G.R. No. L-824 - Moncado vs. El Tribunal del Pueblo

HILARIO CAMINO MONCADO, Petitioner, accused of the crime of treason in Criminal No. 3522 of the Tribunal del Pueblo.
Tribunal del Pueblo and Juan M. Ladaw, como Procurador Especial, Respondents; information for treason filed February 28, 1946 (per respondents' answer).
Petitioner filed an original petition for certiorari in this Court after the People’s Court denied his motion for return of seized documents.

On April 4, 1945 at about 6:00 p.m., members of the Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) of the United States Army arrested petitioner at his residence at San Rafael St., No. 199A, Manila, without a warrant and detained him at the Bilibid Prison, Muntinglupa, Rizal.
On April 11, 1945, petitioner’s wife, who had moved to a residence at Rosario, No. 3, Quezon City, was approached by CIC officers under Lt. Olves and invited to witness a search of the San Rafael house; she initially refused because the officers had no search warrant but accompanied them after they said they would search with or without her.
Upon arrival, Mrs. Moncado observed trunks and effects ransacked, documents and items scattered on the floor, and Lt. Olves announced that he would take documents that purportedly proved petitioner’s guilt.
No receipt was issued to Mrs. Moncado. Inventory made thereafter showed many items missing, including passes, correspondences (including alleged correspondence with Japanese officers), private letters, books, publications, personal memorabilia, and a promissory note for P50,000.

On June 27, 1946 petitioner filed a motion in the Tribunal del Pueblo for the return of the documents, alleging that they were obtained from his residence without a search warrant.
The Tribunal del Pueblo denied the motion on July 9, 1946, applying the doctrine of Alvero v. Dizon (76 Phil., 637) that evidence obtained without a warrant is not necessarily excluded.
Petitioner then filed a petition for certiorari in this Court (filed August 10, 1946 in the record) praying that the lower court order of July 9, 1946 be annulled; that the documents be returned; and that the Procurador Especial be enjoined from offering them as evidence.

Petitioner contended Alvero did not apply because the seizure here occurred Apr...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether the Tribunal del Pueblo erred in denying petitioner’s motion for return of documents seized from his home without a search warrant, and whether this Court should order their return and enjoin the Procurador Especial from offering them as evidence.

Whether the seizure and possession of the documents occurred under circumstances that render the Alvero v. Dizon doctrine inapplicable (i.e., whether the Commonwealth had been restored and constitutional protections were operative at the time of seizure).
Whether the illegality of the means by which evidence was obtained requires exclusion of those materials from evidence at trial or instead requires pu...(Subscriber-Only)