Arrest how made

Arrest, how made | Arrest (RULE 113) | CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Below is a comprehensive and meticulous discussion of Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure (Philippines), particularly Section 2, titled “Arrest, How Made.” This includes the legal foundation, requirements, jurisprudential interpretations, and practical guidelines. Please note that while this write-up is designed to be thorough, it is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. For specific legal issues, it is always prudent to consult a licensed attorney.

I. DEFINITION AND NATURE OF ARREST

  1. Statutory Definition

    • Section 1 of Rule 113 defines arrest as “the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense.”
    • In effect, arrest is a form of restraint on the liberty of an individual suspected of or charged with a crime, undertaken for the purpose of bringing that person to justice.

  2. Distinguishing Arrest from Other Forms of Restraint

    • Arrest vs. Detention
      • Arrest is the initial act of taking custody, whereas detention may continue after a lawful arrest (e.g., in a detention facility or police station).
    • Arrest vs. Search and Seizure
      • Although conceptually linked (e.g., search incidental to lawful arrest), an arrest specifically concerns taking a person into custody, while search and seizure generally refer to property or evidence.

  3. Purposes of an Arrest

    • To ensure the appearance of the accused in court.
    • To prevent the accused from committing further harm or escaping.
    • To initiate the criminal justice process, allowing investigation, charging, and trial.

II. ARREST, HOW MADE (SECTION 2, RULE 113)

A. Method of Effecting an Arrest

  1. Actual Restraint

    • The rule states that an arrest is made “by an actual restraint of the person to be arrested” or physical custody.
    • Restraint does not necessarily require handcuffs; it may be physical holding or any act indicating the intent to deprive the person of liberty.

  2. Voluntary Submission

    • Arrest can also occur “by the person’s voluntary submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.”
    • For instance, if a suspect, upon learning that the police have a valid warrant, yields to their authority voluntarily without any physical compulsion.

  3. No Unnecessary Force

    • Section 2 further provides: “No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest, and the person arrested shall not be subjected to any greater restraint than is necessary for his detention.”
    • Excessive force can subject the arresting officer to administrative, civil, or even criminal liability.

B. Duty to Inform

  1. Cause of Arrest and Authority

    • The arresting officer must inform the person to be arrested of the following:
      1. Cause of the arrest (i.e., the offense, if with a warrant, or the circumstances justifying a warrantless arrest).
      2. That a warrant has been issued (if applicable), or the basis for a warrantless arrest.
    • This is in line with constitutional due process and the right to be informed of the nature and cause of one’s arrest.

  2. Exceptions

    • The officer need not inform the arrestee if:
      • The person flees or forcibly resists arrest before the officer has an opportunity to inform him; or
      • The provision of information would imperil the arrest (e.g., the suspect is armed and dangerous, and immediate action is required to prevent harm).

C. Constitutional Rights upon Arrest

  1. Right to be Informed of Constitutional Rights (Miranda Rights)

    • Upon arrest (especially if this leads to custodial investigation), the arrestee must be informed:
      • That he has the right to remain silent;
      • That anything he says can be used against him in court;
      • That he has the right to counsel; and
      • If he cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided.
    • Under Philippine law, custodial investigation begins when a law enforcement officer starts to ask questions intended to elicit admissions or confessions. Hence, reading of Miranda rights is crucial at the start of questioning.

  2. Right Against Use of Involuntary Confessions

    • Any confession or admission obtained in violation of these rights is inadmissible in evidence (Article III, Section 12, 1987 Constitution).

III. ARREST WITH A WARRANT VS. WARRANTLESS ARREST

A. Arrest with a Warrant

  1. Requirements for a Valid Warrant

    • Must be based on probable cause personally determined by the judge;
    • Must particularly describe the person to be arrested;
    • Must be supported by an oath or affirmation of the complainant and witnesses.

  2. Procedure

    • Once a valid warrant is issued:
      • The law enforcement officer may execute the warrant anywhere within the Philippines unless restricted by the court.
      • The officer must identify himself/herself and show the warrant (or at least inform the arrestee of the existence of the warrant) unless providing details would imperil the arrest.

  3. Time of Execution

    • Unlike search warrants that must generally be served during daytime, arrest warrants can be served any time of day or night, provided the officer complies with the rules and does not abuse authority.

  4. Duty after Execution

    • The arrested person must be brought before the issuing court without unnecessary delay.
    • The officer must make a return on the warrant, detailing how it was executed and the date of arrest.

B. Warrantless Arrests

While the general rule is that no person may be arrested without a valid warrant, the law provides exceptions found in Section 5, Rule 113:

  1. In Flagrante Delicto (Section 5[a])

    • When the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense in the presence of the arresting officer.
    • Requires personal knowledge on the part of the arresting officer: he must witness the criminal act or any overt act indicating the crime is being committed.

  2. Hot Pursuit (Section 5[b])

    • When an offense has just been committed, and the arresting officer has probable cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed it.
    • The concept of “just been committed” implies an element of immediacy or recentness, and the officer’s inference of probable cause must be grounded on overt facts, not mere suspicion.

  3. Escapee (Section 5[c])

    • When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment, a place where he is serving final judgment, or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or while being transferred from one confinement to another.
    • Here, the legal basis is that the escapee is under an existing legal process or custody; thus, no new warrant is necessary.

  4. Additional Jurisprudentially Recognized Instances

    • Citizen’s Arrest: Private individuals may perform warrantless arrests under the same circumstances (in flagrante delicto, hot pursuit, or escape of detainees). However, they must immediately deliver the arrested person to the nearest peace officer or judicial authority.
    • Extended Hot Pursuit Doctrine: In some cases, the Supreme Court has recognized that there can be a continuing pursuit, so long as the pursuit is not unreasonably remote in time or circumstance.

IV. PROCEDURE AFTER ARREST

  1. Delivery to Proper Authorities

    • The arresting officer must deliver the arrested person to the nearest police station or jail without delay, along with a statement of the circumstances of the arrest.
    • Failure to do so may render the arresting officer liable for arbitrary detention or other violations.

  2. Booking and Documentation

    • The arrested person is usually subjected to booking procedures: personal information, fingerprinting, taking of photographs, and other identifying details.

  3. Filing of Appropriate Complaint or Information

    • The prosecutor must evaluate whether there is sufficient basis (probable cause) to formally charge the accused in court.
    • If the prosecutor finds probable cause, an Information is filed in court. If the case was initiated by complaint, it goes through inquest or preliminary investigation, as required by law.

  4. Right to Bail

    • If the offense is bailable, the accused has the right to be released on bail pending trial, subject to conditions imposed by the court.
    • This is rooted in the Constitutional right to bail, except for offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when the evidence of guilt is strong.

V. LEGAL AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

  1. Legal Ethics for Arresting Officers and Counsel

    • Law enforcement officers must always act in good faith, adhere to constitutional mandates, and respect the dignity and rights of the arrestee.
    • Lawyers who represent arrested persons must ensure that the arrestee’s constitutional rights are upheld at every stage—especially the right to counsel, right to remain silent, and protection against torture or coercive interrogation.

  2. Consequences of Unlawful Arrest

    • An unlawful arrest may lead to:
      • Exclusion of evidence obtained (as “fruit of the poisonous tree” if linked to a constitutional violation).
      • Potential administrative, civil, or criminal liability for the arresting officer for violations of the Revised Penal Code provisions on illegal detention (Articles 124-126) or for abuse of authority.
    • Courts can also quash or dismiss the case if the arrest was unconstitutional and the subsequent proceedings are fatally defective.

  3. Remedies of a Person Unlawfully Arrested

    • Motion to Quash the Information based on lack of jurisdiction over the person, if the arrest was invalid.
    • Habeas Corpus if illegally detained.
    • Administrative and/or criminal complaint against erring officers.

VI. JURISPRUDENTIAL HIGHLIGHTS

  1. People v. Burgos (144 SCRA 1)

    • Reinforced the necessity that a warrantless arrest must strictly fall under the exceptions; otherwise, it is invalid.

  2. Posadas v. Court of Appeals (188 SCRA 288)

    • Clarified that the right to question an illegal arrest is deemed waived if the accused fails to move to quash before arraignment and voluntarily enters a plea.

  3. Malacat v. Court of Appeals (283 SCRA 159)

    • Distinguished between a valid in flagrante delicto arrest and circumstances amounting only to suspicion; insisted on strict compliance with the requirements of in flagrante delicto arrests.

  4. Valeroso v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 164815)

    • Emphasized the necessity of “overt acts” that demonstrate probable cause for a hot pursuit arrest.

VII. PRACTICAL POINTERS

  • Identify Authority: An arresting officer (whether police or a private citizen) must clearly state the authority or reason for the arrest, except under extreme circumstances where immediate action is required.
  • Avoid Excessive Force: Only the minimal amount of force necessary to subdue and detain the suspect is permissible.
  • Inform Constitutional Rights: Immediately inform the arrestee of their Miranda rights if custodial investigation is to follow.
  • Documentation Is Key: Keep accurate records of the time, place, manner, and circumstances of the arrest, including any resistance or use of force.
  • Deliver to Nearest Station: Swiftly turn over the arrestee to the proper authorities for booking and inquest or preliminary investigation (if warranted).
  • Legal Counsel: Arrested persons should promptly be given access to a lawyer, and the lawyer should verify that all steps taken by the arresting officer complied with the law.

VIII. CONCLUSION

Rule 113, Section 2 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure governs how an arrest in the Philippines must be executed—either by actual restraint or by voluntary submission to authority. Accompanying provisions in Sections 5 and 6 clarify when warrantless arrests are permissible and the duties imposed on arresting officers thereafter. At all stages, both constitutional and ethical duties compel law enforcement and legal practitioners to safeguard the rights of the person arrested, ensuring that the arrest process itself withstands legal scrutiny and upholds the rule of law.

A thorough understanding of these rules—alongside attentive adherence to the 1987 Philippine Constitution and controlling jurisprudence—is essential to maintaining the balance between public order and individual rights.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login