Scribd
Upload
27 views1 page

Regional Trial Court People of The Philippines,: Nationa Capital Judicial Region

Uploaded by

Pao Brills

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt

Regional Trial Court People of The Philippines,: Nationa Capital Judicial Region

Uploaded by

Pao Brills
27 views1 page

Original Title

Reply to Motion

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
27 views1 page

Regional Trial Court People of The Philippines,: Nationa Capital Judicial Region

Uploaded by

Pao Brills

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

Republic of the Philippines

NATIONA CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 99, MANILA CITY

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,


Plaintiff,
-vs- CRIM CASE
FOR: HOMICIDE
VLADIMIR,
Accused.
x---------------------------------------------x

REPLY TO COMMENT/OPPOSITION

Through the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable Court,


most respectfully submits their reply to the Prosecution’s
Comment/Opposition to the Demurrer to Evidence, and in support thereof
avers: That-

1. The presumption of regularity in the performance of duty


cannot overcome the stronger presumption of innocence in favor of the
accused.1

2. A reading of the arguments in the Comment/Opposition of the


prosecution, it appears that the Honorable Public Prosecutor is trying to
impress this Honorable Court that SP02 Duran’s investigation enjoys the
presumption of regularity in the performance of his police duties based on
the former’s perception. However, such view is only the perception of the
Prosecutor and such cannot be considered as evidence.

3. The prosecution in its Comment/Opposition presents its


opinion that its own witness, SP02 Duran painstakingly and judiciously
investigated the case and prepared necessary documents in indicting the
two (2) accused, Bugaring and Beltran. To reiterate, such is only the
opinion of the Public Prosecutor and thus cannot be used as evidence
against the accused enough to convict them beyond reasonable doubt.

Explanation

The foregoing pleading was served on the above-named parties and filed
before this Court via electronic mail and private courier due to the distance
involved and lack of sufficient messengerial personnel to effect personal
service and filing.

1
People vs. Mendoza, G.R. No. 192432, June 23, 2014.

You might also like