Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Group 1

    Uploaded by

    Jhon Paul V. Baruela
    15 views7 pages

    Original Title

    GROUP-1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    15 views7 pages

    Group 1

    Uploaded by

    Jhon Paul V. Baruela

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 7

    GROUP

    1
    REPORT
    TOPIC: Extra Judicial Confession versus Extra
    Judicial Admission and the Legal Requirements,
    Judicial versus Extra Judicial Admission and
    Confession

    MEMBERS:
    Baruela Jhon Paul V.
    Baroña John Louie R.
    Bañez Nelie Jane B.
    Babila Regine C.
    Balaoro Iran P.
    Barbosa Princess Gem N.
    Baula Leina Mae
    ADMISSION AND CONFESSION

    Underlying Principle:

    1. Confession and Admission reduces the burden of proof of other party.


    2. None makes a false statement against he’s own interests.
    3. An Admission or Confession made is a good piece of evidence against the
    maker.

    EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION
    An extra-judicial confession is a declaration made voluntarily and
    without compulsion or inducement by a person under custodial investigation,
    stating or acknowledging that he had committed or participated in the
    commission of a crime. In order that an extra-judicial confession may be
    admitted in evidence, Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution
    mandates that the following safeguards be observed:

    Section 12:
    (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have
    the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have
    competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot
    afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be
    waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

    (2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which
    vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places,
    solitary, incommunicado, or other forms of detention are prohibited.

    (3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 shall


    be inadmissible in evidence against him.

    Thus, we have held that an extra-judicial confession is admissible in evidence if


    the following requisites have been satisfied:
    (1) it must be voluntary;
    (2) it must be made with the assistance of competent and independent counsel;
    (3) it must be express; and
    (4) it must be in writing.

    Extrajudicial confessions are universally recognized as admissible in


    evidence against an accused provided they are voluntarily made and
    corroborated by evidence of the actual commission of the crime. Section 3, Rule
    133 of our Rules of Court provide, “An extrajudicial confession made by an accused
    shall not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless corroborated by evidence of corpus
    delicti.” In law, corpus delicti means the fact of the commission of the crime.
    In the crime of murder, the fact of death of the person killed must be established by
    credible evidence.

    TYPES OF EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION:


    1. Voluntary Extra-Judicial Confession- The confession is voluntary when the
    accused speaks of free will and accord, without inducement of any kind, with full
    and complete knowledge of the nature and consequence of the confession.
    2. Involuntary Extra-Judicial Confession- The confession obtained through force,
    threat, intimidation, duress or anything influencing the voluntary act of the
    confessor.

    NOTE: Confession obtained from the defendant by means of force or


    intimidation/violence is null and void, and cannot be used against him/her during the
    trial. (Doctrine of Poisonous Tree)

    EXTRA-JUDICIAL ADMISSION
    It is a statement made by a person, outside of court proceedings, voluntary and
    without coercion, to someone other than judicial authority. It’s not necessarily a
    confession of guilt but can be a statement that implies involvement or knowledge of the
    crime.

    For an Extrajudicial Admission to be admissible, it must satisfy the following


    requirements;
    1. The declarant must be a party to the litigation or someone authorized to speak on
    behalf of the party.
    2. The statement must be relevant to the subject matter of litigation.
    3. The statement must be made voluntarily and without coercion.
    4. The statement is made in a manner that is reasonably calculated to be
    understood by the person to whom it is made.

    EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION VERSUS EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSION

    Extra Judicial Confession:

    a. Refers to a statement or acknowledgement made by a person outside the court


    or judicial proceedings, which may or may not be self-incriminating.
    b. It can encompass a broader range of statements or acknowledgements,
    including those that are not necessarily related to the commission of the crime. It
    can be a statement of fact or an acknowledgement of a particular circumstance.

    c. It can be admissible as evidence in court, depending on its relevance and


    credibility. The court will assess its probative value and consider other
    corroborating evidence, if any, to determine its weight.

    Extra Judicial Admission:

    a. Refers to the statement made by a person outside the court or judicial


    proceedings, typically to the police or other authorities. Refers to a statement or
    acknowledgement made by a person outside the court or judicial proceedings,
    which may or may not be self-incriminating.

    b. A self-incriminating statement in which the person admits to the commission of a


    crime. It is an explicit acknowledgement of guilt made outside the formal setting
    of a court proceeding. It can encompass a broader range of statements or
    acknowledgements, including those that are not necessarily related to the
    commission of the crime. It can be a statement of fact or an acknowledgement of
    a particular circumstance.

    c. Can be admissible as evidence in court if it meets the requirements/requisites.


    The court will evaluate its credibility and reliability based on the circumstances
    surrounding its making. It can be admissible as evidence in court, depending on
    its relevance and credibility. The court will assess its probative value and
    consider other corroborating evidence, if any, to determine its weight.

    JUDICIAL CONFESSION
    A confession made by a defendant in criminal case before a court of law. It is
    considered the most reliable form of evidence against a defendant and is often used to
    secure a conviction.

    Requisites:
    1. That the confession must be voluntary it was given freely, knowingly and
    intelligently.
    2. The accused gave the confession of his own free will, with full understanding and
    knowledge of its consequences and that he was not coerced, pressured, forced,
    intimidated or improperly influenced, or subjected to third degree.
    3. The accused have the assistance of competent counsel during the confession.
    4. The confession must be made before a magistrate or in court during judicial
    proceeding.
    5. In the event the confession was due to an inducement, consideration, promise or
    exhortation.

    JUDICIAL CONFESSION VERSUS EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION

    1. Judicial confession is made before a court in which the case is pending and in the
    course of legal proceedings therein. Extrajudicial confession is made in any other
    place or occasion.

    2. Judicial confession, by itself, can sustain a conviction. Extrajudicial


    confession cannot sustain a conviction unless corroborated by evidence of the corpus
    delicti.

    3. A judicial confession is admissible against the declarant's co-accused since the latter
    are afforded opportunity to cross-examine the former. An extrajudicial confession may
    be given in evidence against the confessant but not against his co-accused as they are
    deprived of the opportunity to cross-examine him.

    JUDICIAL ADMISSION
    A judicial admission is an admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the
    course of the proceedings in the same case, which dispenses with the need for proof
    with respect to the matter or fact admitted.

    Requisites for judicial admission:


    1. Made by a party
    2. In the course of the proceedings
    3. In the same case

    Different forms of judicial admission:


    1. Verbal–Verbal waiver of proof made in open court, a withdrawal of contention, or
    disclosure made before the court, or admission made by witness in his testimony
    or deposition;
    2. Writing– Pleading, bill of particulars, stipulation of facts, request for admission, or
    a judicial admission contained in an affidavit used in the case
    (31 C.J.S 1069; Programme Inc. v. Province of Bataan, GR No. 144635, June 26, 2006)

    Judicial admissions may be made in:


    1. The pleadings filed by the parties;
    2. The course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations,
    including depositions, written interrogatories and requests for admissions; or
    3. Other stages of the judicial proceedings, as in pre-trial (Binarao vs. Plus Builders,
    Inc., 491 SCRA 49

    What are the effects of judicial admission?

    ● A judicial admission may not be contradicted by the party making it. As the party
    making such judicial admission is bound by it, he is deemed in estoppel. Therefore, a
    party making an admission cannot during the trial deny what has been earlier admitted
    nor present evidence which will run counter against the admission.

    ● An admission in a pleading on which a party goes to trial is conclusive against him


    unless the court allows the pleader to withdraw, explain or modify it if it appears to have
    been made by improvidence or mistake or that no such admission was made.

    How may judicial admission be contradicted?

    The admission may be contradicted only by showing that:


    It was made through palpable mistake or
    No such admission was made

    How judicial admissions are made


    Verbally or in writing
    Expressly or impliedly

    ● Judicial admissions may be verbal or those verbally made in the course of the trial or
    they may be written, such as those stated in a pleading. They may be express or
    implied, implied admissions by a defendant of material facts alleged in a complaint
    include:
    Keeping silent on such material facts,
    Denying such material facts without setting forth the matters upon which he relies to
    support his denial, and
    Asserting lack of knowledge or information of the truth of the material allegations when
    the same is plainly and necessarily within the knowledge of defendant.

    NOTE:
    Judicial admissions are conclusive and no evidence is required to prove the same
    (Solivio vs. CA, 182 SCRA 119)

    Remedy of party who made a judicial admission:


    1. Written admission– File a motion to withdraw such pleading, or any other written
    instrument containing such admission.
    2. Oral admission– The counsel may move for the exclusion of such admission

    JUDICAL ADMISSION VS EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSION

    Judicial Admission:
    A judicial admission conclusively binds the party making it, he cannot thereafter take a
    position contradictory to, or inconsistent with his pleadings. Acts or facts admitted do not
    require proof and cannot be contradicted unless it is shown that the admission was
    made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made (Cahilig v. Hon.
    Terencio [2010]).

    Extra Judicial Admission:


    The extrajudicial admission of one accused is admissible only against said accused, but
    is inadmissible against the other accused. But if the declarant or admitter repeats in
    court his extrajudicial admission, during the trial and the other accused is accorded the
    opportunity to cross-examine the admitter, the admission is admissible against both
    accused because then it is transposed into a judicial admission (Enriquez v.
    Sandiganbayan [2012])

    You might also like