Datos obtenidos en el post-test

People vs. Escordial, G.R. Nos. 138934-35, January 16, 2002, the accused, having become the focus of attention by the police after he had been pointed to by a certain Ramie as the possible perpetrator of the crime, it was held that when the out-of-court identification was conducted by the police, the accused was already under custodial investigation.

2. Mug shots—where photographs are shown to the witness to identify the suspect; and

3. Police Line ups—where a witness identifies the suspect from a group of persons lined up for the purpose. It is not considered a part of any custodial inquest because it is conducted before that stage of investigation is reached (People vs. Bravo, G.R. No. 135562, November 22, 1999). The process has not yet shifted from the investigatory to the accusatory stage, and it is usually the witness or the complainant who is interrogated and who gives a statement in the course of the line-up (People vs. Amestuzo, July 12, 2001).

Factors in Resolving the Admissibility of and Relying on Out-of-Court Identification of Suspects: TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES TEST

1. The witness’ opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime;

2. The witness’ degree of attention at that time;

3. The accuracy of any prior description given by the witness;

4. The level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the identification;

5. The length of time between the crime and the identification; and 6. The suggestiveness of the identification procedure.

Two (2) kinds of Involuntary or Coerced Confessions:

1. Those which are the product of 3^rd degree methods such as torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, which are dealt with in paragraph 2 of Section 12;

and

2. Those which are given without the benefit of Miranda warnings.

Extrajudicial Confessions—are presumed voluntary, and, in the absence of conclusive evidence showing the declarant’s consent in executing the same has been vitiated, such confession will be sustained.

To be admissible, it must be:

1. Voluntary;

2. Made with the assistance of competent and independent counsel;

Pa ge 9 97 /1 2/ 20 08 ¥s ay 

3. Express; and 4. In writing.

Investigations not considered custodial interrogation 1. Those conducted by an audit examiner

2. Those conducted by the Court Administrator 3. Those conducted by the employer

For the reason that these people are not law enforcement officers

However, in the case of People vs. Salonga, G.R. No. 131131, June 21, 2001, after an audit, the accused was summoned to appear before the Assistant Accountant of MetroBank and, in the course of the interview, accused admitted having issued the subject cashier’s checks without any legitimate transaction, the written confession was held admissible in evidence inasmuch as the interview did not constitute custodial investigation.

Ladiana vs. People, G.R. No. 144293, December 24, 2002, the counter-affidavit submitted by the respondent during preliminary investigation is admissible because preliminary investigation is not part of custodial investigation. The interrogation by the police, if any would already have been ended at the time of the filing of the criminal case in court or in the public prosecutor’s office.

Spontaneous statements—those elicited through questioning by law enforcement officers, but given in an ordinary manner where the appellant verbally admits to having committed the offense, are admissible. (People vs. Guillermo, G.R. No. 147786, January 20, 2004)

WAIVER—

It must be in writing and made in the presence of the counsel. The burden of proving that there was a valid waiver rests on the prosecution. The presumption of official duty has been regularly performed cannot prevail over the presumption of innocence.

What may be waived?

1. Right to remain silent 2. Right to counsel Exclusionary Rule—

Confession or admission obtained in violation of Sections 12 and 17 of Article III shall be inadmissible in evidence.

Fruit of the poisonous tree—once the primary source is shown to have been lawfully obtained, any secondary or derivative evidence derived from it is inadmissible.

Evidence illegally obtained by the State should not be used to gain other

Pa ge 1 00 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

evidence because the originally obtained evidence taints all evidence subsequently obtained.

Sec. 13, Article III

All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by

sufficient sureties, or be released or recognizance as may be provided by law.

The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.

Right to Bail

Bail—the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before any court as may be required.

 The right to bail may be invoked by any person once detention commences even if no formal charges have yet to be filed;

 It can availed of by a person who is in custody of law or otherwise deprived of his liberty;

 Suspension of the writ of the privilege of habeas corpus does not suspend the right to bail;

 Even when the accused has previously jumped bail, still he cannot be denied bail before conviction if it is a matter of right. The remedy is to increase the amount of bail;

 Right to bail has not been recognized and is not available to the military.

Standards for fixing amount of bail:

1. Financial ability of the accused;

2. Nature and circumstances of the offense;

3. Penalty for the offense charged;

4. Character and reputation of the accused;

5. Age and health of the accused;

6. Weight of evidence against the accused;

7. Probability of appearance at trial;

8. Forfeiture of other bonds by him;

9. He was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and 10.Pendency of other cases where he is also under bail.

Bail as a matter of right—

All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as prescribed by law:

Pa ge 1 01 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

1. Before or after conviction by the MTC; and

2. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.

3. The evidence of guilt is not strong.

Bail when discretionary—

1. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, the court, on application, may admit the accused to bail.

2. The court, in its discretion, may allow the accused to continue on provisional liberty after the same bail bond during the period to appeal subject to the consent of the 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 similar circumstances:

a. That the accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiteracion;

b. That the accused is found to have previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or has violated the conditions of his bail without valid justification;

c. That the accused committed the offense while on probation, parole, or under conditional pardon;

d. That the circumstances of the accused or his case indicates the probability of flight if released on bail; or

e. That there is undue risk that during the pendency of the appeal, the accused may commit another crime.

Whether bail is a matter of right or discretion—reasonable notice of hearing is required to be given to the prosecutor, or at least he must be asked for his recommendation, because in fixing the amount of bail, the judge is required to take into account a number of factors.

When bail shall be denied—

 No person, regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution, shall be admitted to bail if:

a. Charged with capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment; and

b. Evidence of guilt is strong.

 When the accused is charged with an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or higher, a hearing on the motion for bail must be conducted by the judge to determine whether or not the evidence of guilt is strong.

Pa ge 1 02 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

 Without a hearing, the judge could not possibly asses the weight of the evidence against the accused before granting the latter’s application for bail.

(See the cases of Government of USA vs. Hon. Purganan and Government of Hongkong vs. Judge Olalia)

Sec. 14, Article III

(1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.

(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to

face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial

may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

Rights of the Accused:

1. Criminal due process:

a. Opportunity to be heard in court of competent jurisdiction;

b. The accused must proceed against under orderly processes of law;

c. He must be given notice and opportunity to be heard; and

d. The judgment rendered was within the authority of a constitutional law.

2. Presumption of innocence—

Every circumstance favoring the innocence of the accused must be taken into account. The proof against him must not be permitted to sway judgment and the presumption that official duty was regularly performed cannot, by itself, prevail over the constitutional presumption of innocence.

3. Right to be heard by himself and counsel

4. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him Objectives:

a. To furnish the accused with such a description of the charge against him as will enable him to make the defense;

b. To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for protection against a further prosecution for the same cause; and

c. To inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whether they are sufficient in law to support a conviction, if one should be had.

Pa ge 1 03 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

Description, not designation, of the offense is controlling.

Void-for-Vagueness Rule—the accused is denied the right to be informed of the charge against him, and to due process as well, where the statute itself is couched in such indefinite language that it is not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to determine therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and, hence, shall be avoided.

Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001, every legislative measure is presumed constitutional. Petitioner failed to discharge the burden to overcome the presumption of constitutionality.

5. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial—

Impartial—the judge must not be bias and not motivated by malice or bad faith 6. Right to meet witness face to face—

Witnesses not submitted for cross-examination are not admissible as evidence.

However, right to cross-examination may be waived.

7. Right to compulsory process to secure attendance of witnesses and production of evidence

8. Trial in Absentia

 After arraignment;

 Due notice; and

 Absence is unjustified.

Plea of guilt to a capital offense—

1. There must be searching inquiry into the voluntariness of the plea and the full comprehension of the consequences thereof;

2. Presentation of evidence to prove the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his culpability;

3. The accused must be asked if he desire to present evidence on his behalf and allow him to do so if he so desires.

Sec. 15, Article III

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires.

(Relate this to Section 18, Article VII)

Pa ge 1 04 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

Writ of habeas corpus—

A writ issued by the court directed to a person detaining another, commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at designated time and place, with the day and cause of his capture and detention, to do, to submit to, and to receive whatever court or judge awarding writ shall consider in his behalf.

It lies only where the restraint of a person’s liberty has been judicially adjudged to be illegal or unlawful.

A petition for habeas corpus will be given due course only if it shows that petitioner is being detained or restrained of his liberty unlawfully. A restrictive custody and monitoring of movements or whereabouts of police officers under investigation by their superiors is not a form of illegal detention or restraint of liberty. (SP02 Manalo vs.

PNP Chief Calderon, G.R. No. 178920, October 15, 2007)

Sec. 16, Article III

All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.

Enriquez vs. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 174902-06, February 15, 2008, this right, like the right to a speedy trial, is deemed violated when the proceedings are attended by vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delays.

The concept of speedy disposition of cases is relative or flexible. A simple mathematical computation of the time involved is insufficient. The facts and circumstances peculiar to each case must be examined. In ascertaining whether the right to a speedy disposition of cases has been violated, the following factors must be considered:

1. The length of delay;

2. The reasons for the delay;

3. The assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused; and

4. The prejudice caused by the delay. (Tilendo vs. Ombudsman and Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165975, September 13, 2007)

Sec. 17, Article III

No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

Right against self-incrimination—

Availability:

Not only in criminal prosecutions but also in all other government proceedings,

Pa ge 1 05 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

including civil actions and administrative or legislative investigations

May be claimed not only by accused but by any witness to whom an incriminating question is addressed.

Scope:

It applies only against testimonial compulsion and production of documents, papers and chattels in court except when books of account are to be examined in exercise of power of taxation and police power.

Two (2) types of Immunity Statutes:

1. Transactional Immunity Statute—testimony of any person or whose possession of documents or other evidence necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted is immune from criminal prosecution for an offense to which such compelled testimony relates; and

2. Use Immunity Statute—prohibits the use of a witness’ compelled testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness.

Sec. 18, Article III

(1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.

(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.

Right against Involuntary Servitude

It is a condition where one is compelled by force, coercion, or imprisonment, and against his will, to labor for another, whether he is paid or not.

General Rule: No involuntary servitude shall exist.

Exceptions:

1. As punishment for a crime whereof one has been duly convicted;

2. Service in defense of the State;

3. Naval enlistment;

4. Posse commitatus;

5. Return to work order in industries affected with public interest; and 6. Patria potestas.

Sec. 19, Article III

(1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for

compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter

Pa ge 1 06 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.

(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal

facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.

Prohibited Punishments

Mere severity does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment. To violate constitutional guarantee, penalty must be flagrant and plainly oppressive, disproportionate to nature of offense as to shock senses of community.

Sec. 20, Article III

No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

Coverage:

1. Debt—any civil obligation arising from contract

2. Poll tax—a specific sum levied upon any person belonging to a certain class without regard to property or occupation.

A tax is not a debt since it is an obligation arising from law hence, its non-payment may be validly punished with imprisonment.

Sec. 21, Article III

No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either

shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.

Right against Double Jeopardy Requisites:

1. A valid complaint or information;

2. Filed before competent court;

3. To which defendant has pleaded; and

4. Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the case dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.

Two (2) types:

1. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense;

2. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.

To substantiate a claim of double jeopardy, the following must be proven:

1. A first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second;

2. The second jeopardy must be for the same offense, or the second offense includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first

Pa ge 1 07 7/ 12 /2 00 8 ¥ sa y

information, or is an attempt to commit the same or is a frustration thereof.

Legal Jeopardy Attaches Only:

1. Upon a valid indictment;

2. Before a competent court;

3. After arraignment;

4. When a valid plea has been entered and

5. The case was dismissed or otherwise terminated without the express consent of the accused.

General Rule: Dismissal of action, when made at the instance of the accused, does not put the accused in first jeopardy.

Exceptions:

In document Interés de las creencias y concepciones de los profesores en la investigación educativa (página 162-165)