Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 16 views

    Arroyo V. DOJ GR. No. 199082, 199085, and 199118

    Uploaded by

    Muni Coffee
    The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners were validly arrested without a warrant. [1] The arresting officers responded to a complaint from Atty. Generoso that he had been assaulted by the petitioners. [2] Upon arriving at the scene less than an hour after the alleged crime, the officers found that Atty. Generoso had been stabbed and assaulted. [3] Atty. Generoso positively identified the petitioners as the perpetrators, and the petitioners lived in the same neighborhood as where the crime took place.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Arroyo V. DOJ GR. No. 199082, 199085, and 199118

    Uploaded by

    Muni Coffee
    16 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners were validly arrested without a warrant. [1] The arresting officers responded to a complaint from Atty. Generoso that he had been assaulted by the petitioners. [2] Upon arriving at the scene less than an hour after the alleged crime, the officers found that Atty. Generoso had been stabbed and assaulted. [3] Atty. Generoso positively identified the petitioners as the perpetrators, and the petitioners lived in the same neighborhood as where the crime took place.

    Original Title

    9. Arroyo V. DOJ GR. No. 199082, 199085, and 199118

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners were validly arrested without a warrant. [1] The arresting officers responded to a complaint from Atty. Generoso that he had been assaulted by the petitioners. [2] Upon arriving at the scene less than an hour after the alleged crime, the officers found that Atty. Generoso had been stabbed and assaulted. [3] Atty. Generoso positively identified the petitioners as the perpetrators, and the petitioners lived in the same neighborhood as where the crime took place.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    16 views2 pages

    Arroyo V. DOJ GR. No. 199082, 199085, and 199118

    Uploaded by

    Muni Coffee
    The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners were validly arrested without a warrant. [1] The arresting officers responded to a complaint from Atty. Generoso that he had been assaulted by the petitioners. [2] Upon arriving at the scene less than an hour after the alleged crime, the officers found that Atty. Generoso had been stabbed and assaulted. [3] Atty. Generoso positively identified the petitioners as the perpetrators, and the petitioners lived in the same neighborhood as where the crime took place.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    2F & 2G CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Arrest without warrant; when lawful

    DIGEST BY: Ragaza, Maria Isabella Katrina M.


    G.R. NO. 182601
    30. PESTILOS V GENEROSO DATE: November 10, 2014
    PONENTE: Brion, J.
    DOCTRINE When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on
    personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed
    it (Section 5[b], Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.

    FACTS
    In 2005, Attorney Moreno Generoso had an altercation with petitioners Pestilos, Macapanas, Gaces and
    Fernadez. Generoso called the Central Police district wherein SP02 Dominador Javier, together with
    augmentation personnel from the Airforce, A2C Alano Sayson and Airman Ruel Galvez responded to render
    assistance. Upon arriving they discovered that the petitioners have assaulted and stabbed Attorney Moreno
    Generoso.

    They invited the petitioners to the Batasan Hills police station for investigation. Genoroso survived the attacks.
    A case for attempted murder was filed against the petitioners. The petitioners filed an Urgent Motion for
    Regular Preliminary Investigation on the ground that they had not been lawfully arrested. They alleged that no
    valid warrantless arrest took place since the police officers had no personal knowledge that they were the
    perpetrators of the crime. More so, They also claimed that they were just "invited" to the police station.

    ISSUE/S

    Whether the petitioners were validly arrested without a warrant. YES.

    RULING
    The petitioners in this case were validly arrested without warrant of arrest.

    Pursuant to Section5(B), Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that when an offense
    has been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or
    circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it.

    The elements of a valid warrantless arrest are as follows, first, an offense has just been committed; and second,
    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.
    All the elements provided are present in this case as the arresting officers went to the scene of the crime upon
    complaint of Atty. Generoso of his alleged mauling; the police officers responded to the scene of the crime less
    than an hour after the alleged mauling; that the alleged crime transpired in a community where the respondent
    and the petitioners reside; that Atty. Generoso positively identified the petitioner and that they lived in the same
    neighborhood; and that when the petitioners were confronted by the arresting officers, they did not deny their
    participation in the incident.
    [A.Y. 2021-2022]

    You might also like