Houses as well as killed the whole family of roberto

This preview shows page 81 - 83 out of 103 pages.

houses as well as killed the whole family of Roberto Separa, Sr. She was, therefore, already under custodial investigation and the rights guaranteed by Article III, Section 12 (1), of the Constitution should have already been observed or applied to her.” 137 Taking the teachings and spirit of Malngan further, the Court held in Lauga that Bantay Bayan See Rene B. Gorospe, “Beyond Stonehill : Extending the Exclusionary Rule to Uncounselled Media Confessions,” UST Law 134 Review , Vol. XLVIII (January-December 2004), at 131-190. () 236 SCRA 565 (1994) 135 475 SCRA 248 (2005) 136 In People v . Ulit , 423 SCRA 374 (2004), the Barangay chairman ordered the barangay tanods to “invite and bring” the accused 137 to the barangay hall, and thereafter asked the accused if he raped the complainant. The suspect admitted and executed a sworn statement to that effect. The Court said that the uncounselled sworn statement of the accused was considered admissible because he was not then under arrest nor under custodial investigation. “The exclusionary rule is premised on the presumption that the defendant is thrust into an unfamiliar atmosphere and runs through menacing police interrogation procedures where the potentiality for compulsion, physical and psychological, is forcefully apparent. As intended by the 1971 Constitutional Convention, this covers ‘investigation conducted by police authorities which will include investigations conducted by the municipal police, the PC and the NBI and such other police agencies in our government.’ The barangay chairman is not deemed a law enforcement officer for purposes of applying Section 12(1) and (3) of Article III of the Constitution. Under these circumstances, it cannot be successfully claimed that the appellant’s statement before the barangay chairman is inadmissible.” (Both Ulit and Samus were en banc decisions.) In People v. Tomaquin , 435 SCRA 23 (2004), the Court noted that a barangay captain “is called upon to enforce the law and ordinances in his barangay and ensure peace and order at all times.” As such, he could not be considered as an independent counsel for the purpose of assisting a suspect.
U.P. Bar Review 2013 R B G A Library Of Liberties vis-à-vis An Arsenal Of Arms R B G OROSPE C ONSTITUTIONAL L AW Notes, Updates and Teasers (Bar 2013) Page 82 of 103 members or voluntary barangay-based anti-crime or neighborhood watch groups should similarly be covered by the Miranda Doctrine . The Court observed that they are recognized by the local government units to perform functions relating to the preservation of peace and order at the barangay level. Thus, on the authority to conduct a custodial investigation, any inquiry they make has the color of a state-related function and objective insofar as the entitlement of a suspect to his constitutional rights provided for under Article III, Section 12 of the Constitution. Accordingly, any extrajudicial confession taken without a counsel is inadmissible in evidence.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture