This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-07-30 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, "stop and frisk" searches are conducted to prevent the occurrence of a crime. For instance, the search in Posadas v. Court of Appeals[65] was similar "to a 'stop and frisk' situation whose object is either to determine the identity of a suspicious individual or to maintain the status quo momentarily while the police officer seeks to obtain more information."[66] This court stated that the "stop and frisk" search should be used "[w]hen dealing with a rapidly unfolding and potentially criminal situation in the city streets where unarguably there is no time to secure . . . a search warrant."[67] | |||||
|
2014-07-30 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| Normally, "stop and frisk" searches do not give the law enforcer an opportunity to confer with a judge to determine probable cause. In Posadas v. Court of Appeals,[86] one of the earliest cases adopting the "stop and frisk" doctrine in Philippine jurisprudence, this court approximated the suspicious circumstances as probable cause: The probable cause is that when the petitioner acted suspiciously and attempted to flee with the buri bag there was a probable cause that he was concealing something illegal in the bag and it was the right and duty of the police officers to inspect the same.[87] (Emphasis supplied) | |||||