XVIII. Rights of Persons under Custodial Investigation, Article III, Section 12

A. Miranda Doctrine

Case: Miranda v Arizona, `384 US 436 (1966)

B. Custodial Investigation

RA 7438 – Act Defining Certain Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or under Custodial Investigation, as well as Duties of the Arresting, Detaining, Arresting and Investigating Officers

Cases:
– People v Lugod, GR 136253, 21 Feb 2001
– People v Del Rosario, GR 127755, 14 Apr 1999 (“invitation”)

C. Administrative Investigations

Cases:
– Ladiana v People, GR 144293, 24 Dec 2002
– People v Espanola, (GR 119308, 18 Apr 1997)
-People v Judge Ayson, GR 85215, 7 Jul 1989

D. Ways of Identifying Suspects

1. Mug shot
2. Show-up
3. Line-up

CASE: People v Ganih, GR 185388, 16 Jun 2010

E. Right to Independent and Competent Counsel of Choice

Cases:
– People v Paris and Fernandez, GR 281130, 14 Feb 2018
– People v Malngan, GR, 170470, 26 Sep 2006
– People v Tomaquin, GR 133188, 23 Jul 2004
– People v Rapeza, GR 169431, 3 Apr 2007
– People v Ordono and Medina, GR132154, 29 Jun 2000

F. Extrajudicial Confessions

Cases:
– People v Andan, GR 116437, 3 Mar 1987 (Confession to Newsmen)
– People v Lauga, GR 186228, 15 Mar 2010 (Confession to civic watch groups)
– People v Gomez, GR 101817, 26 Mar 1997 (admission obtained abroad)
– People v Luvendino, GR L-69971, 3 Jul 1992 ( re-enactment)

G. Fruit of the poisonous tree

Cases:
-Ho Wai Pang v People, GR 176229, 19 Oct 2011 – the Court categorically ruled that “the infractions of the so-called Miranda rights render inadmissible ‘only the extrajudicial confession or admission made during custodial investigation.’ The admissibility of other evidence, provided they are relevant to the issue and [are] not otherwise excluded by law or rules, [are] not affected even if obtained or taken in the course of custodial investigation.”
– People vs. Wong Chuen Ming, GR 112801-11, 12 Apr 1996 –