This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2008-06-25 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Fourth, when petitioner engaged Atty. Uy as her lawyer, she undoubtedly executed the amicable settlement. Verily, she was provided with an independent counsel and such "right to counsel is intended to preclude the slightest coercion as would lead the accused to admit something false. The lawyer, however, should never prevent an accused from freely and voluntarily telling the truth."[15] An amicable settlement is not and does not partake of the nature of an extrajudicial confession or admission but is a contract between the parties within the parameters of their mutually recognized and admitted rights and obligations. Thus, the presence of Atty. Uy safeguarded petitioner's rights even if the custodial investigation did not push through and precluded any threat of violence, coercion, or intimidation. | |||||