Flashcards Studio

At a private technology company’s floor, the facilities manager, Ms. Chen, who handles building safety and access to non-private areas, visits after hours when the CTO is away and verbally consents to a search of the entire floor, including a locked file cabinet inside the CTO's private office. The officers do not obtain a warrant. They search and seize a USB drive containing confidential trade secrets from the cabinet and also seize other items from the floor's common areas. The CTO later challenges the search specifically as to the private cabinet. (a)Identify the controlling doctrine and the essential elements of a valid consent to search under Philippine law. (b)Determine whether Ms. Chen had authority to consent to search the different areas of the floor, including the locked cabinet, and explain the limits of consent with respect to the private cabinet. (c)If portions of the search are invalid, explain the legal effect on the seized evidence and what remedies are available to the accused.