100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 13 - 14 out of 46 pages.
The accused's right to counsel attaches onlyfrom the time that adversary judicial proceedingsare taken against him. People v. Lamsing38.British Horace William Barker was slain insidehis house in Tuba, Benguet on the occasion of arobbery. Two household helpers of the victimsidentified Salvamante (a former houseboy of thevictims) and Maqueda as the robbers. MikeTabayan and his friend also saw the twoaccused a kilometer away from the house of thevictims that same morning, when the twoaccused asked them for directions. Maquedawas then arrested in Guinyangan, Quezon. Hewas taken to Calauag, Quezon where he signeda Sinumpaang Salaysay wherein he narrated hisparticipation in the crime. According to SPO3Molleno, he informed Maqueda of hisconstitutional rights before he signed suchdocument. Afterwards he was brought to theBenguet Provincial Jail. While he was underdetention, Maqueda filed a Motion to Grant Bail.He stated therein that "he is willing andvolunteering to be a State witness in the aboveentitled case, it appearing that he is the leastguilty among the accused in this case." Is theSinumpaan Salaysay admissible asevidence?Answer:No. The Sinumpaang Salaysay isinadmissible because it was in clear violation ofthe constitutional rights of the accused. First, hewas not informed of his right to remain silent andhis right to counsel. Second, he cannot becompelled to be a witness against himself. At thetime of the confession, the accused was alreadyfacing charges in court. He no longer had theright to remain silent and to counsel but he hadthe right to refuse to be a witness and not tohave any prejudice whatsoever result to him bysuch refusal. And yet, despite his knowing fullywell that a case had already been filed in court,he still confessed when he did not have to do so.People v. Maqueda39.In an information Tupaz and De jesus wascharged of crime of Robbery with Homicide. Cpl.Arnaldo Limpoco and Pfc. Reynaldo Zapatawere dispatched to a particular stall along SanAgustin St., Public Market. Pasig to look for acertain "Eddie" and another surnamed Tupaz inconnection with the death of Leonardo. Uponfinding the two, the police officers asked themwhether they had knowledge of the stabbingincident, to which they allegedly answered in theaffirmative. "Eddie," accused Edgardo de Jesus,then surrendered to the officers two bladedweapons: one ten-inch dagger and one eleven-inch stainless knife. "Eddie," and Tupaz, hereinappellant Carlos Tupaz, were brought by theofficers to police headquarters, where they wereturned over to Pat. Lorbes. The two were theninterrogated by Pat. Lorbes without theassistance of counsel. Pat. Lorbes fetched alawyer from CLAO, Atty. Oscar Saldivar, and inthe latter’s presence, reduced the statements ofthe two accused to writing. Both accused signedtheir respective statements. Whether or notthere was a violation of Accused constitutionalright to counsel?