PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.
BERNARDINO DOMANTAY, @
"JUNIOR OTOT," accused-appellant.
FACTS: Appellant, 29 years old, was charged with rape with homicide for the death of
Jennifer Domantay, a 6-year old girl whose body was found in a bamboo grove with 38
stab wounds at the back and whose hymen was completely lacerated on the right side,
though found fully clothed in blue shorts and white shirt. The trial court found appellant
guilty as charged and was sentenced to death. Conviction was based primarily on the
testimonies of SPO1 Espinoza and Celso Manuel, a radio reporter. SPO1 Espinoza
testified that appellant confessed to the killing of Jennifer and disclosed to him the
location of the bayonet used which was submitted as evidence for the prosecution.
According to him, appellant waived assistance of counsel but the waiver was not put in
writing nor made in the presence of counsel. On the other hand, Manuel declared that
appellant, in an interview, admitted the brutal killing of Jennifer; that he was just outside
the cell when he interviewed appellant accompanied by his uncle inside the jail, that the
nearest policemen were about 2-3 meters from him and that no lawyer assisted
appellant during the interview. Also presented as a witness was Dr. Bandonill,
medico-legal expert of the NBI, who testified that it was possible that the lacerations on
the victim could have been caused by something blunt other than the male organ.
ISSUE:
W/N the two confessions made before SPO1 Espinoza and Manuel which appellant
claimed to have been obtained from him were admissible.
HELD:
The right to counsel of a person under custodial investigation can be waived only in
writing and with assistance of counsel and that confessions or admissions obtained in
violation thereof are inadmissible in evidence. However, this prohibition does not apply
to confessions or admissions made to private individuals, such as radio reporters. For
an extrajudicial confession to be admissible, it must satisfy the following requirements:
(1) it must be voluntary; (2) it must be made with the assistance of competent and
independent counsel; (3) it must be express; and (4) it must be in writing. In the case at
bar, when accused-appellant was brought to the Malasiqui police station in the evening
of October 17, 1996, he was already a suspect, in fact the only one, in the brutal slaying
of Jennifer Domantay. He was, therefore, already under custodial investigation and the
rights guaranteed in Art. III, §12 (1) of the Constitution applied to him. But though he
waived the assistance of counsel, the waiver was neither put in writing nor made in the
presence of counsel. For this reason, the waiver is invalid and his confession is
inadmissible. SPO1 Espinoza's testimony on the alleged confession of the
accused-appellant should have been excluded by the trial court. So is the bayonet
inadmissible in evidence, being, as it were, the "fruit of the poisonous tree." However,
the SC agreed with the Solicitor General that accused-appellant's confession to the
radio reporter, Celso Manuel, is admissible. In People v. Andan, the accused in a rape
with homicide case confessed to the crime during interviews with the media. In holding
the confession admissible, despite the fact that the accused gave his answers without
the assistance of counsel, this Court said: [A]ppellant's
[oral] confessions to the newsmen are not covered by Section 12 (1) and (3) of Article III
of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights does not concern itself with the relation between a
private individual and another individual. It governs the relationship between the
individual and the State. The prohibitions therein are primarily addressed to the State
and its agents.
