MURAO, JOSE PEPITO III

I. Article III Section 12, Confession Without Counsel:

People v. Bokingco G.R. No. 187536

Facts:
On February 29, 2000 the accused Michael Bokingco and Reynante Col are alleged to have conspired to
kill their employer Noli Pasion. Victim Noli Pasion was the owner of a pawnshop in Angeles City, which
was connected to an apartment complex that had 6 units and other units being constructed at the time of his
death. Herein appellants stayed in Apartment no. 3 as they were construction workers employed by Pasion.
From the testimonies of Pasion’s wife Elsa and his brother-in-law Dante Vitalicio, on February 29, 2000 at
around 1:00 am, they heard a commotion that ensued in Apartment No.3.
According to Vitalicio, upon going to the aforementioned unit, he saw Bokingco hitting something on the
floor and when Bokingco saw him, he was then attacked by Bokingco with a hammer. Bokingco chased
Vitalicio only to be subdued by a co-worker. Meanwhile, Elsa testified that she heard banging sounds and
her husband’s moans that prompted her to go to Apartment No. 3. However, Reynante Col who allegedly
sprayed her eyes with tear gas prevented her and poked her neck with something sharp. Reynante Col then
proceeded to drag her to open the vault of the pawnshop but before reaching it, Bokingco told Col, “tara,
patay na siya”, and the herein accused ran away with Bokingco. Vitalicio and Elsa then saw Noli Pasion in
a pool of his own blood at Apartment No.3.
For his defense, Bokingco said he was sleeping at Apartment No.3 when he was awakened by a drunk
Pasion who questioned why he did not report for work with the later hitting him in the head upon his reply
that he merely stayed at the apartment the whole day. Enraged, Bokingco took a hammer and hit Pasion
repeatedly and he escaped for Manila. For Col’s part, he admitted that he was an employee of Pasion but
that he had resigned earlier that month and was staying in Cainta.
It is important to note that upon arraignment, Bokingco entered a guilty plea while Col pleaded not guilty.
Bokingco also confessed to the crime during pre-trial.
The Regional Trial Court found Col and Bokingco in conspiracy to commit the crime of Murder. With the
Court of Appeals affirming such decision only modifying the penalty of death to reclusion perpetua as the
death penalty was suspended.
Issue:
W/N the Regional Trial Court and Court of Appeals erred in holding Col equally guilty?
Held:
YES. In Bokingco’s extrajudicial confession during preliminary investigation, he admitted that he and Col
planned the murder of Pasion but in his in-court testimony, he only said that he was provoked by Pasion
that is why he attacked the latter. Although Bokingco admitted that he killed Pasion and the same is
supported by circumstantial evidence, Col’s liability is hinged upon Bokingco’s uncounselled extrajudicial
confession. As such, the same should not be admissible in court since the right to counsel during said
investigations are mandatory. Aside from Bokingco’s inadmissible confession, only Elsa’s testimony is
incriminating on the part of Col. However, Elsa offered no proof of Col’s involvement in the murder aside
from Bokingco’s statement for him and Col to leave. This does not prove conspiracy for murder and at
most, what the evidence prove is that Col merely attempted to rob the pawnshop during the scuffle.
Bokingco is declared GUILTY for murder while Col is ACQUITTED.