CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION ( 2018)

Section 12, paragraphs 1 and 3, Article III (Bill of Rights) of the 1987 Constitution mandate that:

SEC. 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right
to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be
provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of
counsel.

(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free
will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar
forms of detention are prohibited.

(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be
inadmissible in evidence against him.

(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as
compensation to and rehabilita

The "investigation" in Section 12, paragraph 1, Article III of the 1987 Constitution pertains to
"custodial investigation."

CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION - involves any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers

after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in
any significant way.

"custodial investigation" shall include the practice of issuing an "invitation" to a person who is
investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without
prejudice to the liability of the "inviting" officer for any violation of law.

WHEN COMMENCES:
- Custodial investigation commences when a person is taken into custody and is
singled out as a suspect in the commission of a crime under investigation and the
police officers begin to ask questions on the suspect's participation therein and
which tend to elicit an admission.
- It is only after the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an unsolved crime
and begins to focus on a particular suspect, the suspect is taken into custody, and the
police carries out a process of interrogations that lends itself to eliciting
incriminating statements that the rule begins to operate.
- When the process has shifted from investigatory to accusatory; or from the time that
adversary judicial proceedings are taken against him.
WHEN CUSTODIAL RIGHTS BECOME RELEVANT:

-Any allegation of violation of rights during custodial investigation is relevant and material only
to cases in which an extrajudicial admission or confession extracted from the accused becomes
the basis of their conviction ( PP vs Lugnasin, 2-24-16)

- 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.

THE RIGHT TO BE APPRISED OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS:

The right to be informed of one's constitutional rights during custodial investigation refers to an
effective communication between the investigating officer and the suspected individual, with
the purpose of making the latter understand these rights. Understanding would mean that the
information transmitted was effectively received and comprehended. Hence, the Constitution
does not merely require the investigating officers to "inform" the person under investigation;
rather, it requires that the latter be "informed."

-- there should be several short and clear questions and every right explained in simple words in
a dialect or language known to the person under investigation instead of a long question
followed by a monosyllabic answer does not satisfy the requirements of the law that the
accused be informed of his rights under the Constitution and our laws.

RIGHT TO COUNSEL - the right to counsel refers to competent and independent lawyers
preferably chosen by the accused persons themselves.

-"[w]e have constitutionalized the right to counsel because of our hostility against the use of
duress and other undue influence in extracting confessions from a suspect. Force and fraud
tarnish confessions and render them inadmissible." This Court has consistently held, without
equivocation, that no custodial investigation shall be conducted unless it is done in the presence
of counsel. ( pp VS Muleta, 6—25-99, GR 130189)

-The right to counsel is a fundamental right and is intended to preclude the slightest coercion
that would lead the accused to admit something false. The right to counsel attaches upon the
start of the investigation, i.e., when the investigating officer starts to ask questions to elicit
information and/or confessions or admissions from the accused
WAIVER OF RIGHTS - The waiver, in order to be valid, should have been in a language that
clearly manifested his desire to do so

- Such waiver MUST show his understanding of his rights, his waiver of those rights, and the
implications of his waiver.

WHEN THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURES ON CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION DO NOT APPLY:

1) VOLUNTARY & SPONTANEOUS CONFESSION -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.

VOLUNTARY CONFESSION – spontaneous statement, not elicited through questioning by the

authorities but given in an ordinary manner whereby appellant orally admitted having
committed the crime.

- What the constitution bars is the compulsory disclosure of incriminating facts or

confessions, not to prevent one from freely and voluntarily telling the truth.

e.g. – appellant talked with the mayor as a confidant. ( PP v Andan, 336 Phil 91, 1997)

- accused uttered “ sinaksak kop o yung tatay ko! Napatay ko na po”, while holding a
knife to police officers standing outside the police station ( PP v Guting, 9-9-15)

2) IDENTIFICATION IN A POLICE LINE UP

- the right to counsel guaranteed in Art. III, § 12(1) of the Constitution does not extend to police
lineups because they are not part of custodial investigations. The reason for this is that at that
point, the process has not yet shifted from the investigatory to the accusatory. The accused's
right to counsel attaches only from the time that adversary judicial proceedings are taken
against him. ( PP vs Lamsing)

-It has been held, however, that the police line-up is not part of the custodial investigation,
where, as here, the suspects had not yet been held then to answer for the criminal offense with
which they were later charged and convicted. 21The Court has held that there is no real need to
afford a potential suspect the services of counsel at the police line-up, for the customary
practice is that it is the witness who is investigated or interrogated in the course of the line-up.
It is the witness who gives a statement to the police, rather than the accused who is not
questioned at all at that stage. ( PP vs Timple)

WHEN THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURES ON CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION APPLY:

 1) Extrajudicial confession

- confessions extracted without the assistance of counsel are taboo and useless in a court of
law.

-To be acceptable, extrajudicial confessions must conform to constitutional requirements. A

confession is not valid and not admissible in evidence when it is obtained in violation of any of
the following rights of persons under custodial investigation: to remain silent, to have
independent and competent counsel preferably of their own choice, to be provided with
counsel if they are unable to secure one, to be assisted by such counsel during the investigation,
to have such counsel present when they decide to waive these rights, and to be informed of all
these rights and of the fact that anything they say can and will be used against them in court.

- If the extrajudicial confession satisfies these constitutional standards, ( SEC 12, Art III) it is
subsequently tested for voluntariness, i.e., if it was given freely — without coercion,
intimidation, inducement, or false promises; and credibility, i.e., if it was consistent with the
normal experience of mankind.

A confession that meets all the foregoing requisites constitutes evidence of a high order
because no person of normal mind will knowingly and deliberately confess to be the
perpetrator of a crime unless prompted by truth and conscience. Otherwise, it is disregarded in
accordance with the cold objectivity of the exclusionary rule

2) . At the supposed reenactment, accused must be assisted by counsel of his choice.

Otherwise, the alleged confession and the pictures of the supposed re-enactment
are inadmissible as evidence because they were obtained in a manner contrary to
law

Custodial rts (RA 7438) - Inform the person Constitutional rts. ( sec 12, Art III) - Any person
A,D,UC, in a language known and understood under investigation for the commission of an
by him offense shall have :

1. his rt to remain silent 2. his right to remain silent

3. to have competent and independent 3. the right to be informed of and to have

counsel, preferably of his own choice, competent and independent counsel preferably of
who shall at all times be allowe to his own choice.
confer privately with him.

4. If such person cannot afford the 4. If the person cannot afford the services of
services of his own counsel, he must be counsel, he must be provided with one.
 provided with a competent and
independent counsel,

5. Any waiver of the provisions of Art. 125 6. These rights cannot be waived except in
of the RPC shall be in writing and writing and in the presence of counsel.
signed by such person in the presence
of his counsel, otherwise the waiver is
null and void.