Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
• Also known as Clear and Probable Danger • This right is not subject to prior restraint (ex. the need for
a permit) unless the meeting takes place in a public area (ex.
• If the words or utterances create a dangerous tendency that
Rizal Park).
the state has a right to protect, such utterance is punishable.
It is sufficient if the natural Tests for a lawful assembly:
See Section 12, Art III People vs. Lugod, G.R. No. 136253, February 21, 2001,
the accused should have been entitled to Miranda rights,
because even assuming that he was not yet under
Rights of an Accused under Custodial Investigation: interrogation at the time he was brought to the police
°Exist only in custodial interrogation station, his confession was elicited by a police officer who
°Available when the investigation is no longer a general promised to help him if he told the truth. Furthermore, when
inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a he allegedly pointed out the body of the victim, the
particular suspect, the suspect has been taken into police atmosphere was highly intimidating and not conducive to a
custody, the police carry out a process of interrogation that spontaneous response as the whole police force and nearly
tend to elicit incriminating statements. 100 townspeople escorted him there. Not having the benefit
of counsel and not having been informed of his rights, the
Custodial Investigation—Any questioning initiated by law confession is inadmissible.
enforcement officers after a person has been taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in People vs. Baloloy, G.R. No. 140740, April 12,
any significant way. 2002, it was held that this guarantee does not apply to
It shall include the practice of issuing “invitation” spontaneous statement, not elicited through questioning by
to a person who is investigated in connection with an the authorities but given in an ordinary manner whereby the
offense he is suspected to have committed, without suspect orally admitted having committed the offense.
prejudice to the liability of the “inviting” officer for any Neither can it apply to admissions or confessions made by a
violation of the law. (RA 7438) suspect before he was placed under custodial investigation.
In this case, the narration before the Barangay Captain
Miranda rights—(Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436) x x x prior to custodial investigation was admissible in evidence,
The prosecution may not use statements, whether but not the admissions made before Judge Dicon, inasmuch
exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial as the questioning by the judge was done after the suspect
interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use had been arrested and such questioning already constituted
of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege custodial investigation.
against self-incriminations. By custodial interrogation, it
means questioning initiated by law enforcement officers Rights guaranteed:
after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise 1. Right to remain silent;
deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way. As 2. Right to have a competent and independent counsel
for the procedural safeguards to be employed, unless other preferably of his own choice at all stages of the
fully effective means are devised to informed accused- investigation;
persons of their right of silence and to assure a continuous Independent and competent counsel—willing to
opportunity to safeguard the constitutional rights of the accused
exercise it, the following measures are required. 3. Right to be informed of such rights;
Prior to any questioning, the person must be Rationale:
warned that he has the right to remain silent, that any a. to make him aware of it;
statement he does make may be used as evidence against b. to overcome the inherent pressure o the interrogating
him, and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, atmosphere; and
either retained or appointed. The defendant may waive
c. to show the individual that his interrogators are
prepared to recognize his privilege should he choose to Extrajudicial Confessions—are presumed voluntary, and,
invoke it. in the absence of conclusive evidence showing the
4. Right to be provided with counsel, if the person cannot declarant’s consent in executing the same has been vitiated,
afford one; such confession will be sustained.
°These rights cannot be waives except in writing and in To be admissible, it must be:
the presence of counsel; it is not required in a police-line 1. Voluntary;
up as the latter is not part of a custodial inquest. 2. Made with the assistance of competent and independent
5. No torture, force, etc. which vitiate free will shall be counsel;
used; 3. Express; and
6. Secret detention places are prohibited; and 4. In writing.
7. Confession/admissions obtained in violation of rights are
inadmissible in evidence. Investigations not considered custodial interrogation
1. Those conducted by an audit examiner
Ways of identifying the suspects During Custodial 2. Those conducted by the Court Administrator
Investigation: 3. Those conducted by the employer
1. Show-ups (out-of-court identification)—where the
suspect alone is brought face to face with the witness for For the reason that these people are not law enforcement
identification; officers. However, in the case of People vs. Salonga, G.R.
People vs. Escordial, G.R. Nos. 138934-35, January 16, No. 131131, June 21, 2001, after an audit, the accused was
2002, the accused, having become the focus of attention summoned to appear before the Assistant Accountant of
by the police after he had been pointed to by a certain MetroBank and, in the course of the interview, accused
Ramie as the possible perpetrator of the crime, it was held admitted having issued the subject cashier’s checks without
that when the out-of-court identification was conducted by any legitimate transaction, the written confession was held
the police, the accused was already under custodial admissible in evidence inasmuch as the interview did not
investigation. constitute custodial investigation.
2. Mug shots—where photographs are shown to the witness
to identify the suspect; and In Ladiana vs. People, the counter-affidavit submitted by
3. Police Line ups—where a witness identifies the suspect the respondent during preliminary investigation is
from a group of persons lined up for the purpose. It is not admissible because preliminary investigation is not part of
considered a part of any custodial inquest because it is custodial investigation. The interrogation by the police, if
conducted before that stage of investigation is reached any would already have been ended at the time of the filing
(People vs. Bravo). The process has not yet shifted from the of the criminal case in court or in the public prosecutor’s
investigatory to the accusatory stage, and it is usually the office.
witness or the complainant who is interrogated and who Spontaneous statements—those elicited through
gives a statement in the course of the line-up (People vs. questioning by law enforcement officers, but given in an
Amestuzo). ordinary manner where the appellant verbally admits to
having committed the offense, are admissible. (People vs.
Factors in Resolving the Admissibility of and Relying on Guillermo, G.R. No. 147786, January 20, 2004)
Out-of-Court Identification of Suspects: TOTALITY OF
CIRCUMSTANCES TEST WAIVER— It must be in writing and made in the presence
1. The witness’ opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the counsel. The burden of proving that there was a valid
of the crime; waiver rests on the prosecution. The presumption of
2. The witness’ degree of attention at that time; official duty has been regularly performed cannot prevail
3. The accuracy of any prior description given by the over the presumption of innocence.
witness;
4. The level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the What may be waived?
identification; 1. Right to remain silent
5. The length of time between the crime and the 2. Right to counsel
identification; and
6. The suggestiveness of the identification procedure. Exclusionary Rule— (§17.Right against self-
incrimination)
Two (2) kinds of Involuntary or Coerced Confessions: Confession or admission obtained in violation of Sections
1. Those which are the product of 3rd degree methods such 12 and 17 of Article III shall be inadmissible in evidence.
as torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, which are Fruit of the poisonous tree—once the primary source is
dealt with in paragraph 2 of Section 12; shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary or
2. Those which are given without the benefit of Miranda derivative evidence derived from it is inadmissible.
warnings.
Evidence illegally obtained by the State should not be used imprisonment, the court, on application, may admit the
to gain other evidence because the originally obtained accused to bail.
evidence taints all evidence subsequently 2. The court, in its discretion, may allow the accused to
obtained. continue on provisional liberty after the same bail bond
during the period to appeal subject to the consent of the
People vs. Duero, 104 SCRA 379 bondsman.
3. If the court imposed a penalty of imprisonment
exceeding 6 years but not more than 20 years, the
accused shall be denied bail, or his bail previously granted
shall be cancelled, upon showing by the following or other
D. Right to Bail (Dolly) similar circumstances:
a. That the accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or
habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime
See Section 13 aggravated by the circumstance of reiteracion;
b. That the accused is found to have previously
escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or
Bail—the security given for the release of a person in has violated the conditions of his bail without valid
custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, justification;
conditioned upon his appearance before any court as may be c. That the accused committed the offense while on
required. probation, parole, or under conditional pardon;
° The right to bail may be invoked by any person once d. That the circumstances of the accused or his case
detention commences even if no formal charges have yet to indicates the probability of flight if released on bail;
be filed; or
° It can availed of by a person who is in custody of law or e. That there is undue risk that during the pendency
otherwise deprived of his liberty; of the appeal, the accused may commit another
° Suspension of the writ of the privilege of habeas corpus crime.
does not suspend the right to bail;
° Even when the accused has previously jumped bail, still Whether bail is a matter of right or discretion—reasonable
he cannot be denied bail before conviction if it is a matter of notice of hearing is required to be given to the prosecutor,
right. The remedy is to increase the amount of bail; or at least he must be asked for his
° Right to bail has not been recognized and is not available recommendation, because in fixing the amount of bail, the
to the military. judge is required to take into account a number of factors.