People vs.

Enojas
Case Summary and Outcome

The Philippines Supreme Court found that text messages can be admitted into evidence
for purposes of prosecution if the prosecution can show that the person testifying about
the text messages had actual knowledge of the text messages. In this case, a police
officer posing as an accused had first hand knowledge of the text messages he was
sending and receiving, and therefore, the messages were admissible.

Facts:
The defendant, taxi driver Enojas, was stopped by police while parked suspiciously in
front of a glass shop. Enojas provided the police with identification that the officers
suspected to be fake. The officers then asked Enojas to accompany them to the police
station. Enojas agreed.
On the way, the officers stopped at a 7/11 to use the restroom. The officer who went
into the store apprehended two robbers, one of whom shot and killed the officer. The
other officer got out of the car upon hearing the gunshots. Returning to the police car,
he found that Enojas had fled the scene. Later, the police searched his abandoned taxi
car and found Enojas phone. They monitored the messages on the phone and
communicated with the other suspects, resulting in an entrapment operation.
Enojas, along with several other defendants, was charged with murder in 2006 before
the Las Pifias Regional Trial Court. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal and
affirmed the conviction. The accused then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Overview:
The defense argued that the prosecution failed to provide direct evidence that the
accused shot the victim. The Court ruled that circumstantial evidence can be sufficient
to convict if: 1) there is more than one circumstance; 2) the facts from which the
inferences are derived are proven; and 3) the combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court found that the
evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to provide a basis for conviction of
the accused. The Court, however, disagreed with the Court of Appeals, which
found that the aggravating circumstances of a) aid of armed men and b) use of
unlicensed firearms made the killing of the police officer a murder. Rather, the
Supreme Court found that the accused could only be found liable for homicide.
The Court found that the text messages were properly admissible because the police
officer, posing as Enojas, had personal knowledge of the messages and was competent
to testify about them. Further, the accused argued that they were arrested without a
valid warrant. The court found that even if this were the case, it is not grounds for
reversing a conviction. Thus, the Court lowered the crime to that of homicide and
lessened Enojas sentence to 12 years in prison.