Practice question
Police issue an invitation to an adult whom they investigate as a suspect in an offense. The ensuing questioning is stipulated to be custodial investigation. After being told that counsel would delay his release, the suspect signs a waiver before only his nonlawyer older sister. No lawyer advises him or is present. Investigators rely on the invitation label and the sister's signature. Which conclusion is correct?
- The waiver is valid because invitations are categorically outside RA 7438
- The waiver is valid because any older relative substitutes for counsel in making the waiver
- The asserted waiver fails: the label does not remove the stipulated custodial setting, and a relative does not replace counsel for waiver
- The waiver is valid because every adult can waive orally or without counsel
- The waiver automatically validates every later confession regardless of other requirements
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 12(1) and (3), custodial rights and waiver: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/3/353
- Republic Act No. 7438, Sections 2 and 3, rights and counseled written waivers: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1992/ra_7438_1992.html
- People v. Mahinay, G.R. No. 122485, February 1, 1999, main decision, meaningful warnings and written waiver in counsel's presence: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1999/feb1999/gr_122485_1999.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.