Practice question
An officer observes only an ordinance violation punishable solely by a fine. No other lawful arrest or search ground exists. The officer makes a custodial warrantless arrest solely for that violation and searches the person as incident to arrest. Applying the principle reiterated in Patotoy, which is correct?
- Every fine-only offense necessarily authorizes custodial arrest and full search
- The fine-only violation does not supply a lawful custodial arrest on these facts, so the asserted incidental-search basis fails
- The later discovery of contraband automatically creates the prior arrest ground
- The officer may replace the ordinance penalty personally
- A search is lawful whenever the officer calls it incidental
Legal references
- Rule 113, Section 5; Patotoy v. People, G.R. No. 257910, March 4, 2025, main decision.
- Reviewed primary authority, Rule 113, Section 5: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html
- Reviewed primary authority, Main decision, overt acts and fine-only distinction: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/mar2025/gr_257910_2025.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.