G.R. No. 1647 : April 11, 1905

FACTS:
Adaucto Ocampo was convicted by the trial court for the crime of robbery and sentenced to six years of imprisonment. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the testimonies of three individuals who were self-confessed accomplices in the same crime. During the trial, the defense counsel objected to this evidence, arguing that it was incompetent and should not have been considered by the court in reaching its verdict.

ISSUE:
Whether the testimony of self-confessed accomplices is admissible and competent evidence for convicting an accused person.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.

The Court held that while the testimony of accomplices is inherently suspect and must be received with great caution, subjected to close scrutiny, and examined with doubt due to its origin from a “polluted source,” it is nevertheless admissible and competent evidence under Section 55 of General Orders, No. 58 (the then-existing procedural rules on criminal procedure).

The Court justified this rule on grounds of public policy and necessity. It reasoned that without information from those implicated in a crime, it would be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to detect and prosecute conspiracies and many serious offenses. The Court found that the evidence presented at the trial, including the testimonies of the accomplices, fully established the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. Finding no prejudicial error, the Supreme Court affirmed the sentence of the lower court.