People vs Guillen

GR No. 191756 Nov 25, 2013

Facts:
Jonas Guillen was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt for rape.
Around midnight, AAA was inside her room, playing cards, while waiting
for her common-law husband to arrive. Someone knocked on the door
and when AAA opened it, Guillen entered the room and poked a balisong
on her neck.

Appellant then turned off the lights and raped her. After, he left the
room. AAA immediately went out and sought help from her sister-in-law
who contacted the police. Since AAA was her neighbor, he was
immediately arrested. Appellant denied this and claimed he was drinking
in Quezon City. He surmised that AAA filed the charge against him
because of his prior altercation with her husband. The RTC and the CA
found Guillen guilty.
Guillen claims that his conviction is erroneous because the trial court
deemed his silence at the police station as an implied admission of guilt.
He also said that AAA’s testimony is insufficient to establish his guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. Her healed lacerations do not prove that he
indeed raped AAA.

Issues:

1. Whether or not his silence should not be used against him as he

was just exercising his right to remain silent. – YES
2. Whether or not trial court erred in convicting Guillen.--NO

HELD:

When appellant was brought to the police station, he was already a

suspect to the crime of rape. He was already under custodial
investigation.His silence should not be taken against him. This right
cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel and
any admission obtained in violation of this rule shall be inadmissible in
evidence.
 The trial court's Decision convicting appellant of rape was anchored
not solely on his silence and so-called implied admission. More
importantly, it was based on the testimony of "AAA" which, standing
alone, is sufficient to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Appellant failed to prove that it was physically impossible for him to be at
the crime scene when the crime was committed.

Failure of AAA to shout for help should not be taken against her
because people react differently to shocking situations. Just because she
failed to seek help does not mean this should be construed as consent. A
knife was posed at AAA’s neck, which is a threat of immediate danger to
her life.

Doctrine:
The silence of the accused should not be taken against him. This
right cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel
and any admission obtained in violation of this rule shall be inadmissible
in evidence.