000			02916nam a2200301 4500
003			OSt
005			20190717105034.0
008			180423b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
020			_a[hardbound]
040			_aUniversity of Cebu- Banilad _cUniversity of Cebu- Banilad
100			_aColasito, Vernon Craig M.
245			_aBalancing of interests and the judicial question: _btesting the reasonableness of drunk and drugged driving searches and seizures /
260			_aCebu City : _c2017. _bUniversity of Cebu,
300			_aiv, 107 leaves :
336			_2rdacontent _atext
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume
501			_aThesis (Degree of Juris Doctor) -- University of Cebu- Banilad, 2017.
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 99-105).
520			_aSummary: Every person has the right against unreasonable search and seizure. However, there are kinds of warrantless searches and seizures that are deemed not unreasonable by jurisprudence. Republic Act 10586, otherwise known as the Anti-drunk and Drugged Driving Law, was passed to curb drunk and drugged driving. It prescribes a warrantless search and seizure. Hence, the purpose of this study is to determine whether or not the search and seizure under the anti-drunk and drugged driving law is reasonable. The study will use the qualitative method of research using a content and document analysis of different legal provisions, particularly section II of Article III of the 1987 Constitution and various jurisprudence interpreting the same. American jurisprudence will also be studied, being instructive although non seizure and the present tests to determine reasonableness. Next, the researcher will apply the test of reasonableness, i.e.., the balancing of interest test and the judicial question doctrine against the search and seizure under the Anti-drunk and drugged driving law. In the study, the researcher found that there is no hard and fast rule or ready test for reasonableness however, the Supreme Court laid down the balancing of interest test and the judicial question doctrine. The balancing of interest test applies to statutory searches whereas the judicial question doctrine applies to searches with particularized facts. Applying the balancing of interest test to the search and seizure under the Anti-drunk and Driving law, the law passes the test because a compelling state interest exists, i.e., the need for road safety by curbing drink and drunk driving. However, the law fails under the judicial question doctrine because it prescribes an absurd basis for flagging down and an unduly intrusive procedure.
541			_xBaldomero Estenzo _yLaw _zLaw
541			_aDonation _xBaldomero Estenzo _yLaw _zLaw
546			_aEnglish
942			_2ddc _cTHE
998			_cmariz[new] _d04/23/2018
998			_cangel[added] _d04/24/2018
999			_c8227 _d8227