A.
Rules on Arrest Warrants and Search
UMIL v. RAMOS
FACTS:
The Regional Intelligence Operations Unit of the Capital Command
(RIOU-CAPCOM) received confidential information about a member
of the NPA Sparrow Unit (liquidation squad) being treated for a
gunshot wound at the St. Agnes Hospital, QC.
It was found that the wounded member was listed in the hospital
records as Ronnie Javelon, but is actually Rolando Dural, member of
the NPA liquidation squad, responsible for killing 2 CAPCOM soldiers
in Caloocan City.
Consequently, Dural was transferred to the Regional Medical
Services of CAPCOM for security reasons and while confined, was
positively identified by eyewitnesses as the gunman who killed the
soldiers.
Rolando was charged with Double Murder with Assault Upon
Agents of Persons in Authority and no bail was recommended.
A petition for habeas corpus was filed with the SC on behalf of
Roberto Umil, Rolando Dural, and Renato Villanueva which was
thereafter issued.
However, Umil and Villanueva posted bail before RTC where
charges for violation of the Anti-Subversion Act had been filed
against them, and were accordingly released.
The petition for habeas corpus (insofar as Umil and Villanueva are
concerned) is now moot and academic and is dismissed since the
writ of HC does not lie in favor of an accused in a criminal case who
has been released on bail. *only portion that mentions Umil
As to Dural, it appears that he was not arrested while in the act of
shooting the 2 soldiers nor was he arrested just after the
commission of the offense  his arrest came a DAY AFTER the
shooting thus, his arrest without warrant is unjustified
ISSUE: WON Dural was lawfully arrested- YES
RULING:
The crimes of rebellion, subversion, conspiracy or proposal to
commit such crimes or offenses committed in furtherance thereof
or in connection constitute direct assault against the State and are
in the nature of continuing crimes setting them apart from common
offenses.
The arrest of persons involved in rebellion is more of an act of
capturing them in the course of an armed conflict, to quell rebellion,
than for the purpose of immediately prosecuting them in court for
statutory offense  the arrest therefore, need not follow the usual
procedure in the prosecution of offenses which requires
determination by a judge of the existence of probable cause before
the issuance of a judicial warrant of arrest
Dural was arrested for being a member of the NPA, an outlawed
subversive organization.
Subversion being a continuing offense, his arrest without warrant is
justified as it can be said he was committing an offense when
arrested.
Dural being found guilty, now serving his sentence imposed upon
him, thus the writ of habeas corpus is no longer available for him.
WHEREFORE, petition is DISMISSED.