Laws & Jurisprudence
STATE WITNESS
6:04 AM
STATE WITNESS is one of two or more persons jointly
charged with the commission of a crime but who is discharged with his consent
as such accused so that he may be a witness for the State (People v. Ferrer,
G.R. No. 102062, Mar. 14, 1996).
The following are the requisites before an accused may become a State witness:
1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of
the accused whose discharge is requested;
2. There is no other direct evidence available for
the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of the
said accused;
3. The testimony of said accused can be
substantially corroborated in its material points;
4. Said accused
does not appear to be the most guilty;
and
5. Said accused
has not at any time been convicted of
any offense involving moral turpitude (Sec. 17, Rule 119).
Note: All the requisites must be complied with. (Herrera,
Vol. IV, p. 820, 2007 ed.)
The expediency of discharging an accused as an state witness should be
availed only when there is absolute necessity
for his testimony, as when he alone has knowledge of the crime, and not when his
testimony would simply corroborate or otherwise strengthened the evidence in
the hands of the prosecution (Chua v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103397,
August 28, 1996).
Law
enforcement officers, even if he
would be testifying against the other law enforcement officers cannot be a
State witness. In such a case, only the immediate members of his family may
avail themselves of the protection provided for under the Witness Protection
Act (Sec. 3, R.A. 6981, Witness Protection Act).
Application
for discharge of the state witness should be
made upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case.
The following
are the effects of the order discharging the accused as a State witness: Generally
1. Discharge
of accused operates as an acquittal and bar to further prosecution for the same
offense
2. Evidence
adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial (People
v. Feliciano, G.R. No. 136258, Oct. 10, 2001); and
3. If
the court denies the motion to discharge the accused as State witness, his
sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence (People v. Feliciano, G.R.
No. 136258, Oct. 10, 2001).
Exceptions
1. When the accused fails or refuses to testify
against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the
basis of his discharge (Sec. 18).
2. Failure to testify refers exclusively to
defendant’s will or fault,
3. Where an accused who turns state’s evidence
on a promise of immunity but later retracts and fails to keep his part of the
agreement, his confession of his participation in the commission of the crime
is admissible as evidence against him. (People v. Beberino GR No L-23213
October 28, 1977)
Note: Discharge
under this rule is only one of the modes to be a State witness. Other modes
are:
1. The Witness Protection Program of R.A. 6981;
2. The power of the Ombudsman to grant immunity
under Sec. 17, R.A. 6770.
If the
discharged accused retracts or fails to comply with his part of the agreement
solely on his fault, his
confession of his participation in the commission of the crime is admissible
as evidence (People v. Beberino, G.R. No. L-23092, Oct. 28, 1977).
The discharge of the accused shall amount
to an acquittal and shall be a bar to future prosecution for the same
offense EXCEPT when the accused fails or refuses to testify against his
co-accused in accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis of the
discharge (Sec. 18, Rule 119).
The author takes no responsibility for the validity, correctness and result of this work. The information provided is not a legal advice and it should not be used as a substitute for a competent legal advice from a licensed lawyer. See the disclaimer
0 comments