Searched and seized evidence in Maguindanao: Admissible or inadmissible?

Date of Publication

2011

Document Type

Bachelor's Thesis

Degree Name

Bachelor of Science in Commerce Major in Legal Management

Subject Categories

Commercial Law

College

Ramon V. Del Rosario College of Business

Department/Unit

Commercial Law

Thesis Adviser

Mark Kristopher G. Tolentino

Defense Panel Member

Hilario S.Caraan,
James Keith Heffron

Abstract/Summary

On November 23, 2009, the lives of 57 innocent people were taken due to the political rivalry of two clans, Ampatuans and Mangudadatus, for a gubernatorial position. Due to this, two cases, rebellion case and multiple murder case, were filed against the Ampatuans and their allies, which cases are pending and yet to be resolved in court. Hence, it is important to discuss the issue on the admissibility of evidence obtained by the military, during their search and seizure operation when the province of Maguindanao was placed under martial law.

This research aims to provide a detailed discussion on how materials would either be considered as admissible in court.

This research was done using the provisions laid down in the Constitution, which led to the discussion of the search and seizure clause, the exceptions to the rule on search and seizure, the exclusionary rule, and the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. Also, the researchers provided some claims that the State may raise with regard to the issue on the admissibility of evidence and attempted to refute these claims.

Basing of the facts and laws provided in the Constitution, it was found that the firearms and ammunition found in the possession of the Ampatuans are in fact inadmissible as evidence in court.

Abstract Format

html

Language

English

Format

Print

Accession Number

TU19615

Shelf Location

Archives, The Learning Commons, 12F, Henry Sy Sr. Hall

Physical Description

97 leaves : illustrations

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS