Paderanga v CAKEY TAKE-AWAY: Right to bail is accorded to persons constructively arrested even though they have not been physically arrestedDATE/GR NO/SCRA: G.R. No. 115407August 28, 1995PONENTE: REGALADO, J.PETITIONER: MIGUEL P. PADERANGARESPONDENT: COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINESFACTS:Petition: Petition for certiorari on the CAs decision denying the motion for reconsideration on his petition for bail.Factual Antecedents: Miguel P. Paderanga was included in an amended information for the crime of multiple murder as the mastermind. Paderanga, through his counsel, filed a Motion for Admission of Bail before a Warrant of Arrest could be issued by the lower court. Paderanga was unable to appear for the hearing due to an ailment that needed medical attention. His counsel manifested that they were submitting custody over the person of their client to the local chapter president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and that, for purposes of said hearing, he considered being in the custody of the law. The Court of Appeals denied the petitioners motion for reconsideration on his right to bailStatute Involved: Art. 3, Sec. 12 Sec. 1 of Rule 114 Section 1.Bail defined. Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form of corporate surety, property bond, cash deposit, or recognizance. (1a)Position of Respondent/s: The Court of Appeals reasoned that Paderanga was granted bail when was not in the custody of the law, thus not eligible for the grant of the petition.

ISSUE: W/N it is proper to admit bail even though petitioner is not yet in custody of law

HELD/RATIO:NO Right to bail is only extended only to those persons who have been arrested, detained, or otherwise deprived of their freedom A person is considered to be in the custody of the law: when he is arrested either by virtue of warrant of arrest or by warrantless arrest when he has voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court by surrendering to the proper authorities In the foregoing facts, petitioner can be considered as being constructively and legally under custody Through his lawyers, he expressly submitted to physical and legal control over his person: firstly, by filing the application for bail with the trial court secondly, by furnishing true information of his actual whereabouts; thirdly, by unequivocally recognizing the jurisdiction of the said court. for purposes of the hearing thereof he should be deemed to have voluntarily submitted his person to the custody of the law and, necessarily, to the jurisdiction of the trial court an arrest is made either by: actual restraint of the arrestee or merely by his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest (house arrest)Final Ruling Decision of CA is reversed. Petitioner is granted bail.