives from
visiting wife
10. Private Individual
Example 2002, No. 8: Passenger
left bag on the bus; conductor
inspected bag and found owners
calling card and a bag of white
powdery substance; NBI found out
it was shabu; accused was
charged and convicted. Evidence
is admissible.
VALID WARRANTLESS ARRESTS:
1) When in his presence, the person to
be arrested has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit
an offense;
2) When an offense has in fact been
committed, and he has personal
knowledge of facts indicating that the
person to be arrested has committed
it; and
***Amended: When an offense has just
been committed and he has probable
cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts and circumstances
that the person to be arrested has
committed it.
3) When the person to be arrested is a
prisoner who has escaped from penal
establishment or place where he is
serving final judgement or temporarily
confined while his case is pending, or
has escaped while being transferred
from one confinement to another.
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
NOTE:
Exclusionary Rule: Meaning
1. Illegal Warrantless Searches; and
2. Void Warrants
Consequence:
o Return the objects, unless
they are contraband. In most
cases, accused will have to be
acquitted.
Stonehill A personal right
Provisions with exclusionary rule:
2, 3, 12 & 17
Fruit of Poisonous Tree Rule
All objects obtained through illegal
search are inadmissible in evidence.
Section 3:
(1) The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the
court, or when public safety or order
requires as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation
of this or the preceding section shall
be inadmissible for any purpose in
any proceeding.
Q: The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable except
upon lawful order of the court or when
A: Public safety or order requires otherwise
as prescribed by law.
Privacy of Communications
May be restricted:
1. Upon lawful order of the court (court)
Court can order it in the manner in
Sec. 2; apply before the judge for
the tapping and prove that there is
probable cause and the judge can
order the conduct of wiretapping.
2. When prescribed by law as public
order and safety requires (congress
has to pass a law)
It applied new modes of
communications such as it is also
a form of communication.
R.A. 4200 (Anti-Wire Tapping Law)
punishes interception and recording of
conversation without the consent of both
parties.
It is similar to Sec. 3 in the sense
that they are bot exclusionary
rules, but it goes further because it
punishes (violation becomes a crime).
 5|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS

It is narrower in the sense that it Prisons; letter was turned over the
covers only oral communication (it prosecutor. Lawyer of X objected to the
is about oral communications only not presentation of the letter and moved for
written or letters; Text messages are not its return on the ground that it violates
covered with this, Calls definitely
included.)
the right of X against unlawful search
Cases: and seizure. Decide.
Alejano A: Yes, the letter may be opened and
Q: Can letter of detainees or convicts read by the warden because it was not
be opened and read? And is Sec. 3 addressed to nor was it from his lawyer
aailable to them? Exception? (Only exception to the general rule is
A: Yes, as a general rule, all letters can the lawyer-client privilege)
be opened. People in jail do not enjoy
privacy to communications, except Q: A file an annulment case against her
letters written between clients and husband based on psychological
lawyers because it has lawyer-client incapacity of the latter. While the case
privilege. was pending, she broke open the
drawer of her husbands office and took
Ople away the pictures, letters and cards
Q: Does the Constitution protect the sent to her husband from his paramour.
right to privacy? When ma it be Her husband objected to the admission
curtailed? into evidence of the documents on the
A: The Constitution only provided the ground of illegal search and seizure.
privacy of communication, which is very Are they admissible?
limited. However, it is a constitutional A: No, because there was no court
right even if not specifically provided or order or a law authorizing the seizure of
listed in the constitution as the the documents.
provision of bill of rights is really Note: Zulueta Cases; note that you
intended to protect persons privacy; cannot invoke Bill of Rights against a
such as due process, against private person.
unreasonable seizures, against self- 1. By entering into a contract of
incrimination. marriage, one does not waive his
right to the privacy with respect to
his spouse;
Bar Question (1998 No. 7)
2. This doctrine applied only if the suit
Q: Police suspecting Juan was using
is between spouse in view of the
the mail for propaganda purposes,
fact that bill of rights can only be
Chief of Police of Lanao ordered the
invoked only against the state; and
Postmaster to intercept and open all
3. Section 3 is still covered by
mail addressed to and coming from
Exclusionary Rule.
Juan in the interest of national security?
Was the order valid?
R.A. 9372 (Please take note that the right
A: No, because the order violates the
to privacy to communications may be
privacy of communication and
limited by law)
correspondence, it can be had only
through court order or a law passed by
1. Anti-wiretapping Law
congress.
2. Anti- terrorism Law
Bar Question (1989 No. 8)
Section 7: Surveillance of Suspects and
Q: X was serving sentence at
Interception and Recording of
Muntinglupa for the crime of theft when
Communications. The provisions under
he stabbed dead on of his guards. X
R.A. 4200 (Anti-Wire Tapping Law) to the
was charged with murder. During trial,
contrary notwithstanding, a police or law
prosecution introduced a letter written
enforcement official and the members of his
by C in prison to his wife tending to
team may, upon a written order of the
establish that the crime of murder was
Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and
the result of premeditation. It was
record, with the use of any mode, for, kind
opened and read by warden pursuant to
or type of electronic or other surveillance
the rules of discipline of Bureau of
equipment or intercepting and tracking
 6|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS

devices, or with the use of any other Restraint on Expression

suitable ways and means for that purpose,
any communication, message, conversation 1. Prior Restraint
discussion, or spoken or written words o Government restriction on forms
between members of a judicially declared of expression in advance of
and outlawed terrorist organization, actual publication or
association,, or group of persons or of any dissemination.
person charged with or suspected of the o Note: Exercise of Prior Restraint
crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit bears a presumption of
terrorism. unconstitutionality, except:
i. In times of war;
Note: If you are not a terrorist, you can ii. When the COMELEC
apply with the RTC or MTC because they exercise its power under
are authorized to issue search warrants to Sec.4, Art. XI; or
tap their private conversation. iii. When the restriction is
content neutral.
HABEAS DATA Section 1: The writ of 2. Subsequent Punishment
Habeas Data is a remedy available to any o The restraint on freedom of
person whose right to privacy in life, liberty speech, expression and of the
and security is violated or threatened by an press that comes after the
unlawful act or omission of a public official exercise of said rights in the
or employee, or of a private individual or form of criminal prosecutions,
entity engaged in the gathering, collecting citations for contempt or suits
or storing of data or information regarding for damages.
the person, family, home and
correspondence of the aggrieved party. Content-Neutral Content-Based
One that is Imposed on
Therefore, persons who violate your right to imposed not on content, suffers
privacy as when they got information about the content of the from presumption
you without court order, you may file speech but on of unconstitutionality
petition for the issuance of Habeas data to the time mode or and should be
protect your right to Privacy. manner of place subject to the clear
of the exercise of and present danger
Section 4: No law shall be passed right. rule.
abridging the freedom of speech, of
expression, or of the press, or the right of Challenges to Restriction on Free
the people peaceably to assemble and Speech:
petition the Government for redress of Overbreath Vagueness
grievances. A law is overbroad A law which lacks
which sweeps comprehensive
Five (5) Rights Protected: unnecessarily standard so that people
(S.E.P.A.P.) broadly and invade would differ as to its
1. Speech an area of protected meaning.
freedom
2. Expression
Decrees that a Repugnant to the
3. Press governmental Constitution in two (2)
4. Assemble purpose to control or respects:
5. Petition prevent activities 1) It violates due process
constitutionally for failure to accord
Note: These are political rights as they are subject to state persons, especially the
enjoyed in order to participate in affairs of regulations may not parties targeted by it,
the Government. be achieved by fair notice of the
means which sweep conduct to avoid; and
Freedom of Speech, Expression and of unnecessarily 2) It leaves law enforcers
the Press is the liberty to discuss publicly broadly and thereby unbridled discretion in
invade the area of carrying out its
and truthfully any matter of public interest
protected freedoms. provisions and
without censorship or punishment. becomes an arbitrary
flexing of the
Government muscle.
 7|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING
Test on Restrictions:
(On expression to determine W/N it is valid)
1. Dangerous Tendency
2. Clear and Present Danger
3. Balancing of Interest
1. Dangerous Tendency
If the words spoken create a
dangerous tendency which the state
has a right to prevent, then such
words are punishable. (What is
punished here is the tendency of the
Speech.)
2. Clear and Present Danger
Whether the words are used in such
circumstances and are such nature
as to create a clear and present
danger that they will bring about the
substantive evil that the legislature
has a right to prevent.
(The danger is about to happen or is
happen and the problem is very
serious)
Ex: Shouting *fire* in a theatre.
3. Balancing of Interest
Courts will weigh or balance the
conflicting social interests that will be
affected by legislation and uphold
what should be considered as the
most importance interest
LIBEL
Vasquez Rule
This involves usually libel against
Public Officers, not that if it is against
private individual, no constitutional
issue would arise, because there is no
public interest involved in maligning
private individual.
Note: When government officials are
being criticized or libelled in the
exercise of his function, constitutional
issues would arise as every person
has the right to express matters of
public concern and in view of the
accountability of government offices in
the performance of its official
functions.
If the Libelous statement relates to
official functions, or it relates to a crime,
truth is a defense.
1. It is the public official who must
prove that statement is false, and
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
2. It was made with knowledge of its
falsity, or
3. There was a reckless disregard
whether it is true or not. (Ex. Person
libelling did not bother to verify the
source.)
Borjal Reverse Presumption
applies not only to public official but to
a Public Figure
Public Figure any person who, by
his accomplishment, game, mode of
living, or by adopting a profession or
calling which gives the public interest
in his doings, affair or character.
Vinuya Case (644 scra 543)
Lawyers have limited freedom of expression
as they are government by the code of
judicial rights narrower rights.
Petition and Assembly
Freedom of assembly is the right of the
people to meet peaceably for consultation
and discussion of matters of public concern.
Test: Clear and Present Danger to Public
Safety, Order, Morals, etc. *Purpose of
Police Power*
Hecklers Veto
This occurs when an acting partys right to
freedom of speech is curtailed or restricted
by the government in order to prevent a
reacting partys behaviour. The common
example is that of demonstrators (reacting
party) causing a speech (given by the
acting party) to be terminated in order to
preserve the peace.
Hecklers Veto is the suppression of
speech by the government, because
of, the possibility, a violent reaction
by hecklers.
 8|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING
Section 5: No Law shall be made
respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise and enjoyment
of religious profession and worship, without
discrimination or preference, shall forever
be allowed. No religious test shall be
required for the exercise of civil or political
rights.
NOTE: Section 5 Clauses.
a.) Non-Establishment Clause; and
b.) Free Exercise Clause.
1. Non-Establishment Clause
o The non-establishment clause
prohibits legislation which aid one
religion, aid all religions, or prefers
one over another.
2. Free Exercise Clause
o Free exercise of religion is the
freedom to believe, which is
absolute, and the freedom to act,
which may be restricted, in
accordance with ones beliefs.
o TEST: Clear and Present Danger
Case: Manosca owns a small lot which
turned out to be the birthplace of the found
of INC and it is sought to be expropriated by
the National Historical Society. The issue
that was raised in Manosca case pertains to
the Non-Establishment Clause.
CASE: DECS case, where they require
students and teachers of J.W. to participate
in flag ceremonies challenges the issue of
The Free Exercise Clause.
TESTS FOR ALLOWABLE AID TO
RELIGION: (Lemon vs. Kurtzman)
1. The statute must have a secular
legislative purpose;
2. The principal or primary effect is
neither one that advances or inhibits
religion;
3. It must not foster excessive
government entanglement with
religion.
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
Section 6: The liberty of abode and of
changing the same within the limits
prescribed by law shall not be impaired
except upon lawful order of the court.
Neither shall the right to travel be impaired
except in the interest of national security,
public safety, or public health as may be
provided by law.
Restricted by:
1. Congress Within the limits
prescribed by law.
2. Court lawful order of the court
(Yap Case)
CASE: The military commander in charge
of the operation against rebel groups
directed the inhabitants of the island which
would be the target of attacks by
government forces to evacuate the area
and offered the residents temporary military
hamlet. Can the military commander force
the residents to transfer their places of
abode without court order? No. Because
only the courts or Congress by means of
a law can restrict the liberty of abode.
RIGHT TO TRAVEL: Who can restrict?
1. Court
-Of people out on bail.
2. Executive & Administrative Officials
-If they do not act arbitrarily, meaning
that there is a law authorizing them
and they do it on the basis of
national security, public safety and
public health.
3. Congress
-Silverio and Santiago Cases.
CONDITIONS WHEN COURT MAY
ALLOW TRAVEL:
1. Prove Urgency
2. State Duration
3. Obtain Consent of Surety
 9|Page LAWYERS IN THE MAKING FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS

Section 7: The right of the people to Section 8: The right of the people,
information on matters of public concern including those employed in the public and
shall be recognized. Access to official acts,, private sectors, to form unions, associations
transactions, or decisions, as well as to or societies for purposes not contrary to law
government research data used as basis for shall not be abridged.
policy development, shall be afforded the
citizen, subject to such limitations as may Right to Associations guarantees:
be provided by law. 1. The Right to Join any association;
and
Elements of Section 7: 2. The Right to Refuse to Join.
a. Right to Information; and Exception:
b. Access to Official Records o Close-shop Agreement
Exception to the Exception:
Term Matters of Public Concern refers o Freedom of Religion
to those which the public may want
to know, because it directly affects CASE: Union A has a close shop
their lives or because they arouse agreement with company X. B a new
the interest of a citizen. employee refuses to join on the ground that
his religion prohibits him from doing so.
CASE: Kabataan at Matatandang Can B be forced to join the union?
Makabansa (KMM) wrote the Department of
Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Department Decision: No, because freedom of religion
of National Defense (DND) demanding is superior to a close shop agreement.
disclosure of the details of the negotiations,
as well as copies of the minutes of the
meetings. The DFA and the DND refused,
contending that premature disclosure of the
offers and counter-offers between the
parties could jeopardize on-going
negotiations with another country. KMM
filed suit to compel disclosure of the
negotiation details, and be granted access
to the records of the meetings, invoking the
constitutional right of the people to
information on matters of public concern.
Decision: They cannot have access for it is
still on-going.
 10 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G
Section 9: Private Property shall not be
taken for public use without just
compensation.
EMINENT DOMAIN - is the power of the
government to take over private property for
public use after payment of just
compensation.
Principle: Inherent in the State, but
exercised by Congress and those expressly
authorized by law.
Outline of this Section:
1. Taking
2. Public Use
3. Just Compensation
ELEMENTS OF TAKING:
(Republic vs. Castellvi)
1. Expropriator must enter the private
property;
2. The entrance must be for more than
a limited period;
3. The entrance should be under
warrant or color of legal authority;
4. The property must be devoted to
public use or otherwise informally
appropriated or injuriously affected;
5. The entrance must be to oust the
owner to deprive him of beneficial
enjoyment.
Term Public Use:
1. Used by the Public; or
2. Indirect advantage or benefit to the
public.
CASE: Vda. de Ouano v. Republic, 642
SCRA 384 (2011)
Question: If the expropriator does not use
the property for the purpose for which it was
expropriated, or abandons it, or uses it for
another public purpose, can the owner
recover it?
Held: Yes, the notion that the government, via
expropriation proceedings, acquires
unrestricted ownership over or a fee simple title
to the covered land [Fery v. Municipality of
Cabanatuan], is no longer tenable. We
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
suggested as much in Heirs of Moreno and in
Tudtud and more recently in Lozada, Sr.
Expropriated lands should be differentiated from
a piece of land, ownership of which was
absolutely transferred by way of an
unconditional purchase and sale contract freely
entered by two parties, one without obligation to
buy and the other without the duty to sell. In that
case, the fee simple concept really comes into
play. There is really no occasion to apply the
fee simple concept if the transfer is
conditional. The taking of a private land in
expropriation proceedings is always conditioned
on its continued devotion to its public purpose.
As a necessary corollary, once the purpose is
terminated or peremptorily abandoned, then the
former owner, if he so desires, may seek its
reversion, subject of course to the return, at the
very least, of the just compensation received.
Rights/Obligations of parties:
(Lozada, etc)
Expropriator:
1. Return property.
2. May give owner option to buy
improvements, but if he declines,
remove them.
3. Keep income and fruits of the
property.
Owner:
1. Return just compensation, without
interest.
2. Pay expropriator necessary
expenses for maintenance of
property to the extent he got
benefited.
3. Pay interest only if there is delay in
returning just compensation after
expropriator has reconvened.
Just Compensation:
1. Must be in cash, except Santos
case.
2. Determination is a judicial function
[Purefoods and Libunao RA 6395
only 10% for right of way.]
3. Basis:
a. Time of taking;
b. Time of filing;
c. Whichever comes first, except
City of Cebu case.
4. What is the rate of interest if
expropriator fails to pay on time?
 11 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS

o 12% in Republic v. CA and Reyes
v. NHA; and
o 6% in Libunao Case, apparently if
judgment is satisfied on time.
5. Can the owner recover the property if
expropriator fails to pay just
compensation after an unreasonable
lapse of time? Republic v. Lim
When can expropriator enter the
property?
Section 10: No law impairing the obligation
of contracts shall be enacted.
A law impairs the obligations of contracts
when it changes the terms of the contract:
1. In time or mode of performance;
2. Imposes new conditions;
3. Dispenses with those expressed;
and
4. Authorizes for its satisfaction
something different.

1. After filing of complaint, Basic Principles in this section:

2. With notice to owner
3. Deposit with authorized government 1. Police power, eminent domain and
depository taxation are superior to non-
4. Amount equivalent to assess value impairment.
for taxation purposes [LGC 15%] 2. Freedom of religion is superior.
EMINENT DOMAIN POLICE POWER 3. Can be invoked only against
If the property is In police power, he statutes, ordinances, but not against
taken in the exercise is not entitled to quasi-judicial acts.
of eminent domain, compensation.
the owner is entitled Section 11: Free access to the courts [and
to compensation. quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
In eminent domain, In police power, it is assistance] shall not be denied to any
property is taken for destroyed in the person by reason of poverty.
public use. interest of public
health, safety,
morals or public Section 12: Any person under custodial
welfare. investigation for the commission of an
offense shall have the right to be informed
of his right to remain silent and to have
competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice. If the person
cannot afford the services of counsel, he
must be provided with one. These rights
cannot be waived except in writing and in
the presence of counsel.

(2) No torture, force, violence, threat,

intimidation, or any other means which
vitiate the free will shall be used against
him. Secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado, or other similar forms of
detention are prohibited.

(3) Any confession or admission obtained in

violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall
be inadmissible in evidence against him.
(EXCLUSIONARY RULE)

(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil

sanctions for violations of this section as
well as compensation to the rehabilitation of
victims of torture or similar practices, and
their families. (THE ONLY NON SELFEXECUTING
PROVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION)
 12 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G
Topics:
1. When right attaches
2. Counsel of Choice
3. Waiver
4. Exclusionary Rule
Requisite of Custodial Investigation:
1. Suspect must be in custody, either in
jail or deprived of your freedom in a
significant way.
2. Suspect is under investigation,
questioning initiated by officers
having custody in relation to an
offense.
Q: After X, a rape suspect, was apprised of
his right to silence and to counsel, he told
the investigators that he was waiving his
right to have his own counsel or to be
provided one. He made his waiver in the
presence of a retired Judge who was
assigned to assist and explain to him the
consequences of such waiver. Is the waiver
valid?
A: No, the waiver was not reduced in
writing.
Q: When right to counsel attaches?
A: When the investigator starts to ask
questions which tends to incriminate you.
The right to counsel attaches upon the start
of an investigation.
Counsel of Choice
Only lawyers are qualified.
Rules:
1. Suspect can choose his lawyer;
2. If police chooses someone, and
he expressly agrees to the lawyer
given to him, he is deemed
counsel of choice of the suspect
(Parjinog,Pamon.); and
3. Likewise, if police chooses
someone and you agree to be
investigated without objection
counsel is deemed the choice of
accused.
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO COUNSEL
REQUISITES:
1. Must be in writing
2. Must be made in the presence of
counsel (Note: It need not be signed
by the counsel.)
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
3. After a valid waiver, confession itself
must be signed in the presence of
the parent, brother, sister, spouse,
mayor, judge, supervisor or priest
(R.A. 7438.)
4. It must be voluntary. (It must not be a
product of torture.)
Exclusionary Rule:
(Confessions which are covered)
1. Uncounselled Confession;
2. Obtained through force torture,
violence and other means that
vitiates the will;
3. Oral Confession; and
4. Those obtained after a valid waiver.
Section 13: All persons, except those
charged with offenses punishable by
reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is
strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable
by sufficient sureties, or be released on
recognizance as may be provided by law.
The right to bails shall not be impaired even
when the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall
not be required.
When is Bail a matter of Right?
(Meaning: The judge cannot refuse you to
post bail.)
1. Before (during trial) or after
conviction by the MTC, MTCC,
MCTC.
(Reason: in Before- cases falling
under the jurisdiction of these courts
do not exceed sic (6) years; and,
After- it is still a matter of right but
when or after the decision has
become final.
2. Before conviction by the RTC.
(If punishable by RP and D.)
3. Before conviction by the RTC for an
offense punishable with reclusion
perpetua or death when the evidence
of guilt is not strong.
Q: Information for murder was filed against
X. After examining the case records
forwarded to him by the prosecution, the
trial judge granted the bail of X. Based on
the prosecutions manifestation that it was
 13 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS

not objecting to the grant of bail, is the trial that he has been duly notified and
judge correct? his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

A: No, the trial judge should have held a TRIAL RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED:
hearing to ascertain the quality of the
evidence of guilt that the prosecution had 1. Right to Due Process
against X.
2. Presumption of Innocence
When bail is not allowed? 3. To be Heard
1. After final judgement by any court
2. Before conviction for an offense 4. To Counsel
punishable by death or reclusion 5. To be Informed
perpetua.
3. After conviction for a crime 6. To Speedy Trial
punishable by reclusion perpetua or 7. To Impartial Trial
death while the case is on appeal.
4. After conviction for an offense with 8. To Public Trial
the penalty exceeding six years but 9. To Meet Witnesses
not more than 20 years.
a. Accused is a recidivist, quasi- 10. To Compulsory Process
recidivist, habitual delinquent or
has committed a crime
aggravated by reiteracion. Right to Due Process
b. Accused is found to have
previously escaped from legal Due Process here is procedural, not
confinement.
substantive.
c. Accused committed the offense
while on probation, parole or
conditional pardon; Elements:
d. Circumstances of accused o his 1. A court or tribunal cloth with judicial
case indicate the probability of power to hear and decide the case;
flight. (subjective to judge) 2. Jurisdiction lawfully acquired over
e. There is undue risk that during the person of the accused and over
the pendency of the appeal,
accused may commit another the offense;
crime. 3. Accused was given an opportunity to
be heard; and
4. Judgement was rendered upon
lawful hearing.
Section 14: Presumption of Innocence
(1) No person shall be held to answer
Reversed presumption is allowed in:
for a criminal offense without due
process of law. Malversation
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the Anti-Fencing
accused shall be presumed innocent Rules of Evidence
until the contrary is proved, and shall Illegal Fishing
enjoy the right to be head by himself
Intellectual Property Law
and counsel, to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation Plunder
against him, to have a speedy, Reasons:
impartial, and public trial, to meet the 1. It is only Prima Facie
witnesses face to face, and t have 2. There is a logical connection
compulsory process to secure the between the fact proved and the fact
attendance of witnesses and the
presumed
production of evidence in his behalf.
However, after arraignment, trial may
proceed notwithstanding the To be Heard
absence of the accused provided
 14 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G
Pertains to the right to present
evidence (Right to present
witnesses? Not much here.)
To Counsel
Elements to Right to Counsel:
1. The court is duty-bound to inform
accused of his right before the
arraigned;
2. The court must ask him if he desires
the service of counsel;
3. If he does, and is unable to get one,
the court must assign him a counsel
de officio;
4. If accused wishes to get a private
counsel, the court must give him time
to obtain one.
To be Informed
To enable him to defend himself.
This is usually determined or based
on whether or not the information
was properly crafted.
To Speedy Trial
Factors:
o Extent of the delay
o Reasons for the delay
o Invocation of the right
o Prejudice to the accused
Right is only violated if delay is
capricious or whimsical.
To Impartial Trial
Simply means that the judge should
not be biased.
To Public Trial
Intended to prevent abuse of judicial
power.
In certain cases, however, the public
may be excluded.
To Meet Witnesses
The right to cross examine witnesses
against him; to confront them.
To Compulsory Process
It is now broadened as it includes
Documentary Evidences.
FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS
REQUISITES FOR TRIAL IN ABSENCIA:
1. Accused has been arraigned;
2. He was notified of the proceedings;
and
3. His failure to appear is unjustified.
Section 15: The privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus shall not be suspended
except in cases of invasion or rebellion
when public safety requires it.
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
An order issued by a court directed to a
person detaining another, commanding
him to produce the body of the prisoner
at a designated time and place and
explain the cause of detention.
In other words: The person detaining
another must explain the cause of the
detention; otherwise, the person detained
must be released.
Only the privilege is suspended, not the
writ itself.
Effect on Right of Bail?
o It is not suspended if the privilege is
suspended.
o May be availed of cases of illegal
deprivation of liberty.
Case: (Moncupa)
o He was detained by the Military.
o Before writ could be issued, the
military released him. Military
assumed that petition has become
moot and academic.
o However, when Moncupa was
released, there was a condition that he
would not talk to media and change
his residence.
o HELD: Because release was with a
condition and restriction, petition must
proceed because the restriction is
equivalent to restraint of his liberty.
o Although it is not a deprivation of
liberty, it constitutes deprivation of the
right to travel, thus, equivalent to
restriction to a persons liberty.
Case:
o Person was arrested in Manila and
brought to Davao.
o Before petition, person was released
in Davao and Former contended that
petition is moot and academic, thus,
dismisses petition.
o HELD: No, petition must proceed.
When they bring a person in another
 15 | P a g e L A W Y E R S I N T H E M A K I N G FROM ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF LAW AND BUSINESS

place without money and any means The writ shall cover extra-legal killings
amounts to deprivation of liberty. It is and enforced disappearances or threats
then ruled that unless they bring the thereof.
person back to Manila, the petition
shall not become moot and academic. Distinction of Writ of Habeas Corpus and
Case: (Aquino vs. Esperon) Writ of Amparo
o Military Officer was detained and was Writ of Amparo is a remedy against
held incommunicado, his wife and life, liberty and security while the
relatives were not allowed to visit him. latter is limited to liberty.
o Wife filed a petition for the issuance of It applied to not only to actual
Writ of Habeas Corpus on the ground violation but also threatened
of conditions of her husbands violations while the latter is only for
confinement. actual deprivation liberty or actual
o HELD: Conditions of confinement is restraint of liberty
not a ground for petition for the
issuance of writ of habeas corpus.
o TAKE NOTE: Purpose of issuance of
writ is to obtain immediate release.
Case: (Ampatuan vs. Macaraig)
o Ampatuan was arrested in Manila for
the murder of COMELEC officials.
o He was placed under restrictive
custody wherein he was placed under
restrictive custody; he was not allowed
to go out within the specified area.
o He filed for P.I.W.H.C
o HELD: Restrictive custody is only a
Nominal Restraint and not actual.
Case: (Ilagan)
o Persons were arrested and detained
by the military without any charge.
o The court order for their release.
o After receiving order, they filed for
MFR.
o Because MFR disposition was
pending, the military file a case
against person for Rebellion.
o HELD: Once a case is already filed
against a person, the petition has
become moot and academic. Their
release may not now be in view of the
case filed. Dangerous Doctrine will
now apply and detention would be
legal.
Case: (Aberca)
o HELD: Once PWHC is suspended,
only the privilege or right of getting
immediate release is suspended. Civil
case of claim for damages is not
suspended.

WRIT OF AMPARO
Is a remedy available to any person
whose right to life, liberty and security is
violated or threatened with dilation by an
unlawful act or omission of a public
official or employee, or of a private
individual or entity.