G.R. No. 100920 June 17, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NOLI SALCEDO @ “KA TONY,” GEMO IBAÑEZ @ “KA TITING,” BOLODOY CALDERON, JUANITO SUAL, JR., EDISON BANCULO, NONOY ESQUILONA, GIL RAPSING, JOSE FERNANDEZ, REYNALDO CORTEZ, NOE ALBAO, ELY RAPSING, PACO MANLAPAZ, DANILO LAURIO and NORIE HUELVA, accused, NOLI SALCEDO, EDISON BANCULO, JUAN SUAL, JR., and DANILO LAURIO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

An Information dated October 28, 1988, charged multiple accused, including appellants Noli Salcedo, Edison Banculo, Juanito Sual, Jr., and Danilo Laurio, with the murder of Honorio Aparejado on June 20, 1988, in Baleno, Masbate. The prosecution’s principal witness was Edwin Cortes, the victim’s brother-in-law, who testified that on the night of the incident, armed men led by Salcedo arrived at his house, hogtied him and the victim, led them to a creek, where Salcedo shot and hacked Aparejado, and his companions also hacked the victim, removed his liver and kneecap. Cortes claimed to have witnessed the incident due to a flashlight and the rising moon. The postmortem examination confirmed hack, gunshot, and incised wounds as the cause of death. Appellants Banculo, Sual, Jr., and Laurio gave extrajudicial confessions during police investigation conducted by P/Sgt. Jose Bajar. During cross-examination, Bajar admitted the three were not assisted by counsel when they signed their statements or waivers. The defense presented alibis and claimed the confessions were extracted through physical maltreatment and threats. Salcedo denied involvement, claiming he was in Manila working at the time. The trial court convicted Salcedo as principal and Banculo, Sual, Jr., and Laurio as accomplices, acquitting others.

ISSUE

The primary issue is the admissibility of the extrajudicial confessions of appellants Edison Banculo, Juanito Sual, Jr., and Danilo Laurio, which were obtained without the assistance of counsel and without a valid waiver of their rights during custodial investigation.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the extrajudicial confessions of appellants Banculo, Sual, Jr., and Laurio are inadmissible in evidence. The Court emphasized that a voluntary extrajudicial confession, even if truthful, is inadmissible if given without the assistance of counsel and without a valid waiver of such right. The investigating officer admitted that the appellants were not assisted by counsel during the investigation or when they signed their statements. Consequently, without these inadmissible confessions, the remaining evidence against these appellants is insufficient to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction of appellants Banculo, Sual, Jr., and Laurio was reversed, and they were acquitted. The Court affirmed the conviction of appellant Noli Salcedo as the principal, based on the positive identification by eyewitness Edwin Cortes, whose testimony was found credible and sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.