Practice question
A privately employed guard performs a State-directed terminal-security function. Is private employment alone enough to classify every act as Marti’s independent private search?
- Yes, employment status alone decides every case.
- No; the actual function and State involvement must be examined.
- Yes, a government direction is always legally nonexistent.
- Yes, no private guard can ever act for the State.
- Yes, every security task is purely a personal hobby.
Legal references
- People v. Marti, G.R. No. 81561, January 18, 1991, MAIN decision, genuinely private search without State intervention: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/jan1991/gr_81561_1991.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.