Estacio vs. Sandiganbayan

A waiver of the rights to remain silent and to counsel made without counsel during custodial investigation is substantially complied with and the resulting extrajudicial confession is admissible where counsel arrives before the closing stage, reads the statement, confers with the accused, and the accused thereafter voluntarily signs, having had the opportunity to refuse. Conspiracy liability as co-principal likewise attaches where several accused perform distinct but concerted parts toward the same fraudulent object.

Jesus Estacio y Estrella served as janitor-messenger detailed at the Clearing Office of the Central Bank of the Philippines, while co-accused Manuel Valentino served as bookkeeper in the same clearing operations. Romero Villasanta presented himself as a construction businessman maintaining current accounts with Solid Bank, Lucena City Branch and Cubao Branch, and with Traders Royal Bank, Pasig Branch. Out-of-town checks coursed through the Central Bank Clearing House, with clearing completed within three working days absent objection, under Central Bank manifests and bank clearing statements transmitted to the regional clearing house.

On August 26, 1981, Romero Villasanta opened Current Account No. 37-574 with the Lucena City Branch of Solid Bank with an initial deposit of P1,500.00, representing himself as engaged in construction and receiving check books numbered 107301 to 107325. The next day he opened another current account with the Cubao Branch of Solid Bank, Current Account No. 115-02543-3, again as a businessman and owner of Romero Villasanta Construction at 14 P. Tuazon Blvd., Cubao, Quezon City, with an initial check deposit of P10,000.00 and cash of P10,020.00. On August 25, 1981, he had also opened Current Account No. 72-700934-6 with Traders Royal Bank, Pasig Branch, with an initial deposit of P2,000.00 and check books numbered 176931 to 177000.

On August 28, 1981, Villasanta deposited three checks totaling P653,485.70 with his Traders Royal Bank account, two of which were drawn against his Solid Bank Lucena account with only P1,500.00 balance, namely AA-37-107302 for P269,200.00 and AA-37-107304 for P379,285.70. The same day those checks were forwarded to the Central Bank Clearing House for standard clearing. At the Clearing House, Valentino, the bookkeeper, and Estacio, the janitor-messenger, awaited the demand envelope containing Villasanta's checks. Estacio took the envelope in his push cart to the comfort room on the fourth floor of the Central Bank Building, where Valentino and Villasanta joined him; Valentino pulled out the checks and gave them to Villasanta, then altered the attached bank clearing statement of Solid Bank, Lucena Branch by crossing out P628,564.00 under Amount Received opposite Traders Royal Bank and changing the total P992,723.99 to P344,238.29.

Valentino then prepared Central Bank Manifest Exh. H with the correct figure P992,723.99 opposite Consolidated Bank and Trust Company, obtained the signature of CB Chief of Division Alfonso Magsalin, and superimposed thereon P344,238.29 to make it appear as the only amount received for Solid Bank, Lucena Branch. The demand envelope with the altered Manifest and clearing statement was sent to the Regional Central Bank Clearing House at Lucena City, where official Adriano Valenzena noticed the alteration but considered it unremarkable because the balances in the two documents matched. Because no objection or refusal was received by Traders Royal Bank from Solid Bank, Lucena within the three-working-day clearing period, and understandably so as Solid Bank, Lucena received no checks, Traders Royal Bank treated the deposits as regular and credited Villasanta's account.

Thereafter Villasanta dissipated the proceeds through successive withdrawals. On September 4, 1981, he issued TRB Check No. 176954 for P500,000.00 payable to cash and deposited it with his Solid Bank Cubao account, leaving a Traders Royal Bank balance of P184,485.70 after the deduction. On September 7, 1981, he encashed TRB Check No. 176956 for P69,000.00 with Traders Royal Bank, Pasig, followed on September 8 by TRB Check No. 176958 for P84,500.00. His Solid Bank Cubao ledger showed P500,512.02 after the P500,000.00 deposit, from which he encashed Solid Bank Check No. 81230 for P4,500.00, No. 81231 for P420,000.00, and No. 81232 for P79,500.00, all dated September 8, 1981, leaving P1,012.04 as of that date. According to the prosecution, the syndicate thereby defrauded Solid Bank, Lucena City Branch and/or the Central Bank in the total amount of P648,564.70 by falsifying the August 28, 1981 Manifest and clearing statement.

The trial findings credited state witness Valentino's categorical testimony on the Ramada Hotel meeting among Salamanca, Villasanta, Valentino, and Estacio to plan the pilferage scheme and on Estacio's assigned role of bringing out the demand envelope, as well as his account of the August 28, 1981 execution at the fourth floor. Also credited was NBI Agent Salvador Ranin's testimony that Atty. Madarietta arrived before the closing stage of Estacio's interrogation, read the statement, and talked to Estacio before signing, with Estacio conditioning his signature on his lawyer's prior reading.

• Admissibility of Extrajudicial Confession: Petitioner argued that his extrajudicial statements dated May 4 and 5, 1982 (Exhs. E and E-1) are inadmissible because he was not properly informed of his constitutional rights, there was no valid waiver prior to taking the statements, and the statements were extracted through force and intimidation.
• Validity of Waiver Without Counsel: Petitioner maintained, relying heavily on People vs. Galit, that there was no valid waiver of the right to remain silent and to counsel because the waiver was not made with the assistance of counsel.
• Non-participation in Conspiracy: Petitioner argued that the prosecution evidence did not link him to the conspiracy.
• Degree of Liability: Petitioner asserted in the alternative that, if guilty at all, criminal liability should only be as accessory or accomplice.
• Voluntary Surrender: Petitioner asserted that the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender should be credited in his favor.

• Admissibility of Extrajudicial Confession: Whether petitioner's extrajudicial statements are admissible despite a waiver not made in the presence of counsel and a claim of force and intimidation.
• Conspiracy: Whether petitioner was part of the conspiracy to defraud through falsification of clearing documents.
• Degree of Liability: Whether petitioner's liability, if any, should only be as accessory or accomplice rather than as co-principal.
• Voluntary Surrender: Whether petitioner is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.

• Admissibility of Extrajudicial Confession: Yes. The defect was cured by substantial compliance when counsel arrived before signing, read the statement, and conferred with the accused, and voluntariness was shown by intimate details only a participant could know.
• Conspiracy: Yes. Presence at the planning meeting with defined roles plus execution of the assigned role established concerted action toward the same fraudulent object.
• Degree of Liability: No reduction. Liability as co-principal by conspiracy stands, the assigned and executed part having completed the common design, with sufficient evidence even without the confession.
• Voluntary Surrender: No. The requisites were absent where petitioner went to the NBI on February 16, 1982 upon a superior's instruction and not spontaneously to submit unconditionally.

• Admissibility of Extrajudicial Confession: The prevailing Morales vs. Ponce Enrile procedure reiterated in People vs. Galit requires warning of the rights to remain silent and to counsel, presence of counsel during custodial investigation, and a waiver valid only with assistance of counsel, under pain of inadmissibility. Although the initial waiver was not made in counsel's presence, substantial compliance occurred when Atty. Madarietta arrived before the closing stage, read the statement, and talked to Estacio, who conditioned signing on counsel's prior reading; had the waiver been involuntary or reconsidered, signing could have been refused and the unsigned statement reclaimed. Voluntariness was further confirmed because the confession narrated the mid-August 1981 Ramada Hotel meeting, Salamanca's burning of the paper naming Solid Bank, Lucena, and the August 21 and August 28, 1981 signals, push-cart movement, comfort-room interception, and lookout role — details only a participant could supply and partly exculpatory, negating duress under People vs. Tintero and related jurisprudence.
• Conspiracy: Conspiracy exists where several accused aim at the same object, each performing a part so as to complete it, their apparently independent acts constituting concerted action and concurrence of sentiments under People vs. Dalusag. Applied here, attendance at the Ramada Hotel where mechanics and individual roles were defined, combined with Estacio's retrieval of the demand envelope in his push cart, delivery to the fourth-floor comfort room, lookout function, and return of the envelope to the Lucena rack, unquestionably demonstrated conspiratorial design as corroborated by Valentino's direct testimony on assignment and execution.
• Degree of Liability: As a co-conspirator performing an indispensable part of the pilferage scheme — bringing out and returning the demand envelope to enable extraction of checks and alteration of the clearing statement and Manifest — liability as co-principal was properly imposed rather than as accessory or accomplice. Moreover, even disregarding the extrajudicial confession, Valentino's positive and categorical testimony on knowledge and participation sufficed to sustain culpability.
• Voluntary Surrender: The mitigating circumstance requires (a) no actual arrest, (b) surrender to a person in authority or agent thereof, and (c) spontaneity, under People vs. Hanasan and People vs. Canamo. None concurred where Estacio went to the NBI on February 16, 1982 in obedience to Central Bank Anti-Bank Fraud Unit officer-in-charge Atty. Agapito Fajardo, not spontaneously acknowledging guilt or seeking to save authorities the trouble of search, and not placing himself unconditionally at their disposal.

• Custodial investigation warnings and waiver — Upon arrest, the officer must inform the person of the reason, show the warrant if any, warn of the rights to remain silent and to counsel and that statements may be used against him, and ensure communication with counsel or relatives; no custodial investigation shall proceed except in counsel's presence, and waiver is valid only with counsel's assistance, otherwise the statement, exculpatory or inculpatory, in whole or in part, is inadmissible. Applied to admit Estacio's statement on substantial compliance through counsel's pre-signing arrival, reading, and conference.
• Substantial compliance curing defective waiver — A waiver initially taken without counsel may be cured where counsel arrives before the closing stage, reads the confession, confers with the accused, and the accused, free to refuse and reclaim the unsigned statement, still signs. Applied to hold Exh. E admissible.
• Voluntariness inferred from intimate details — Details in a confession knowable only to the declarant, especially narration explaining conduct or shifting blame and exculpatory portions, indicate voluntariness and render claims of duress incredible. Applied to reject force and intimidation, citing People vs. Tintero, People vs. Bautista, People vs. Limoso, People vs. Villa, People vs. Santalani, People vs. Nillos, and People vs. Balana.
• Conspiracy by concerted parts toward a common object — Conspiracy lies where several accused by acts aimed at the same object, one performing one part and another another so as to complete it, exhibit concerted action and concurrence of sentiments though acts appear independent. Applied to hold Estacio a co-principal for his defined and executed role in the pilferage and falsification scheme, citing People vs. Dalusag and People vs. Petenia.
• Voluntary surrender as mitigating circumstance — Appreciation requires that the offender has not been actually arrested, surrenders to a person in authority or agent thereof, and does so voluntarily and spontaneously to submit unconditionally. Applied to deny mitigation where appearance before the NBI was upon a superior's order rather than spontaneous acknowledgment of guilt, citing People vs. Hanasan and People vs. Canamo.

• "No custodial investigation shall be conducted unless it be in the presence of counsel engaged by the person arrested by any person in his behalf, or appointed by the court upon petition either of the detainee himself or by any one on his behalf. The right to counsel may be waived but the waiver shall not be valid unless made with the assistance of counsel. Any statement obtained in violation of the procedure herein laid down, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, in whole or in part shall be inadmissible in evidence." — States the controlling Morales vs. Ponce Enrile procedure reiterated in People v. Galit governing warnings, counsel presence, and waiver.
• "There is conspiracy where several accused by their acts aimed at the same object, one performing one part and another performing another part so as to complete it with view to the attainment of the same object, and their acts, though apparently independent are in fact concerted action and concurrence of petitioners." — Provides the canonical formulation of conspiracy applied to sustain co-principal liability.
• "May I manifest for the record that I was able to talk with Estacio before he signed this statement marked as Exhibit E, Your Honor." — Records counsel's pre-signing conference relied upon to find substantial compliance curing the initial absence of counsel.
• "With the foregoing as backdrop, We find it difficult to give credit to Estacio's assertion that his statement given to the NBI was taken under duress, compulsion, force or intimidation." — Expresses rejection of the coercion claim because the confession contained intimate operational details and exculpatory portions indicative of voluntariness.

• People vs. Galit, 135 SCRA 465 — Reiterated the Morales vs. Ponce Enrile custodial-investigation procedure; invoked by petitioner to void the waiver, then distinguished as substantially complied with by counsel's pre-signing intervention.
• Morales vs. Ponce Enrile — Source of the required warnings, counsel presence, and counsel-assisted waiver rule; laid down the procedure applied to test admissibility.
• People vs. Tintero, 111 SCRA 714 — Authority that intimate details knowable only to the declarant and exculpatory narration indicate voluntariness; relied upon to reject duress, with support from People vs. Bautista, People vs. Limoso, People vs. Villa, People vs. Santalani, People vs. Nillos, and People vs. Balana.
• People vs. Dalusag, 133 SCRA 15 — Controlling definition of conspiracy by concerted parts toward a common object; applied to hold petitioner a co-conspirator and co-principal, as cited in People vs. Petenia.
• People vs. Hanasan, 29 SCRA 534 — Source of the three requisites for voluntary surrender; applied with People vs. Canamo to deny mitigation.

• Constitutional rights to remain silent and to counsel, Constitution — Required that petitioner be informed before questioning that he may remain silent, that statements may be used against him, and that he is entitled to counsel of choice or appointed counsel; applied through the investigator's Q1-Q2 warnings and waiver questions to test admissibility.
• Rule on counsel-assisted waiver and exclusion, jurisprudence on custodial investigation — Provided that waiver without counsel is invalid and statements so obtained are inadmissible; applied to admit the confession only upon finding the defect cured by counsel's arrival, reading, and conference before signing.
• Mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, criminal law — Required spontaneity and unconditional submission to authorities; applied to deny mitigation where appearance was in obedience to a superior's order.

Fernan, C.J., Narvasa, Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Feliciano, Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Sarmiento, Cortes, Griño-Aquino, Medialdea and Regalado, JJ., concur.