Consti II case digest: Gamboa vs. Cruz

RIGHTS TO COUNSEL

FACTS:

Petitioner herein was arrested and was brought to the police station because of vagrancy. The next day, the petitioner and with other 5 detainees were ask to line up. The complainant, meanwhile, during the line up pointed to the petitioner herein as a suspect of robbery. After that, he was asked to sit in front of the complainant while the latter is being investigated. An information of robbery has been filed against the herein petitioner.

During the arraignment, the prosecution offered and presented its evidence. While on the other hand, the petitioner, with the assistance of his counsel, instead preparing for his evidence, file a Motion to Acquit or Demurrer of evidence. The petitioner filed this motion on the ground that the conduct of the line up, without notice, and in the absence of his counsel violated his constitutional right to counsel and to due process.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the petitioner’s right to counsel and to due process was violated during the line up.

HELD:

No. The Rights to counsel and to due process is protected by the constitution whether it be 1973 or 1987.

The right to counsel attaches upon the start of the investigation, or when the investigating officers tries to elicit or ask information from the accuse,even though the questions appeases to be innocent. At this point of stage, the assistance of the counsel is needed in order to avoid the pernicious practice of extorting false or coerced admissions or confessions from the lips fo the person undergoing interrogation, for the commission of an offense.

When the petitioner was asked to line up with other detainees, he was not asked any question nor to answer. The police line up is not wart of custodial inquest, hence the petitioner was not entitled to right to counsel.

Under the 1973 and 1987 Constitution, the right to counsel attaches at the start of the investigation against the respondent, and even before the adversary judicial proceedings against the accused begins.

While the court finds no real need to afford a suspect the services of counsel during a police line up, the moment there is a move to elicit admissions or confessions, even a plain information which may appear innocent or innocuous at the time, from said suspect, he should then and there be assisted by counsel, unless he waives the right, but the waiver shall be made in writing and in the presence of the counsel.