PEOPLE VS. MAHINAY
FACTS:
Respondent was charged
with the crime of rape with homicide in which he was convicted in the lower
court. The information provides
That on or about the 26th day of June 1995 in
Valenzuela, Metro Manila and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court
the above-named accused, by means of force and intimidation employed upon the
person of MARIA VICTORIA CHAN y CABALLERO, age 12 years old, did then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously lie with and have sexual intercourse with
said MARIA VICTORIA CHAN Y CABALLERO against her will and without her consent;
that on the occasion of said sexual assault, the above-named accused, choke and
strangle said MARIA VICTORIA CHAN Y CABALLERO as a result of which, said victim
died.
Contrary to law. 3
Respondent made an extra-judicial confession
during the custodial investigation which was then admitted as evidence against
him but he subsequently pleaded not guilty of the offense charged against him
and further contended that when he was apprehended, he heard the police
officer's plan to salvage him if he would not admit that he was the one who
raped and killed the victim. Scared, he executed an extra-judicial confession.
He claimed that he was assisted by Atty. Restituto Viernes only when he was
forced to sign the extra-judicial confession but evidence proved otherwise.
HELD:
Lastly, considering the heavy penalty of death and in
order to ensure that the evidence against an accused were obtained through
lawful means, the Court, as guardian of the rights of the people lays down the
procedure, guidelines and duties which the arresting, detaining, inviting, or
investigating officer or his companions must do and observe at the time of
making an arrest and again at and during the time of the custodial
interrogation 40 in accordance with the Constitution,
jurisprudence and Republic Act No. 7438: 41 It is high-time to educate our
law-enforcement agencies who neglect either by ignorance or indifference the
so-called Miranda rights which had become insufficient and which the Court must
update in the light of new legal developments:
1. The person arrested, detained, invited or under
custodial investigation must be informed
in a language known to and understood by him of the reason for the arrest
and he must be shown the warrant of arrest, if any; Every other warnings,
information or communication must be in a language known to and understood by
said person;
2. He must be warned
that he has a right to remain silent and that any statement he makes may be used as evidence against him;
3. He must be informed that he has the right to be assisted at all times and
have the presence of an independent and competent lawyer, preferably of his own
choice;
4. He must be informed that if he has no lawyer or cannot afford the services of a lawyer, one
will be provided for him; and that a lawyer may also be engaged by any
person in his behalf, or may be appointed by the court upon petition of the
person arrested or one acting in his behalf;
5. That whether or not the person arrested has a
lawyer, he must be informed that no
custodial investigation in any form shall be conducted except in the presence
of his counsel or after a valid waiver has been made;
6. The person arrested must be informed that, at any time, he has the right to
communicate or confer by the most expedient means - telephone, radio,
letter or messenger - with his lawyer (either retained or appointed), any member of his immediate family, or
any medical doctor, priest or minister chosen by him or by any one from his
immediate family or by his counsel, or be visited by/confer with duly
accredited national or international non-government organization. It
shall be the responsibility of the officer to ensure that this is accomplished;
7. He must be informed that he has the right to waive any of said rights
provided it is made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently and ensure that he
understood the same;
8. In addition, if the person arrested waives his right to a lawyer, he must be informed
that it must be done in writing AND in the presence of counsel, otherwise, he
must be warned that the waiver is void even if he insist on his waiver
and chooses to speak;
9. That the person arrested must be informed that he may indicate in any manner at any time or stage of
the process that he does not wish to be questioned with warning that once he
makes such indication, the police may not interrogate him if the same had not
yet commenced, or the interrogation must ceased if it has already begun;
10. The person arrested must be informed that his initial waiver of his right to remain silent, the
right to counsel or any of his rights does not bar him from invoking it at any
time during the process, regardless of whether he may have answered
some questions or volunteered some statements;
11. He must also be informed that any statement or evidence, as the case may be, obtained
in violation of any of the foregoing, whether inculpatory or exculpatory, in
whole or in part, shall be inadmissible in evidence.