Juan Ponce Enrile vs.

Sandiganbayan, and People of the Philippines,

G.R. No. 213847 July 12, 2016
FACTS:
On June 5, 2014, the Office of the Ombudsman charged Enrile and
several others with plunder in the Sandiganbayan on the basis of their
purported involvement in the diversion and misuse of appropriations under
the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).
Enrile filed an Omnibus Motion and Supplemental Opposition, praying,
among others, that he be allowed to post bail should probable cause be
found against him. The Sandiganbayan issued a resolution denying Enriles
motion, particularly on the matter of bail, on the ground of its prematurity
considering that Enrile had not yet then voluntarily surrendered or been
placed under the custody of law. Accordingly, the Sandiganbayan ordered
the arrest of Enrile.
On the same day that the warrant for his arrest was issued, Enrile
voluntarily surrendered to Director Benjamin Magalong of the Criminal
Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) in Camp Crame, Quezon City, and
was later on confined at the Philippine National Police (PNP) General Hospital
following his medical examination.10 Thereafter, Enrile filed his Motion for
Detention at the PNP General Hospital ,11 and his Motion to Fix Bail , both
dated July 7, 2014, which were heard by the Sandiganbayan on July 8, 2014.
In support of the motions, Enrile argued that he should be allowed to post
bail because: (a) the Prosecution had not yet established that the evidence
of his guilt was strong; (b) although he was charged with plunder, the
penalty as to him would only be reclusion temporal, not reclusion perpetua ;
and (c) he was not a flight risk, and his age and physical condition must
further be seriously considered.
ISSUE:
HELD:

People of the Philippines vs. Rodrido Quitola y Balmonte, G.R. No.

200537 July 13, 2016
FACTS:
Balmonte was charged with special complex crime of Robbery with
Homicide. Balmonte was alleged to be armed with a bladed weapon and
robbed Maria Fe Valencia y Supan. By reason or on the occasion of the

robbery, accused allegedly stabbed the victim inflicting her multiple stab
wounds which resulted to her death.
While the accused was in his detention cell, he was interviewed by
Tacason, an ABS-CBN field reporter. In the interview, the accused admitted
that he was borrowing money from the victim but the latter refused to lend
him. When he was asked what happened next, he said, Hindi ko na alam
and sumunod na nangyari. Such interview was taped and aired. The
recorded interview forms part of the records of the case.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) admitted the extra-judicial confession
and held that the denial of the accused-appellant did not overcome the
overwhelming evidence of the prosecution. Thus, the RTC found the accused
guilty.
Accused elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) with a
contention that the interview was impelled by extreme fear because the
same was conducted by while the accused was in the detention cell and
while police officers were around. However, the CA affirmed the decision of
the RTC.
ISSUE:
Whether the interview conducted was admissible in evidence.
HELD: