NOLASCO V. CRUZ-PANO G.R. No. L-69803October 8, 1985
FACTS:
l (At 11:30 A.M. on August 6th) Aquilar-Roque and Nolasco were arrested by a Constabulary Security Group (CSG) at the intersection of Mayon Street, Quezon City. The record does not disclose that a warrant of arrest had previously been issued against NOLASCO.
l (At 12:00 N. on August 6th) On the same day, a searched was conducted. Ct. Col. Virgilio Saldajeno;
l (On August 6th, at around 9:00 A.M)applied for search warrant from the respondent judge Cruz-Pano, to be served at No. 239-B Mayon Street, Quezon City, determined to be the leased residence of AGUILAR-ROQUE, after almost a month of "round the clock surveillance" of the premises as a "suspected underground house of the CPP/NPA." after a month of “round the clock” surveillance of the premises as a “suspected underground house of the CPP/NPA”,
l AGUILAR-ROQUE has been long wanted by the military for being a high ranking officer of the Communist Party of the Philippines, particularly connected with the MV Karagatan/Doña Andrea cases.
l The searching party seized 428 documents and written materials, and additionally a portable typewriter and 2 wooden boxes.
l The City Fiscal filed the information for violation of PD No. 33, Illegal Possession of Subversive Documents.
l Petitioners contend that the Search Warrant is void because it is a general warrant since it does not sufficiently describe with particularity the things subject of the search and seizure and that probable cause had not been properly established for lack of searching questions propounded to the applicant’s witness.
ISSUE:
WON the search warrant is a general warrant
HELD:
YES. It is at once evident that the foregoing Search Warrant authorizes the seizure of personal properties vaguely described and not particularized. It is an all-embracing description which includes everything conceivable regarding the Communist Party of the Philippines and the National Democratic Front. It does not specify what the subversive books and instructions are; what the manuals not otherwise available to the public contain to make them subversive or to enable them to be used for the crime of rebellion. There is absent a definite guideline to the searching team as to what items might be lawfully seized thus giving the officers of the law discretion regarding what articles they should seize as, in fact, taken also were a portable typewriter and 2 wooden boxes. It is thus in the nature of a general warrant and infringes on the constitutional mandate requiring the particular description of the things to be seized.
Moreover, the questions propounded by respondent Executive Judge to the applicant's witness are not sufficiently searching to establish probable cause. The "probable cause" required to justify the issuance of a search warrant comprehends such facts and circumstances as will induce a cautious man to rely upon them and act in pursuant thereof.
u Out of the 10 Of the 8 questions asked, the 1st, 2nd, and 4th pertain to Identity.
u The 3rd and 5th are leading not searching questions.
u The 6th, 7th and 8th refer to the description of the personalities to be seized, which is Identical to that in the Search Warrant and suffers from the same lack of particularity.
The examination conducted was general in nature and merely repetitious of the deposition of the said witness. Mere generalization will not suffice and does not satisfy the requirements of probable cause upon which a warrant may issue.