To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: T. SUBJECT HEADS: WIVINO E. BRACERO II & HERAZEUS CHRISTINE Y. UY; MEMBERS: LAWRENCE PAULO H. AQUINO, LEANDRO RODEL V. ATIENZA, MARINETH EASTER AN D. AYOS, CARLO R. BALA, WILFREDO T. BONILLA, JR., KEEL ACHERNAR R. DINOY, APRIL V. ENRILE, KENNETH JAMES CARLO C. HIZON, JOSE MARIA G. MENDOZA, ROGER CHRISTOPHER R. REYES, ROMILINDA C. SIBAL, JASMIN M. SISON, ZARAH PATRICIA T. SUAREZ, RALPH JULIOUS L. VILLAMOR. BILL OF RIGHTS officer. In such case, the uncounselled confession did not violate the suspect’s constitutional rights. (People v Zuela, G.R. No 112177, January 28, 2000) Note: What the Constitution bars is the compulsory disclosure of the incriminating facts or confessions. The rights under Sec. 12 are guarantees to preclude the slightest use of coercion by the State, and not to prevent the suspect from freely and voluntarily telling the truth. (People v. Andan, G.R. No. 116437, Mar. 3, 1997) Q: Decide on the admissibility as evidence of confessions given to news reporters and/or media and videotaped confessions. A: Confessions given in response to a question by news reporters, not policemen, are admissible. Where the suspect gave spontaneous answers to a televised interview by several press reporters, his answers are deemed to be voluntary and are admissible. Videotaped confessions are admissible, where it is shown that the accused unburdened his guilt willingly, openly and publicly in the presence of the newsmen. Such confessions do not form part of confessions in custodial investigations as it was not given to police men but to media in attempt to solicit sympathy and forgiveness from the public. However, due to inherent danger of these videotaped confessions, they must be accepted with extreme caution. They should be presumed involuntary, as there may be connivance between the police and media men. (People v. Endino, G.R. No. 133026, Feb. 20, 2001) Q: What is the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine? A: This doctrine states that once the primary source (the tree) is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary or derivative evidence (the fruit) derived from it is also inadmissible. The ru...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/12/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online