Law on Public Accountability Atty Aquirre
United States v De Los Reyes (1911) Moreland, J. Re: Search and Seizure DOCTRI! The fact that an accused refused the officers permission to search his house for opium cannot be taken against him. His exercise of a legal right cannot be the basis of his conviction. "ACTS Appellant Gabriela Esguerra came to isit !aleriano de los Reyes and his "i#e at their home in Manila. $n % &oember, "hile Gabriela "as still at de los Reyes' house, reenue o##icials "ent to the house o# the accused de los Reyes to search #or opium. (e los Reyes re#used to let the o##icials in his house on the ground that, "ithout search "arrant, they "ere not authorized to search the premises. A#ter a #e" moments) conersation, conersation, and upon their assertion assertion that they "ere o##icers o##icers o# the la", "hile not consenting, he o##ered no physical resistance to their entry. *hile some o# the o##icers "ere in the house searching #or drugs, others "ere on the outside "atching to see that no one le#t the house. (uring the progress o# the search in the #ront part o# the house, one o# the o##icers outside sa" the accused Gabriela thro" a pac+age #rom the "indo" o# the +itchen into the grass behind the house. pon recoering the pac+age it "as #ound to contained a considerable quantity o# morphine. Although there is no direct eidence o# any +ind sho"ing that the accused de los Reyes had any +no"ledge o# the #act that the Gabriela had possession o# the drug, the trial court conicted Gabriella Esguerra and !aleriano de los Reyes. -n its opinion, the court admitted that the only eidence relatie to delos Reyes' +no"ledge that the opium "as in his house is deried #rom the #act #act that he refused permission to the officials to search his premises , the in#erence being dra"n #rom such re#usal that the accused had +no"ledge o# the #act that the contraband drug "as located in his house, other"ise he "ould hae o##ered no obection to the search. ISSU! *hether an accused's re#usal re#usal to let the o##icials o##icials "ithout search "arrant to search his house may be a basis o# his coniction. #!LD$ O% (court discussed the history of the right against unreasonable search and seizure)
’every man’s house is his castle,’ But as sea search rch-w -warr arrant ants s are a spe species cies of pr proces ocess s exc exceed eeding ingly ly ar arbit bitra rary ry in character, and which ought not to be resorted to except for very urgent and satisfactory reasons, the rules of law which pertain to them are of more than ordi or dina nary ry st stric rictn tnes ess; s; an and d if th the e pa part rty y ac acti ting ng un unde derr th them em ex expe pect cts s leg legal al protection, it is essential that these rules be carefully observed. - Judge Cooley. /he #act that !aleriano re#used the o##icers permission to search his house #or opium cannot be ta+en against him. &o public o##icial or other person in any country "here that portion o# the 0onstitution o# the nited States against searches and seizures or similar proisions is in #orce, has the right to enter the premises o# another "ithout his consent #or the purpose o# search or seizure "ithout #irst being proided "ith the proper search "arrant #or the purpose, obtained in the manner proided by la".
Law on Public Accountability Atty Aquirre
“For the service of criminal process, the houses of private parties are subject to be broken and entered under circumstances which are fully explained in the works on criminal law, and need not be enumerated here. nd there are also cases where search! warrants are allowed to be issued, under which an officer may be protected in the like action. "ut as search!warrants are a species of process exceedingly arbitrary in character, and which ought not to be resorted to except for every urgent and satisfactorily reasons, the rules of law which pertain to them are of more than ordinary strictness# and if the party acting under them expects legal protection, it is essential that these rules be carefully observed. xxx $e have said that if the officer follows the command of his warrant, he is protected# and this is so even when the complaint proves to have been unfounded. "ut if he exceed the commands by searching in places not described therein, or by sei%ing persons or articles not commanded, he is not protected by the warrant, and can only justify himself as in other cases where he assumes to act without process. &beying strictly the command of his warrant, he may break open outer or inner doors, and his justification does not depend upon his discovering that for which he is to make search. 'n other cases than those to which we have referred, and subject to the general police power of the (tate, the law favors the complete and undisturbed dominion of every man over his own premises, and protects him therein with such jealousy that he may defend his possession against intruders, in person or by his servants or guests, even to the extent of taking the life of the intruder, if that seem essential to the defense.) * +udge ooley, in his constitutional -imitations, sixth edition
“'n the early history of most peoples we find beliefs and traditions which bear witness to the ancient respect for man/s home. 0xx The house of man was the first house of 1od2 the home the primitive altar. Family worship preceded public worship# the sanctity of the home preceded that of the temple. 'n 3ome the home of the citi%en was a safe refuge, a sacred asylum. 'ts inviolability was at once proclaimed, both by the jurists and by the laws.) * 1roi%ard in his work on the 4enal ode of (pain1 /he only eidence against the de#endant !aleriano being an in#erence dra"n #rom the exercise of a legal right , "e declare the eidence insu##icient to support the coniction. *e accordingly reerse the udgment belo" as to him and acquit him o# the charge embraced in the in#ormation. As to the accused Gabriela Esguerra, "e hae no doubt o# her guilt. /he eidence clearly demonstrates her possession o# the morphine and her attempt to rid hersel# o# its possession be#ore discoery by the o##icers. *e hae care#ully e2amined the eidence in the case and, not"ithstanding the able arguments o# her counsel, "e are coninced that she is guilty.
