460 People v. Galit DIGEST PDF

Constitutional Law II Case No.
460
EN BANC
[G.R. No. 51770. March 20, 1985.]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO GALIT,
defendant-appellant.
CONCEPCION, JR., J p:
TOPIC: RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION –
The Galit Rule
Principle: A long question followed by a monosyllabic answer does not satisfy the
requirements of the law that the accused be informed of his rights under the
Constitution and our laws. Instead there should be several short and clear
questions and every right explained in simple words in a dialect or language known
to the person under investigation.
"At the time a person is arrested, it shall be the duty of the arresting officer to
inform him of the reason for the arrest and he must be shown the warrant of arrest,
if any. He shall be informed of his constitutional rights to remain silent and to
counsel, and that any statement he might make could be used against him. The
person arrested shall have the right to communicate with his lawyer, a relative, or
anyone he chooses by the most expedient means — by telephone if possible — or
by letter or messenger. It shall be the responsibility of the arresting officer to see
to it that this is accomplished. No custodial investigation shall be conducted
unless it be in the presence of counsel engaged by the person arrested, by any
person on his behalf, or appointed by the court upon petition either of the detainee
himself or by anyone on his behalf. The right to counsel may be waived but the
waiver shall not be valid unless made with the assistance of counsel. Any
statement obtained in violation of the procedure herein laid down, whether
exculpatory or inculpatory, in whole or in part, shall be inadmissible in evidence."
FACTS: Mrs. Natividad Fernando was found dead in her bedroom as a result of 7 wounds
inflicted in her body. More than 2 weeks thereafter, the police authorities of Montalban
picked up defendant-appellant, Francisco Galit on suspicion of the murder on the
occasion of a robbery. When the case was referred to the NBI, NBI Agent Flores
conducted premilinary interview of the suspect who allegedly gave evasive answers to
his questons. The following day, Francisco Galit allegedly voluntarily executed a
“Salaysay” admitting his participation in the commission of the crime and implicating two
other persons as his companions. In reality, Gaite has been obtained and interrogated
almost continuously for 5 days, but to no avail as he consistently maintained innocence.
The investigating officers began to maul him and to torture him physically. Galit admitted
what the investigating officers wanted him to admit to the crime and he signed the
confession they prepared. Galit was charged with the Crime of Robbery with Homicide,
was found guilty with the sentence of death penalty. Hence, the automatic review.
Constitutional Law II Case No. 460
ISSUE: Whether or not a monosyllabic answer to a long question suffices as a

voluntary admission that may be used against the accused?
RULING: NO. A long question followed by a monosyllabic answer does not satisfy the
requirements of the law that the accused be informed of his rights under the Constitution
and our laws. Instead there should be several short and clear questions and every right
explained in simple words in a dialect or language known to the person under
investigation. Accused is from Samar and there is no showing that he understands
Tagalog. Moreover, at the time of his arrest, accused was not permitted to communicate
with his lawyer, a relative, or a friend. In fact, his sisters and other relatives did not know
that he had been brought to the NBI for investigation and it was only about two weeks
after he had executed the s ala y s a y that his relatives were allowed to visit him. His
statement does not even contain any waiver of right to counsel and yet during the
investigation he was not assisted by one. At the supposed reenactment, again accused
was not assisted by counsel of his choice. These constitute gross violations of his rights.
The alleged confession and the pictures of the supposed re-enactment are inadmissible
as evidence because they were obtained in a manner contrary to law.
Trial courts are cautioned to look carefully into the circumstances surrounding the taking
of any confession, especially where the prisoner claims having been maltreated into
giving one. Where there is any doubt as to the voluntariness, the same must be rejected
in toto.
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from should be, as it is hereby. SET ASIDE,
and another one entered ACQUITTING the accused Francisco Galit of the crime
charged. Let him be released from custody immediately unless held on other
charges. SO ORDERED.

460 People v. Galit DIGEST PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

460 People v. Galit DIGEST PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

460 People v. Galit DIGEST PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Constitutional Law II Case No.

ISSUE: Whether or not a monosyllabic answer to a long question suffices as a

You might also like