Title
People vs. Poyos
Case
G.R. No. L-63861
Decision Date
Aug 19, 1986
Florencio Poyos acquitted of murder as Supreme Court ruled his extrajudicial confession inadmissible due to coercion, lack of valid waiver of rights, and insufficient evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-63861)

Charges and Initial Findings

Florencio Poyos was found guilty of murder, with aggravating circumstances including treachery and evident premeditation, and was ultimately sentenced to death. The cause of death was originally certified to be a cerebral hemorrhage, but the actual cause of death was clarified later through an autopsy that revealed a contusion compatible with severe hemorrhage.

The Extrajudicial Confession

The case primarily hinged on an extrajudicial confession made by Florencio Poyos, which was taken following an investigation by police officer Pat. Ranulfo Tabudlong. The confession was signed before Clerk of Court Maria Cleofe L. Clarin, who testified that it was signed voluntarily. However, Poyos later repudiated the confession, claiming coercion and alleging additions were made to his statement.

Defense Testimony

Florencio Poyos testified that he did not commit the crime and linked his visit to Paula Angoy's residence to helping after she had already died. He refuted that he had made a confession regarding the circumstances of her death and stressed that it was extracted under duress, stating he was afraid of police threats during the interrogation process.

Prosecution's Argument

The prosecution maintained that the confession was valid, arguing it satisfied constitutional requirements and that Poyos had waived his right to counsel before his interrogation. They claimed that he was informed of his rights and voluntarily agreed to continue without an attorney.

Legal Framework and Constitutional Rights

The admissibility of the extrajudicial confession was evaluated under Article IV, Section 20, of the 1973 Constitution, which protects individuals from self-incrimination and mandates their right to counsel during custodial investigation. The decision referenced various U.S. Supreme Court precedents aimed at safeguarding these rights against police coercion.

Examination of Waiver of Counsel

The court scrutinized whether the waiver of the right to counsel was valid. The questioning phrased to evoke consent indicated a potential lack of clarity, particularly as the waiver was conditioned on the absence of a lawyer "for the moment," questioning its permanence.

Flaws in the Confession

In addition to the absence of counsel during the interrogation, the court noted inconsistencies in the confession, which raised suspicions about its validity. The language used in the confession contradicted Florencio Poyos' educational background, suggesting that it may have been prepared by the police rather than originating from him.

Conduct Foll

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.