PEOPLE VS ALBOFERA

152 SCRA 123

Facts: Albofera and Lawi-an were convicted in the RTC of Davao del Sur for the
murder of a forester and were sentenced to capital punishment. There was no
direct evidence linking both accused to the crime charged, their alleged
participation therein having been found by the trial court to have proved by
circumstantial evidence adduced by the prosecution. On appeal, the accused
assails the trial court’s decision on the ground of among others, a letter written
in the Visayan dialect by accused Albofera, while under detention, to witness
Rodrigo Esma, a friend of Albofera, asking Esma to testify in favor of Albofera.
Albofera contends that the admissibility thereof was specifically excluded
under Sec. 4, Art. IV of the 1973 Constitution on the Privacy of Communication
and Correspondence.

Issue: Whether or not the admission of such letter as evidence was valid.

Held: Yes, Albofera’s contention is untenable. The production of the letter by

the prosecution was not the result of an unlawful search and seizure nor was it
through unwarranted intrusion or invasion into Albofera’s privacy. Albofera
admitted having sent the letter to Esma, and Esma produced such letter in the
course of his testimony before the trial court. Besides, there was nothing really
self-incriminatory in the letter. Albofera mainly pleaded that Esma change his
declaration in his affidavit and testify in Albofera’s favor. Nothing Albofera
stated in this letter was taken against him in assiving at a determination of his
culpability.
(NOTE: The Supreme Court affirmed the judgement of conviction of the trial court
based on circumstantial evidence of which Esma’s testimony was much noted
for its worthiness, even if Albofera’s extra-judicial confession was disregarded
as invalid.)