FACTS:

Petitioners Melecio Macasiray, Virgilio Gonzales, and Benedicto Gonzales were accused of the murder of Johnny Villanueva. During the trial, the prosecution presented an extrajudicial confession signed by petitioner Benedicto Gonzales and a transcript of the preliminary investigation proceedings, both of which implicated the petitioners in the crime. However, the defense objected to the admissibility of these documents on the ground that they were obtained without the assistance of counsel.

The trial court sustained the objections and declared the documents inadmissible. On cross-examination, Gonzales denied the contents of both documents, prompting the prosecution to present them as rebuttal evidence. However, the trial court once again denied admission to the documents.

Private respondent sought the nullification of the trial court's orders, which the Court of Appeals granted, declaring the documents admissible. Now, the petitioners are seeking a review of the appellate court's decision.

The issue in this case is whether the petitioners waived objection to the admissibility of the documents by failing to object or by using them in evidence.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the extrajudicial confession and transcript of the preliminary investigation were admissible in evidence despite being obtained without the assistance of counsel.

2. Whether the petitioners waived their objection to the admissibility of the documents by failing to object during the trial or by using them in evidence.

RULING:

1. The extrajudicial confession and transcript of the preliminary investigation were inadmissible in evidence as they were obtained without the assistance of counsel. The confession and statements taken from petitioner Benedicto Gonzales were in violation of his rights under Article IV, Section 20 of the 1973 Constitution.

2. The petitioners did not waive their objection to the admissibility of the documents. The fact that the prosecution introduced the documents during their evidence-in-chief does not mean that the defense waived their objection. The defense had the right to object at any time before the commencement of the trial. The use of the documents during the defense's presentation of evidence does not amount to a waiver, as they were presented to refute the credibility of Gonzales.

PRINCIPLES:

• Statements obtained without the assistance of counsel are inadmissible as evidence under Article IV, Section 20 of the 1973 Constitution.

• Waiver of objection to the admissibility of documents must be made before the commencement of the trial. The use of objectionable documents during the trial does not constitute a waiver.