You are on page 1of 1

PEOPLE vs.

PERALTA

Facts:
Appellant was convicted of the crime of Qualified Theft for stealing
& carrying punctured currency notes due for shredding belonging to
the Central Bank. During arraignment, appellants, assisted by their
respective counsels, pleaded not guilty.

Accdg to the prosecution, while he was waiting for the bus on his
way to BSP, he was arrested & brought to the Police Station for
Investigation. For 3 days, while in the custody of the police, he gave
3 separate statements admitting his guilt & participation in the
crime charged. The defense has an exact opposite detail of the
arrest.

During the hearing, Atty. Sanchez manifested that he did not assist
appellant & that he only signed the 3 statements as a witness.

Issue: W/N such affidavits can be admitted as evidence against the
appellants?

Held: NO!
It is clear that the 3 extrajudicial confessions was not made w/ the
assistance of Atty. Sanchez. The signature of the latter was affixed
only as a witness. A waiver in writing, like that which the trial court
relied upon in the present case, is not enough. w/o the assistance of
counsel, the waiver has no evidentiary relevance.

Without the extrajudicial confession & the perforated currency
notes, the remaining evidence would be utterly inadequate to
overturn the constitutional presumption of innocence. Therefore,
the appellants are ordered acquitted & released immediately.