Case Digest (G.R. No. L-69401) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In the case Rizal Alih et al. v. Major General Delfin C. Castro et al. (G.R. No. 69401, June 23, 1987), the petitioners—Rizal, Nasim, Aisan, Mijal, Omar and other Alih family members, together with Edris Muksan, Mulsidi Waradil, Billy Asmad, Ramsid Asali, Banding Usman, Anggang Hadani, Warmikhan Hapa, Gabral Jikiri, Allan Tan, Mujahirin Marajuki, Kennedy Gonzales, Urduja Alih, Merla Alih, and Nuraisa Alih—occupied a compound on Governor Alvarez Street in Zamboanga City. On November 25, 1984, over two hundred Philippine Marines and elements of the Home Defense Forces, acting under the regional unified command of Major General Delfin C. Castro, Colonel Ernesto Calupig, and Major Arnold Blanco, conducted a warrantless “zona” operation to search for loose firearms, ammunition, and explosives. The occupants responded with warning fire, prompting a violent exchange that caused multiple casualties. The next morning the besieged compound surrendered; sixteen male occupants were arrested Case Digest (G.R. No. L-69401) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Context
- Petitioners
- Rizal Alih, Nasim Alih, Aisan Alih, Mijal Alih, Omar Alih, Edris Muksan, Mulsidi Waradil, Billy Asmad, Ramsid Asali, Banding Usman, Anggang Hadani, Warmikhan Hapa, Gabral Jikiri, Allan Tan, Mujahirin Marajuki, Kennedy Gonzales, Urduja Alih, Merla Alih, Nuraisa Alih vda. de Ferolino.
- Respondents
- Major General Delfin C. Castro (Commander SOUTHCOM & Regional Unified Command, Region IX)
- Colonel Ernesto Calupig (Commanding Officer, Special Forces Group (Airborne) & Internal Defense Command)
- Major Arnold Blanco (Commanding Officer, Philippine Marines & IDC)
- 1st Lieutenant Darwin Guerra (Acting Supervisor, IDC, AFP)
- Raid on Petitioners’ Compound
- Date and Location
- November 25, 1984, Gov. Alvarez Street, Zamboanga City
- Military Operation
- Over 200 Philippine Marines and home defense force elements conducted a warrantless “zona” search for firearms, ammunition, explosives
- Petitioners’ initial defensive gunfire led to a prolonged shoot‐out; no fatalities reported
- Arrest and Seizure
- Surrender and Arrest
- Compound surrendered next morning; sixteen male occupants arrested
- Subsequent fingerprinting, paraffin testing, and photographing performed over petitioners’ objection
- Inventory of Seized Items
- Nine M16 rifles, one M14 rifle, nine rifle grenades, assorted ammunition
- Procedural History
- Petition to the Supreme Court (Dec. 21, 1984)
- Sought prohibition, mandamus, preliminary injunction to recover seized articles, exclude evidence, enjoin fingerprinting
- Trial Court Referral
- Supreme Court treated petition as injunction suit; referred to RTC Judge Omar U. Amin for hearing and report
- RTC received evidence and recommended based on constitutional issues
Issues:
- Legality of Warrantless Search and Seizure
- Whether the warrantless raid violated Article IV, Sec. 3 of the 1973 Constitution
- Whether “superior orders” or urgency (Climaco assassination context) justified bypassing a search warrant
- Admissibility of Seized Articles
- Whether firearms and ammunition constitute “fruits of the poisonous tree” under Article IV, Sec. 4(2) of the 1973 Constitution
- Validity of Fingerprinting, Photographing, and Paraffin Testing
- Whether these procedures violated the petitioners’ right against self‐incrimination
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)