This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2003-09-26 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| In the following cases, the search was held to be incidental to a lawful arrest because of "suspicious" circumstances: People v. Tangliben[88] (accused was "acting suspiciously"), People v. Malmstedt[89] (a bulge on the accused's waist), and People v. de Guzman[90] (likewise a bulge on the waist of the accused, who was wearing tight-fitting clothes). | |||||
|
2003-07-31 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| More importantly, a warrantless arrest is not a jurisdictional defect.[26] Any objection, defect or irregularity attending an arrest must be made before the accused enters his plea on arraignment. Having failed to move for the quashing of the information against them before their arraignment, appellants are now estopped from questioning the legality of their arrest.[27] Any irregularity was cured upon their voluntary submission to the trial court's jurisdiction.[28] | |||||