2. Due Process

Legal grounds for detention:

• Commission of a crime; and
• Violent insanity or other ailment requiring compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital

Note: This list of legal grounds is not exclusive. So long as the ground is considered legal (e.g., in contempt of court, under quarantine, or a foreigner to be deported), there is no arbitrary detention.

Usual cause of Arbitrary Detention

Arrest without warrant is the usual cause of arbitrary detention, unless it is a valid warrantless arrest (under Sec. 5, Rule 113, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure).

Does it have to be physical detention for it to be considered Arbitrary Detention?

No. Psychological restraint is another form of detention. (Astorga v. People, G.R. No 154130).

Rights of detainee:

• Be informed of the cause of his detention; and
• Be allowed, upon request, to communicate and confer at any time with his attorney or counsel

When arrest made by virtue of warrant

A person arrested under a warrant must be brought before the court and may be detained only while a lawful basis for detention remains, subject to the right to bail and other grounds for release (1987 Constitution, Art. III, Secs. 13 and 14; Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 114).

No presumption of regularity of Lapses in Procedure for RA 9165 violations

The practice of eagerly ascribing the veil of regular performance of duty in favor of the apprehending officers - even in the face of their evident lapses in following the prescribed procedure laid down by law -should not be tolerated. The presumption of regularity in the performance of duties is not a tool designed to coddle State agents unjustifiably violating the law or an excuse for the courts to shy away from their duty to subject the prosecution's evidence to the crucible of severe testing to ascertain whether it is enough to overcome the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused. (People v. Quilatan y Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 218107, September 9, 2019.)

Tip of Confidential Informant not Enough

Law enforcers cannot rely solely on confidential tips. A tip is still hearsay, no matter how reliable it may be. It is not sufficient to constitute probable cause in the absence of another circumstance that will arouse suspicion. Thus, the cases adhering to the doctrine that exclusive reliance on an unverified, anonymous tip cannot engender probable cause that permits a warrantless search of a moving vehicle that goes beyond a visual search should be prevailing and controlling line of jurisprudence. (People of the Philippines v. Jerry Sapla y Guerrero a.k.a. Eric Salibad y Mallari, G.R. No. 244045, June 16, 2020.)

Practice of arresting officers asking for the execution of waivers

To prevent committing this felony, officers usually ask those detained to execute a waiver of the rights provided them under Art. 125, which should be under oath and with assistance of counsel. Such waiver is not violative of the constitutional right of the accused.

Waiver of Article 125

A person lawfully arrested without a warrant who asks for a preliminary investigation must sign a waiver of Article 125 in the presence of counsel; the preliminary investigation must then be terminated within 15 days from its inception.

Length of waiver

Even when a waiver is signed, a detainee cannot be held indefinitely. Upon signing of the waiver, a preliminary investigation must be conducted and terminated within 15 days. (Leviste v. Alameda,G.R. No.182677)

Delay in Delivery and Arbitrary Detention, Distinguished

Who are proper judicial authorities?

They are the courts of justice or judges of said courts, vested with judicial power to order the temporary detention or confinement of a person charged with having committed a public offense. (Agbay v. Deputy Ombudsman, GR No. 134503)

Reason for Article 125

It is intended to prevent any abuse resulting from confining a person without informing him of his offense and without permitting him to go on bail. (Laurel v Misa, GR No. L-409)

Search warrant

The judicial order referred to is a search warrant.

When search warrant procured without just cause

A search warrant is said to have been procured without just cause when it appears, on the face of the affidavits filed in support of the application therefor, or through other evidence, that the applicant had every reason to believe that the search warrant sought for was unjustified. (REYES, BOOK TWO, p.70).

Effect when the Judge who issued the search warrant is convicted of an administrative charge

While the imposition of administrative penalties operates to divest the Judge of his authority to act as Vice Executive Judge, the abstraction of such authority would not, by itself result in the invalidity of the search warrant, considering that said Judge may be considered to have made the issuance as a de facto officer. (Retired SPO4 Bienvenido Laud v People, GR No. 199032)

Crimes involving searches of domicile, Distinguished