Thursday, March 25, 2021

Settled is the rule that when the extrajudicial admission of a conspirator is confirmed at the trial, it ceases to be hearsay. It becomes instead a judicial admission, being a testimony of an eyewitness admissible in evidence against those it implicates.

RUSTICO ABAY, JR. and REYNALDO DARILAG vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 165896, September 19, 2008.


“x x x.

At the outset, we note that it was not Aban’s extrajudicial confession but his court testimony reiterating his declarations in his extrajudicial admission, pointing to petitioners as his co-participants, which was instrumental in convicting petitioners of the crime charged. Settled is the rule that when the extrajudicial admission of a conspirator is confirmed at the trial, it ceases to be hearsay. It becomes instead a judicial admission, being a testimony of an eyewitness admissible in evidence against those it implicates. [People v. Silan, G.R. No. 116011, March 7, 1996, 254 SCRA 491, 503; People v. Victor, G.R. Nos. 75154-55, February 6, 1990, 181 SCRA 818, 830]. Here, the extrajudicial confession of Aban was affirmed by him in open court during the trial. Thus, such confession already partook of judicial testimony which is admissible in evidence against the petitioners.

X x x.”