Below is a comprehensive discussion of the method of arrest under the Philippine Rules of Criminal Procedure (Rule 113, particularly Sections 7, 8, and 9), together with key principles, relevant jurisprudence, and practical considerations. This focuses on the procedural rules governing how an arrest is carried out, whether by a peace officer or a private individual, with or without a warrant. It also integrates constitutional safeguards and typical issues encountered in practice.

I. GENERAL FRAMEWORK: ARREST UNDER RULE 113

A. Definition of Arrest (Rule 113, Section 1)

Arrest is the taking of a person into custody in order that he or she may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense.
The essence of arrest is restraint on a person’s liberty; once a person’s freedom of movement is restricted, an arrest has effectively taken place.

B. Modes of Arrest

Arrest with a warrant: Issued by a judge upon probable cause, personally determined after examination of the complainant and the witnesses.
Arrest without a warrant: Allowed only in specific circumstances under Section 5 of Rule 113 (i.e., in flagrante delicto, hot pursuit, and escapee exceptions).

The method by which the arrest is carried out—how the arrester approaches the arrestee, how information is conveyed, and what steps are taken—affects both the legality and validity of the arrest as well as the arrestee’s rights.

II. METHOD OF ARREST

A. Method of Arrest by an Officer By Virtue of a Warrant (Rule 113, Section 7)

Informing the Person Arrested
- The officer must inform the person to be arrested:
  - That there is a warrant for his/her arrest; and
  - The cause of the arrest (i.e., the criminal charge or offense stated in the warrant).
- Exceptions to this requirement:
  - When the person to be arrested flees, forcibly resists, or attempts to flee/resist before the officer has a chance to inform him/her;
  - When giving such information would imperil the arrest (e.g., there is an imminent danger to life or property if the officer pauses to explain).
Showing the Warrant
- The officer need not have the warrant in his/her possession at the time of the arrest (for practical reasons, such as immediate pursuit).
- However, if the arrestee requests to see the warrant, it must be shown to him/her as soon as practicable (i.e., at the earliest opportunity).
Practical Observations
- Failure to strictly inform the accused of the cause of the arrest or that a warrant exists does not automatically invalidate the arrest if the exceptions apply or if substantial compliance is present (e.g., the accused knew he was being arrested pursuant to a warrant).
- If there was clear knowledge on the part of the arrestee that a warrant existed (e.g., from prior proceedings), courts have considered that sufficient compliance may occur.
Constitutional Overlay
- Even if one is lawfully arrested by virtue of a warrant, any search incident to arrest must also be reasonable and limited to the person and items within immediate control. Evidence seized beyond the permissible scope could be deemed inadmissible (People v. Cogaed, G.R. No. 200334, July 30, 2014).

B. Method of Arrest by an Officer Without a Warrant (Rule 113, Section 8)

Authority and Cause of the Arrest
- When an officer effects a warrantless arrest (e.g., in flagrante delicto, hot pursuit, or if the suspect is an escapee), the officer must inform the person to be arrested:
  - Of his/her authority (that he or she is a law enforcement officer or person with authority to effect arrests); and
  - Of the cause of the arrest (i.e., the specific act or offense that justifies the warrantless arrest).
Exceptions to the Information Requirement
- When the person to be arrested is actively committing an offense (in flagrante delicto);
- When the person is pursued immediately after the commission of an offense or after an escape (hot pursuit scenario);
- When the suspect flees, forcibly resists, or there is no opportunity to provide the information;
- When providing such information would imperil the arrest or put the arresting officer or others in grave danger.
Guiding Jurisprudence
- The Supreme Court has consistently held that while immediate verbal notice of the cause of arrest is ideal, it may be excused when doing so is impossible or dangerous (People v. Gerente, G.R. No. 95028, August 30, 1991).
- Subsequent notification—especially once the situation stabilizes—can cure initial omissions if the core objective is met: ensuring the arrestee knows the basis of the seizure of his/her person.
Constitutional Considerations
- Warrantless arrests must strictly fall under one of the recognized exceptions in Section 5, Rule 113; otherwise, the arrest is illegal and any evidence seized may be suppressed (Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine).
- During custodial investigation, the accused must be read his/her Miranda rights. While not strictly part of the method of arrest under Rule 113, in practice, law enforcers are encouraged to advise suspects of their rights immediately upon arrest or as soon as practicable thereafter to comply with constitutional safeguards (Art. III, Sec. 12 of the 1987 Constitution).

C. Method of Arrest by a Private Person (Rule 113, Section 9)

Right of a Private Person to Arrest
- A private individual can lawfully arrest another only under two main scenarios:
  1. When the person to be arrested is committing an offense in his/her presence (in flagrante delicto).
  2. When an offense has in fact just been committed and the private person has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested committed it (hot pursuit scenario).
- Any other attempt by a private person to arrest can be deemed illegal unless it falls under these exceptions.
Requirement to Inform
- A private person must inform the person to be arrested:
  - Of the intention to arrest (i.e., that a citizen’s or private arrest is taking place); and
  - Of the cause of the arrest (e.g., “I am arresting you because I saw you commit this act…”).
- Exceptions (similar to above):
  - When the person to be arrested is in the actual commission of an offense;
  - When the person flees or forcibly resists; or
  - When providing such information would imperil the arrest.
Turnover to Authorities
- Immediately after effecting the arrest, the private person must turn over the arrested individual to the nearest police station or peace officer. A private arrest does not confer upon the citizen the power to detain indefinitely.
Legal Implications
- If a private person makes an arrest outside the parameters of Rule 113, Section 5 (warrantless arrests) and Section 9 (method by private persons), he/she could be liable for unlawful arrest, illegal detention, or other crimes.

III. PRACTICAL AND PROCEDURAL CONSIDERATIONS

Use of Force
- Under both the law and relevant police manuals (e.g., the Philippine National Police Operational Procedures), only reasonable force is allowed to effect an arrest. Excessive or unnecessary force can result in administrative, civil, or criminal liability.
Search Incident to Lawful Arrest
- An arresting officer may perform a warrantless search incident to a valid arrest. This includes searching the person and the immediate surroundings to ensure officer safety and preserve evidence from destruction.
- Any search beyond these bounds generally requires a search warrant or another recognized exception (e.g., consented search, checkpoint searches under specific guidelines, etc.).
Failure to Comply with Method Requirements
- As a rule, failure to strictly comply with the announcements or instructions required by Sections 7, 8, or 9 does not automatically nullify the arrest if it still meets lawful grounds and the exceptions apply.
- However, if the arrest is effected in a manner not sanctioned by law (no warrant, no valid exception), the arrest is considered illegal. Evidence obtained as a direct result of such arrest can be challenged and potentially excluded.
Informing Arrestee of Constitutional Rights
- While the method-of-arrest sections do not explicitly say “read Miranda warnings,” law enforcers are constitutionally obligated to inform the accused of the following rights once under custodial investigation:
  - Right to remain silent;
  - Right to have competent and independent counsel (preferably of his choice);
  - Right to be provided counsel if unable to afford one; and
  - That anything the person says can and will be used against him/her in court.
- The absence of these warnings or the denial of counsel may render admissions or confessions inadmissible in court.
Documentation and Reporting
- Police officers are typically required to accomplish an Arrest Report or an Affidavit of Arrest (sometimes also called a Booking Sheet). This document indicates:
  - The name of the person arrested;
  - The time, date, and place of arrest;
  - The reason or cause of arrest;
  - The identity of the arresting officer and witnesses; and
  - Whether force was used or any property was seized.
- This documentation helps ensure transparency and is critical if the validity of the arrest is questioned.
Legal Remedies in Case of Illegal Arrest
- The person unlawfully arrested may move to quash the Information on the ground that the arrest was invalid, though an illegal arrest does not always divest the court of jurisdiction once the Information is filed. However, the accused may file:
  - A motion to declare any evidence obtained pursuant to the illegal arrest as inadmissible;
  - Administrative complaints against erring officers;
  - Civil claims for damages for violation of rights, if warranted.

IV. RELEVANT LEGAL ETHICS CONCERNS

Lawyer’s Role Upon Arrest of a Client
- A lawyer must ensure that the client’s right to counsel is respected at every stage.
- Ethical duty to confirm that the arresting officers provided the requisite information and followed due process. Where violations have occurred, the lawyer must zealously advocate for the client’s constitutional and procedural rights (e.g., file motions to suppress illegally obtained evidence).
Avoidance of Misleading the Courts
- Defense counsel must avoid frivolously challenging an arrest that was evidently valid. The Rules of Court and the Code of Professional Responsibility mandate candor and honesty toward the court.
- On the other hand, prosecution and government counsel must not condone or conceal procedural lapses by law enforcement officers that impinge on constitutional or procedural guarantees.
Confidentiality and Privilege
- Discussions between attorney and client after an arrest are privileged. Lawyers should be conscious of the environment in which they conduct interviews or consultations—ensuring confidentiality unless waived by the client.

V. COMMON PITFALLS AND POINTERS

Mislabeling an Arrest as “Invitation for Questioning”: Law enforcement sometimes invites a suspect to the station “for questioning” but effectively deprives him/her of liberty. If the suspect is not free to leave, that is an arrest, and all rules on method and constitutional safeguards apply.
Failure to Distinguish Citizen’s Arrest and Citizens’ “Assistance”: A private individual may assist law enforcers but does not automatically have the authority to arrest unless the scenario strictly falls under Rule 113. Otherwise, liability for unlawful arrest or illegal detention can arise.
Delayed Explanation or Non-explanation of the Cause of Arrest: While practicable exceptions exist, law enforcers must strive to give the reasons for the arrest promptly to avoid any claims of arbitrariness.
Abuse of Warrantless Arrest Exceptions: Courts carefully scrutinize claims of in flagrante delicto and hot pursuit. Officers must demonstrate that they had personal knowledge of facts or circumstances indicating that a crime was actually being committed or had just been committed. Vague or generalized “suspicion” is insufficient.

VI. SUMMARY

Arrest With Warrant (Sec. 7)
- Inform the arrestee of the warrant and the cause; present the warrant if requested, when practicable.
Arrest Without Warrant (Sec. 8)
- Officer must inform the arrestee of his/her authority and the cause of the arrest unless circumstances (flight, resistance, danger) prevent it; the arrest itself must meet the recognized exceptions under the law.
Arrest by a Private Person (Sec. 9)
- Inform the person about the intention and cause of the arrest, except when it imperils the arrest; only valid if committed in presence or if there is a hot pursuit scenario.
Exceptions to Informing Requirement
- Flight, resistance, or danger. Even then, the justification must be clear.
Consequences of Invalid Method
- Potential illegality of the arrest and exclusion of evidence gathered as a result.
- Possible administrative/criminal liability for the arresting officer or private person.
Protection of Rights
- Constitutional rights (especially under Article III of the 1987 Constitution) must be respected at all times; otherwise, confessions and evidence may be inadmissible.

By carefully following Sections 7, 8, and 9 of Rule 113, arresting officers—and even private persons—ensure that arrests are executed lawfully, respecting the rights of the individual. Non-compliance can lead to the arrest being deemed illegal and any evidence obtained deemed inadmissible, among other legal repercussions. As counsel, always check the grounds for the arrest, the manner in which it was carried out, and the constitutional rights afforded to the accused.