Mr. Brown, a cigarette vendor, was invited by PO1 White to a nearby police station. Upon arriving at the police station, Brown was asked to stand side-by-side with five (5) other cigarette vendors in a police line-up. PO1 White informed them that they were looking for a certain cigarette vendor who snatched the purse of a passer-by and the line-up was to allow the victim to point at the vendor who snatched her purse. No questions were to be asked from the vendors.
Brown, afraid of a “set up” against him, demanded that he be allowed to secure his lawyer and for him to be present during the police line-up. Is Brown entitled to counsel? Explain (5%)
Would the answer in (a.) be the same if Brown was specifically invited by White because an eyewitness to the crime identified him as the perpetrator? Explain. (3%)
Briefly enumerate the so-called “Miranda Rights”. (2%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
(a) No, Brown is not entitled to counsel, but (b) the answer changes if he was specifically invited as a suspect.
Under Section 12(1), Article III of the Constitution, Gamboa vs Cruz, and RA 7438, a general line-up without interrogation is not custodial investigation and requires no counsel. But inviting a targeted suspect commences custodial investigation, entitling him to counsel. The Miranda rights are: (1) right to remain silent; (2) right to counsel; (3) warning that statements may be used as evidence; and (4) right to appointed counsel if indigent.
Here, a general line-up is not custodial investigation, but inviting Brown as an identified suspect triggers custodial investigation under RA 7438.
Therefore, Brown is initially not entitled to counsel, but becomes entitled when specifically invited as a suspect.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under Gamboa v. Cruz, when does the constitutional right to counsel attach during police proceedings?
The right to counsel attaches only when the police investigation focuses on a specific suspect under custodial interrogation.
Why is a participant in a general police line-up prior to custodial investigation not entitled to counsel?
A general police line-up without interrogation does not constitute custodial investigation where the right to counsel applies.
Under Republic Act No. 7438, what is the legal effect of police specifically inviting an identified suspect to the police station?
Under RA 7438, inviting a targeted suspect for questioning or identification marks the start of custodial investigation.
Which of the following is NOT one of the core constitutional Miranda Rights under Article III, Section 12?
Trial by jury is not a constitutional right under the Philippine Constitution or the Miranda doctrine.
What condition must be met for a waiver of the right to counsel during custodial investigation to be constitutionally valid?
Section 12(1), Article III requires any waiver of rights to be in writing and executed in the presence of counsel.
Learn more about these topics
1. Police Line-up Scope
Under Gamboa v. Cruz and settled jurisprudence, a general police line-up conducted before an investigation focuses on a specific suspect is not part of custodial investigation. During a general line-up where participants are not subjected to interrogation or questioned regarding a crime, the constitutional right to counsel under Section 12(1), Article III of the 1987 Constitution does not attach. The right to counsel guarantees assistance against compulsory self-incrimination during custodial interrogation, not during mechanical physical identification processes conducted prior to custodial investigation.
2. Custodial Investigation Commencement
Under Republic Act No. 7438 and constitutional doctrines, custodial investigation commences as soon as the police investigation ceases to be a general inquiry and begins to focus on a particular suspect. When police specifically invite an identified suspect for questioning or identification, custodial investigation formally begins. Any invitation by a law enforcement officer to a targeted suspect is deemed a custodial interrogation under RA 7438, immediately entitling the suspect to the full bundle of constitutional rights, including competent and independent counsel.
3. Miranda Rights Enumeration
Section 12(1), Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution guarantees the essential safeguards known as Miranda Rights to any person under custodial investigation. These constitutional rights explicitly include: (1) the right to remain silent; (2) the right to have competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice; (3) the right to be informed of these rights and warned that any statement made may be used against him; and (4) the right to be provided with counsel if he cannot afford one.