7/23/2019 Navarro vs CA

1/1

Admissibility of a recorded altercation between the accused and the deceased

NAVARRO vs CA

G.R. No. 121087 August 26 1!!!

"acts# Na$arro was charged with homicide with the R%&. %he trial court con$icted him of thecrime charged. %he court admitted in e$idence the recorded ta'e allegedly containing the

heated e(change between Na$arro and the deceased )ingan in the 'olice station. %he

e(change in the $oice recording was con*rmed by the testimony of +albuena one who too,

the recording and witness for the 'rosecution.

-ssue# /N the ta'e is admissible in e$idence under RA No. 200.

Ruling# es the ta'e is admissible in e$idence. RA No. 200 'rohibits the o$erhearing

interce'ting or recording of 'ri$ate communications. ince the e(change between 'etitioner

Na$arro and )ingan was not 'ri$ate its ta'e recording is not 'rohibited.

Nor is there any 3uestion that it was duly authenticated. A $oice recording is authenticated

by the testimony of a witness 415 that he 'ersonally recorded the con$ersations 425 that the

ta'e 'layed in the court was the one he recorded and 45 that the $oices on the ta'e are

those of the 'ersons such are claimed to belong. -n the instant case +albuena testi*ed that

he 'ersonally made the $oice recording that the ta'e 'layed in the court was the one he

recorded and that the s'ea,ers on the ta'e were 'etitioner Na$arro and )ingan. A sucient

foundation was thus laid for the authentication of the ta'e 'resented by the 'rosecution.

%he $oice recording made by +albuena established# 415 that there was a heated e(change

between 'etitioner Na$arro and )ingan on the 'lacing in the 'olice blotter of an entry

against him and +albuena and 425 that some form of $iolence occurred in$ol$ing 'etitioner

Na$arro and )ingan with the latter getting the worst of it.