Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ARTICLE III Bill of Rights Right to Counsel is extended to police investigation; Waiver
SECTION 12 Given the clear constitutional intent in the 1973 and 1987
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION Constitutions, to extend to those under police investigation the right to
counsel, this occasion may be better than any to remind police
investigators that, while the Court finds no real need to afford a suspect
HO WAI PANG vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
the services of counsel during a police line-up, the moment there is a
Section 12 prohibits as evidence only confessions and admissions of
move or even an urge of said investigators to elicit admissions or
the accused as against himself
confessions or even plain information which may appear innocent or
While there is no dispute that petitioner was subjected to all the rituals
innocuous at the time, from said suspect, he should then and there be
of a custodial questioning by the customs authorities and the NBI in
assisted by counsel, unless he waives the right, but the waiver shall be
violation of his constitutional right under Section 12 of Article III of
made in writing and in the presence of counsel.
the Constitution, we must not, however, lose sight of the fact that what
said constitutional provision prohibits as evidence are only
PEOPLE vs. MACAM
confessions and admissions of the accused as against himself.
Right to Counsel extends even before the Trial
Historically, the counsel guarantee was intended to assure the
Infractions of the Miranda Rights
assistance of counsel at the trial, inasmuch as the accused was
The Court categorically ruled that the infractions of the so-called
"confronted with both the intricacies of the law and the advocacy of
Miranda rights render inadmissible only the extrajudicial confession
the public prosecutor." However, as a result of the changes in patterns
or admission made during custodial investigation. The admissibility
of police investigation, today's accused confronts both expert
of other evidence, provided they are relevant to the issue and [are] not
adversaries and the judicial system well before his trial begins.
otherwise excluded by law or rules, [are] not affected even if obtained
or taken in the course of custodial investigation.
It is therefore appropriate to extend the counsel guarantee to critical
stages of prosecution even before the trial. The law enforcement
In the case at bench, petitioner did not make any confession or
machinery at present involves critical confrontations of the accused by
admission during his custodial investigation. The prosecution did not
the prosecution at pre-trial proceedings "where the result might well
present any extrajudicial confession extracted from him as evidence of
settle the accused's fate and reduce the trial itself to a mere formality."
his guilt.
A police line-up is considered a "critical" stage of the proceedings.
When allegation of violation of rights during custodial investigation
Inadmissibility
relevant and material
After the start of the custodial investigation, any identification of an
In Miranda, Chief Justice Warren summarized the procedural PEOPLE vs. BOLANOS
safeguards laid down for a person in police custody, "in-custody Violation of the Constitutional Right in this case
interrogation" being regarded as the commencement of an adversary Considering the clear requirements of the Constitution with respect to
proceeding against the suspect. the manner by which confession can be admissible in evidence, and the
glaring fact that the alleged confession obtained while on board the
The accused must be warned prior police vehicle was the only reason for the conviction, besides
He must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to appellant's conviction was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, this
remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court Court has no recourse but to reverse the subject judgment under
of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if review.
he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any
questioning if he so desires. PEOPLE vs. ANDAN
Rights of the Person under Investigation; Waiver
Opportunity to exercise those rights must be afforded to him Plainly, any person under investigation for the commission of an
throughout the interrogation. After such warnings have been given, offense shall have the right
such opportunity afforded him, the individual may knowingly and (1) to remain silent;
intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer or make a (2) to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his
statement. But unless and until such warnings and waivers are own choice; and
demonstrated by the prosecution at the trial, no evidence obtained as a (3) to be informed of such rights.
result of interrogation can be used against him.
These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence
Objective of counsel. Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this
to prohibit "incommunicado interrogation of individuals in a police- provision is inadmissible in evidence against him.
dominated atmosphere, resulting in self-incriminating statement
without full warnings of constitutional rights." Exclusionary Rule
The exclusionary rule is premised on the presumption that the
Meaning of Custodial Interrogation defendant is thrust into an unfamiliar atmosphere and runs through
meant "questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person menacing police interrogation procedures where the potentiality for
has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of compulsion, physical and psychological, is forcefully apparent.
action in any significant way." The incommunicado character of custodial interrogation or
investigation also obscures a later judicial determination of what really
PEOPLE vs. PINLAC transpired.
Right to Counsel
No custodial investigation shall be conducted unless it be in the Beginning of the Investigation
Correlative Obligation of the Police Investigator Spontaneous statements to news reporters admissible
In other words, the right of a person under interrogation "to be Appellant's confessions to the media were likewise properly admitted.
informed" implies a correlative obligation on the part of the police The confessions were made in response to questions by news reporters,
investigator to explain, and contemplates an effective communication not by the police or any other investigating officer. We have held that
that results in understanding what is conveyed. Short of this, there is a statements spontaneously made by a suspect to news reporters on a
denial of the right, as it cannot truly be said that the person has been televised interview are deemed voluntary and are admissible in
"informed" of his rights. evidence.
They were not acting under the direction and control of the police.
They were there to check appellant's confession to the mayor. They did
not force appellant to grant them an interview and reenact the
commission of the crime.
PEOPLE vs. DY
Constitutional Procedure not applicable in the case at bar
Contrary to the defense contention, the oral confession made by the
accused to Pat. Padilla that he had shot a tourist' and that the gun he
had used in shooting the victim was in his bar which he wanted
surrendered to the Chief of Police, is competent evidence against him.
The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the
offense charged may be given in evidence against him. It may in a
sense be also regarded as part of the res gestae.
The Trial Court, therefore, cannot be held to have erred in holding that
compliance with the constitutional procedure on custodial
interrogation is not applicable in the instant case, as the defense alleges
in its Error VII.
In the case at bar, the records show that the prosecution utterly failed
to discharge this burden. It matters not that in the course of the hearing,
the appellant failed to make a timely objection to the introduction of
these constitutionally proscribed evidence. The lack of objection did
not satisfy the heavy burden of proof that rested on the prosecution.