Law Dictionary

Question XVIII, Political Law, 2018 Bar Exam

Notice: The following suggested answers simulate those that a bar examinee may provide as an answer to a bar exam question. Thus, specific citations (i.e., republic acts, articles/sections, jurisprudence, etc.) are not provided because it is not required in the bar exam. For purposes other than answering the bar exam, please be reminded that proper referencing or legal citation is required.

Question XVIII, Political Law, 2018 Bar Exam

Two police teams monitored the payment of ransom in a kidnapping case.

The bag containing the ransom money was placed inside an unlocked trunk of a car which was parked at the Angola Commercial Center in Mandaluyong City.

The first police team, stationed in an area near where the car was parked, witnessed the retrieval by the kidnappers of the bag from the unlocked trunk. The kidnappers thereafter boarded their car and proceeded towards the direction of Amorsolo St. in Makati City where the second police team was waiting.

Upon confirmation by radio report from the first police team that the kidnappers were heading towards their direction, the second police team proceeded to conduct surveillance on the car of the kidnappers, eventually saw it enter Ayala Commercial Center in Makati City, and the police team finally blocked it when it slowed down. The members of the second police team approached the vehicle and proceeded to arrest the kidnappers.

Is the warrantless arrest of the kidnappers by the second police team lawful? (5%)

Suggested Answer:

Yes. Answer

Under the Rules of Court, a warrantless arrest may be performed in cases involving hot pursuit. In such a case, when an offense has just been committed, and law enforcers have probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it, said person may be arrested without a warrant. Rule

Further, under jurisprudence, it is sufficient for the arresting team that they were monitoring the pay-off for a number of hours long enough for them to be informed that it was indeed the accused, who was the kidnapper. This is equivalent to personal knowledge based on probable cause. Rule

In the case at bar, the first team and second team of police officers were working in tandem in that operation. The second team was monitoring the pay-off. Accordingly, when the second team received information from the first team on the retrieval of the ransom money and the description of the car, the second team acted on it resulting in the valid arrest of the kidnappers. Apply

Thus, the warrantless arrest of the kidnappers by the second police team was lawful. Conclusion

Disclaimer: All information is for educational and general information only. These should not be taken as professional legal advice or opinion. Please consult a competent lawyer to address your specific concerns. Any statements or opinions of the author are solely his own and do not reflect that of any organization he may be connected.

Suggested Answers

Top Read

par in parem non habet imperium

Latin maxim. • “one State is not subject to the jurisdiction of another State.” (Arigo v. Swift, En Banc, G.R. No. 206510, September 16, 2014

Video Lessons

Legal Maxims

legis non est recedendum

Latin maxim. • “from the words of a statute there should be no departure” (Bolos v. Bolos, G.R. No. 186400, October 20, 2010)

lex prospicit, non respicit

• “the law looks forward not backward” (Co v. CA, En Banc, G.R. No. 100776, October 28, 1993, citing Development Bank of the Philippines v.

Read more


Crimes against public morals

Title Six – Crimes against Public Morals Chapter One: Gambling and Betting ⦁ Gambling ⦁ Importation and sale of lottery tickets or advertisements ⦁ Possession

Grave scandal, Revised Penal Code

1. Concept Article 200. Grave scandal. – The penalties of arresto mayor and public censure shall be imposed upon any person who shall offend against

You cannot copy content of this page