Practice question
A court trying the criminal case declines to hear a search-warrant challenge solely because another trial court issued the warrant before the information was filed. The incident falls under section 14. Is the original issuing court’s identity a categorical obstacle?
- Yes, trial courts can never examine these incidents.
- Yes, only the issuing judge can act after prosecution.
- Yes, the warrant is immune once served.
- No; section 14 expressly gives the court of the instituted action authority over the warrant-quashal or suppression motion.
- No; the police may decide instead.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html — Rule 126 section 14: forum for warrant quashal and evidence suppression.
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/assets/pdf/journals/Collation_and_Codification_of_SC_Issuance_DIGITAL.pdf — A.M. 21-06-08-SC, Rule 3 sections 7–8: unjustified unrecorded searches and suppression remedy, PDF page 706.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/mar2025/gr_257910_2025.html — Patotoy v. People, G.R. 257910, March 4, 2025, main opinion: personal-jurisdiction waiver and admissibility are distinct.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.