admission before a private person

 Under these circumstances, it cannot be successfully claimed that appellant's confession before the mayor is inadmissible. It is true that

a municipal mayor has "operational supervision and control" over the local
police 32 and may arguably be deemed a law enforcement officer for purposes of applying Section 12 (1) and (3) of Article III of the Constitution. However, appellant's confession to the mayor was not made in response to any interrogation by the latter. 33 In fact, the mayor did not question appellant at all. No police authority ordered appellant to talk to the mayor. It was appellant himself who spontaneously, freely and voluntarily sought the mayor for a private meeting. The mayor did not know that appellant was going to confess his guilt to him. When appellant talked with the mayor as a confidant and not as a law enforcement officer, his uncounselled confession to him did not violate his constitutional rights. 34 Thus, it has been held that the constitutional procedures on custodial investigation do not apply to a spontaneous statement, not elicited through questioning by the authorities, but given in an ordinary manner whereby appellant orally admitted having committed the crime. 35 What the Constitution bars is the compulsory disclosure of incriminating facts or confessions. The rights under Section 12 are guaranteed to preclude the slightest use of coercion by the state as would lead the accused to admit something false, not to prevent him from freely and voluntarily telling the truth. 36 Hence, we hold that appellant's confession to the mayor was correctly admitted by the trial court.

Appellant's confessions to the media were likewise properly admitted. The confessions were made in response to questions by news reporters, not by the police or any other investigating officer. We have held that statements spontaneously made by a suspect to news reporters on a televised interview are deemed voluntary an are admissible in evidence. 37


EN BANC

 

G.R. No. 116437 March 3, 1997

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
PABLITO ANDAN y HERNANDEZ @ BOBBY, accused-appellant.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TOLENTINO (1942) REITERACION, RECIDIVIST, HABITUAL DELINQUENCY (distinctions)

  EN BANC G.R. No. L-48740             August 5, 1942 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,  plaintiff-appellee, vs. FAUSTINO TOLENTINO Y DE DIOS and LUISA CORPUZ Y QUITONG,  defendants. FAUSTINO TOLENTINO Y DE DIOS,  appellant. Crispin Oben for appellant. Assistant Solicitor-General Enriquez and Solicitor Kapunan, Jr. for appellee. OZAETA,  J. : In the municipal court of Manila, where this action was commenced, as well as in the Court of First Instance, to which it was appealed, both of the above-named defendants pleaded guilty to the charge of theft of seven shirts valued at P14 belonging to one Cosme Famorca. Both being, recidivists, were sentenced in the Court of First Instance to suffer two months and one day of  arresto mayor  and to pay the corresponding civil indemnity to the offended party. Faustino Tolentino y de Dios was further sentenced to suffer an additional penalty of six years and one day of  prision mayor ...
Read more

res inter alios acta + reclusion perpetua (1992)

  SECOND DIVISION [ G.R. No. 100909, October 21, 1992 ] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. SOLITO TENA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. D E C I S I O N NARVASA, J.: The familiar maxim, “ res   inter   alios   acta  alteri nocere non debet” (“things done between strangers ought not to injure those who are not parties to them”) [1]  embodied in Section 25, [2]  Rule 130 of the Rules of Court furnishes basis for the appellant's acquittal in the case at bar. On June 19, 1988, 82-year-old Alfredo Altamarino, Sr. was found dead inside the bedroom of his house located at corner Gardner and Regidor Streets, Barangay Sadsaran, Mauban, Quezon. His body, described as laid out in an “orderly” manner on his bed, bore eight (8) stab wounds, two of them in the neck and six in the chest. He also had a depressed fracture on the right portion of his head and a lacerated wound on his right eyebrow. 1  Dr. Victorino Q. Arana, then resident physician of the Mauba...
Read more

EN BANC G. R. No. 160188 June 21, 2007 ARISTOTEL VALENZUELA y NATIVIDAD, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and HON. COURT OF APPEALS NACHURA, respondents.

  We thus conclude that under the Revised Penal Code, there is no crime of frustrated theft. As petitioner has latched the success of his appeal on our acceptance of the Diño and Flores rulings, his petition must be denied, for we decline to adopt said rulings in our jurisdiction. That it has taken all these years for us to recognize that there can be no frustrated theft under the Revised Penal Code does not detract from the correctness of this conclusion. It will take considerable amendments to our Revised Penal Code in order that frustrated theft may be recognized. Our deference to Viada yields to the higher reverence for legislative intent.
Read more