Din Din Habeas Corpus

Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION
Branch __
Binangonan, Rizal
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION
FOR HABEAS CORPUS OF
DEAN EVIAN P. ESER
a.k.a DIN DIN
Petitioner.
SP.
PROC.
NO.
____________
- versus For: HABEAS CORPUS
DENNIS DELEON MACALINTAL
Police Superintendent,
Angono Municipal Police Station,
Brgy. San Isidro, Angono, Rizal
and
PO2 JEFFRAY B. MEJALA
PO1 ROMMEL A. BILOG
MR. PIAMONTE
MR. BOGIE
All being Police Officers of Angono
Municipal Police Station
Respondents.
x------------------------------------------------x
PETITION
PETITIONER, through counsel, and unto this Honorable
Court, most respectfully avers:
1. That he is Twenty-Four years old, single and a
resident of 57 F. Villaluz Street, Brgy. Kalayaan,
Angono, Rizal.
2. Than on March 03, 2016, Thursday, at around
10:30 in the evening Petitioner was at a friends
house on Graceville Subdivision, Brgy. Pagasa,
Binangonan, Rizal.
3. That he and one of his friends Micheal who is a

resident of Brgy. San Roque, Angono, Rizal
decided to buy milk and liquor at the Diversion
highway near a restaurant known as Balaw
Balaw located at Brgy. San Roque, Angono
Rizal.
4. That on their way back to Graceville Subdivision,
they decided to drop by a near store within the
subdivision to buy soft drinks and eat snacks.
5. That at around 11:30 PM of the same day, while
taking their snacks, four male persons riding in a
motorcycle who are all in civilian clothes with
weapons suddenly dropped by and arrested his
companion Michael.
6. That after arresting Micheal, one of the arresting
persons told their companion Mali Sir, hindi
yan, eto si Din-Din pointing and referring to the
Petitioner.
7. As such, Petitioner was then restrained and
arrested and was forced to come with the four
(4) male persons in the latters motor vehicle.
8. The four (4) male persons who did not identify
themselves with the Petitioner told the latter
that Sumama ka na lang ng maayos.
9. That Petitioner was never served with any
warrant of arrest neither was he appraised
of his constitutional rights during his
arrest.
10.That Petitioner was directly brought to the
Angono Municipal Police Station at Brgy. San
Isidro, Angono, Rizal at exactly at around 12:00
AM, Friday, March 04, 2016, and was processed
and identified.
11.That the four male arresting persons who are in
civilian clothes were later on identified by the
Petitioner as Mr. Bogie, Mr. Piamonte, Mr.
Mejala and Mr. Bilog, are all Police Officers of
the Angono Municipal Police Station.
2
12.That on Friday afternoon, March 04, 201, at

around 4:00 in the afternoon, Petitioner was
subjected to a Drug Testing at Provincial Police
Office at Hilltop, Brgy. Dolores, Taytay, Rizal.
13.That On Saturday Afternoon, March 05, 2016, at
around 4:00 PM Petitioner was brought to
Prosecutors Office for inquest proceedings.
That as of this filing, the Petitioner is being
restrained of his liberty on account of his
unlawful arrest and no information has been
filed before the Courts charging him of any
criminal offense.
GROUNDS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION
I
THE PETITIONERS ARREST AS WELL AS
HIS CONTINUOUS DETENTION IS ILLEGAL
II.
NO SHABU WAS CONFISCATED FROM
THE
PETITIONER
AND
THAT
THE
AFFIDAVIT OF ARREST EXECUTED BY THE
ARRESTING OFFICERS ARE FABRICATED
AND MERE LIES SINCE THE ACCUSED
WAS ARRESTED ON THE EVENING OF
MARCH 03, 2016 (WHILE TAKING THEIR
SNACKS) NOT ON THE AFTERNOON OF
MARCH 04, 2016 (ALLEGEDLY WHILE
PLAYING KARA Y KRUS)
ARGUMENTS
I. PETITIONERS
ARREST
IS
ILLEGAL
AND
VIOLATIVE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
PATENTLY
OF
HIS
14.Section 2 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution

explicitly provides:
Section 2. The right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects against unreasonable searches
and seizures of whatever nature and for
any purpose shall be inviolable, and no
search warrant or warrant of arrest shall
3
issue except upon probable cause to be

determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of
the complainant and the witnesses he
may produce, and particularly describing
the place to be searched and the persons
or things to be seized.
15.The sacred right against an arrest, search or
seizure without valid warrant is not only
ancient. It is also zealously safeguarded. The
Constitution guarantees the right of the people
to be secure in their persons, houses, papers
and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures. Any evidence obtained in violation of
said right shall be inadmissible for any purpose
in any proceeding. Indeed, while the power to
search and seize may at times be necessary to
the public welfare, still it must be exercised and
the law implemented without contravening the
constitutional rights of the citizens, for the
enforcement of no statute is of sufficient
importance to justify indifference to the basic
principles of government. (Valdez v. People,
G.R. No. 170180, 23 November 2007, 538
SCRA 611.)
16.In the present case, Petitioner, at the time
of his arrest together with his friend
Micheal was merely taking their snacks in
the middle of the night. There was no
scant amount of reason to believe that
they are committing a crime to justify his
arrest.
17.Section 5, Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure provides for valid instances
where warrantless arrest may be conducted, to
wit:
Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when
lawful. A peace officer or a private
person may, without a warrant, arrest a
person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person
to be arrested has committed, is
4
actually committing, or is attempting

to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been
committed, and he has probable
cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances
that the person to be arrested has
committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is
a prisoner who has escaped from a
penal establishment or place where
he is serving final judgment or is
temporarily confined while his case is
pending, or has escaped while being
transferred from one confinement to
another.
In cases falling under paragraph (a) and
(b) above, the person arrested without a
warrant shall be forthwith delivered to the
nearest police station or jail and shall be
proceeded against in accordance with
section 7 of Rule 112.
18.In the present case, Petitioner and his
companion was not committing any crime
neither was there any probable cause to
believe that a crime has just been
committed.
19.Probable cause for a valid warrantless arrest is
the existence of facts that would lead a
discreet and prudent man to believe that a
crime was likely committed by the person
sought to be arrested. Thus, in the instant case,
no facts nor any ground for suspicion to believe
that the Petitioner was committing any crime
was present during the arrest;
20.Therefore, the Police Officers should have
applied a warrant of arrest as mandated by the
law.
II. NO SHABU WAS CONFISCATED FROM
THE
PETITIONER
AND
THAT
THE
AFFIDAVIT OF ARREST EXECUTED BY
5
THE
ARRESTING
OFFICERS
ARE
FABRICATED AND MERE LIES SINCE THE
ACCUSED WAS ARRESTED ON THE
EVENING OF MARCH 03, 2016 (WHILE
TAKING THEIR SNACKS) NOT ON THE
AFTERNOON OF MARCH 04, 2016
(ALLEGEDLY WHILE PLAYING KARA Y
KRUS).
21.That this Petition was not only to question the
validity of the Petitioners arrest and detention,
but more importantly, to show that the
affidavit submitted by the Police Officers
in order to support such arrest, is on its
face, fabricated and mere lies.
22.That the affidavit of arrest submitted by the
arresting Officers stated that the Petitioner was
arrested while playing kara y krus on March
4, 2016 Friday at around 2:45 in the afternoon
and on account of such arrest, they allegedly
recovered a sachet containing shabu. Copy of
the sinumpaang salaysay from the arresting
officers is herein attached as Annex A.
23.That Such allegation is fabricated. The truth of
the matter is that the Petitioner was already
arrested as early as March 03, 2016 at around
11:30 in the evening. Therefore, it was
impossible that the Petitioner was playing
kara y krus in the afternoon of March 04,
2016. Such fabricated report is nothing more
but to justify the illegality of arrest and
detention of the Petitioner.
24.Further, it is impossible for the Police Officers to
confiscate from the Petitioner a sachet of shabu
on March 04, 2016 considering that on March
03, 2016 he was already unlawfully arrested
and detained at the Angono Municipal Police
Station;
25.That while a petition for habeas corpus does
not ordinarily lie to question the validity of
arrest and detention, we respectfully
indulge this Honorable Court to look into
the surrounding factual circumstances of
this case: that there was an (a) invalid
6
arrest,
(b)
non-existence
of
shabu
confiscated from the petitioner and the
(c) fabricating reports the Police Officers
may use to justify the possible filing of a
criminal case prolonging and in effect
legalizing the Petitioners detention;
26.We respectfully submit that the writ of habeas
corpus was devised and exists as a speedy and
effectual remedy to relive persons from unlawful
restraint, and as the best and only sufficient
defense of personal freedom. (Villavicencio vs,
Lukban, 39 Phil., 778,788.) It secures to a
prisoner the right to have the cause of his
detention examined and determined by a court of
justice, and to have ascertained if he is held
under lawful authority. (Quintos vs. Director of
Prisons, 55 Phil., 304, 306.)
27.Thus, Petitioner cannot and will not stand this
unlawful restraint of his liberty by letting this
fabricated reports of the Police Officers and the
unlawful warrantless arrest justify his detention
and restraint of liberty as guaranteed by no
less than the 1987 Constitution;
28. That for expedient resolution of the issues
raised herein, early resolution of the instant
petition has become glaringly exigent;
29. That this petition is intended for the purposes
alluded thereto.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, it is most
respectfully prayed that a (1) Writ of Habeas Corpus be
issued by this Honorable Court directing the Respondent
DENNIS DELEON MACALINTAL in his Capacity as the
Police Superintendent of Angono Municipal Police Station to
produce the body of Petitioner DEAN EVIAN P. ESER before
this Court and forthwith explain the legality of his continued
detention and declare such as invalid and unconstitutional.
Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed
under the premises.
7
Quezon City, Philippines this 7th day of March 2016

Respectfully submitted.
ATTY. JAIRUS B. RUBIO
Counsel for the Petitioner

Roll No. 64701; April 28, 2015
PTR No. 2182274; January 06, 2016; Quezon City
IBP No. 1022990; Quezon City
MCLE Compliance in process
Lot 4 Block 4 Crestwood Subdivision,
Barangay San Luis, Antipolo City, Rizal
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
I, JAIRUS B. RUBIO, of legal age, Filipino and with residence
address at Lot 4 Blk 4, Crestwood Subd., Brgy. San Luis,
Antipolo City, Rizal after having been duly sworn in
accordance with law, hereby depose and state:
1. That I am the Counsel for the Petitioner who is authorized
to represent the Petitioner in the instant case;
2. That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing
Petition for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus;
3. That I have read and understood all the allegations therein
and the same are true and correct to my personal knowledge
and/or based on authentic records;
4. That I have not commenced any similar case or action
before the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, all other lower
courts, or administrative tribunals and that there is no
similar case or action pending in the Supreme Court, Court of
Appeals, all other lower courts, or administrative tribunals;
and that should I learn thereafter that a similar case or
action is pending in the said courts or bodies, I hereby bound
myself to notify this Honorable Court within five (5) days
from notice therefrom.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my
8
signature this 7th day of March 2016 at Quezon City.

JAIRUS B. RUBIO
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 7th day of
March 2016 at Quezon City, affiant exhibited to me his
drivers license with license no. N0-12-011973 issued on
January 20, 2015 at East Avenue, Quezon City.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Doc. No. ______;

Page No. ______;
Book No.______;
Series of 2016.
Copy furnished:
DENNIS DELEON MACALINTAL

Police Superintendent,
Angono Municipal Police Station,
PO2 JEFFRAY B. MEJALA
PO1 ROMMEL A. BILOG
MR. PIAMONTE
MR. BOGIE
Police Officers of Angono
Municipal Police Station

Din Din Habeas Corpus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Din Din Habeas Corpus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Din Din Habeas Corpus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

3. That he and one of his friends Micheal who is a

12.That on Friday afternoon, March 04, 201, at

14.Section 2 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution

issue except upon probable cause to be

actually committing, or is attempting

Quezon City, Philippines this 7th day of March 2016

ATTY. JAIRUS B. RUBIO

Counsel for the Petitioner

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

signature this 7th day of March 2016 at Quezon City.

Doc. No. ______;

DENNIS DELEON MACALINTAL

You might also like