UST Law Review

BEYOND STONEHILL: EXTENDING THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE TO UNCOUNSELED MEDIA CONFESSIONS
By: Atty. Rene B. Gorospe

Abstract

A dissection of one of the landmark decisions penned by the late Chief Justice Roberto
Concepcion, this article presents the case alongside a thorough discussion on the development of the exclusionary rule, the Miranda Rights and other related jurisprudence.

The article discusses the formal adoption of the exclusionary rule in Philippine Jurisprudence
through the case Stonehill v. Diono, rejecting the contrary rule laid down in Moncado v. People’s Court. In addition, it expounds on the expansion of the exclusionary rule which initially covers only unlawful searches and seizures but at present likewise covers cases of confessions not voluntarily given, or those given without the presence and assistance of counsel and those made in violation of the right against self-incrimination. Finally, it presents arguments supporting the author’s submission that the extension of the exclusionary rule to uncounselled media confessions would be a practical means of enforcing the constitutional injunction against the admission of physically, emotionally or psychologically coerced confessions.