Scribd
Upload
100 views3 pages

Comment - Danilo Almazan (As1)

The document is a comment/objection filed by the defense counsel in response to the prosecution's formal offer of exhibits in the criminal case of The People of the Philippines vs. Sandy De Guzman. The defense counsel objects to Exhibits A, B, C, D, F, E, G, H, I, J, and K submitted by the prosecution on the grounds that they are incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, self-serving, or because the prosecution failed to establish their relation to the accused or the crime charged. The defense counsel requests the court to note the objections and deny admission of the prosecution's exhibits.

Uploaded by

NK Mndza
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
100 views3 pages

Comment - Danilo Almazan (As1)

The document is a comment/objection filed by the defense counsel in response to the prosecution's formal offer of exhibits in the criminal case of The People of the Philippines vs. Sandy De Guzman. The defense counsel objects to Exhibits A, B, C, D, F, E, G, H, I, J, and K submitted by the prosecution on the grounds that they are incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, self-serving, or because the prosecution failed to establish their relation to the accused or the crime charged. The defense counsel requests the court to note the objections and deny admission of the prosecution's exhibits.

Uploaded by

NK Mndza
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 8 – BATANGAS CITY

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CRIM. CASE NO.


15336
Plaintiff,

-versus- -for-

SANDY DE GUZMAN y Flores, VIOL. OF ART. II, SEC


11
Accused. SEC.15, OF RA 9165
X ----------------------------------------X

COMMENT/OBJECTION

COME NOW, accused through the undersigned counsel de officio


unto this HONORABLE COURT, most respectfully submits his Comments
to the Formal Offer of Exhibits filed by the Prosecution, to wit:

Exhibit “A” (Request for Laboratory Examination and its


submarkings)

Comment: This is being objected to on the ground that it is


INCOMPETENT, IMMATERIAL AND IRRELEVANT since the subject
specimen of the letter request was not obtained from the accused.

Exhibit “B” (Chemistry Report No. BD-010-08 and its submarkings)

Comment: These are being objected not only that these are
IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL but also INADMISSIBLE as the
prosecution failed to establish its relation to the accused since the
specimen subject of that report was not taken from the accused. The
witness who identified the same has no personal knowledge of the origin
of the specimen subject of the above-mentioned reports.

Exhibit “C” (specimen and its submarkings)

Comment: This is being objected to on the ground that it is


INCOMPETENT, IMMATERIAL AND IRRELEVANT as the accused was
unlawfully arrested and whatever items taken on account of his arrest was
inadmissible against him. The prosecution failed to establish its relation to
the accused. The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt
that accused was really or actually committing offense when he was
arrested, thus, illegal arrest. This piece of evidence is considered to be a
“Fruit of a Poisonous Tree”. The records also reveal that prosecution
failed to present evidence proving that the manner and procedures laid
down by Section 21 of RA 9165. It was also not proven that such specimen
was marked/identified or made part of the inventory at the place where it
was allegedly taken. Prosecution also failed to present pictures or
media,DOJ representatives and barangay official who witnessed the said
marking/inventory.

Exhibits “D” and “F” - Barangay and Police Blotters inclusive of its
submarkings
Comment. These are being objected for being IMMATERIAL and
IRRELEVANT because the prosecution failed to establish their relation to
the offense charged. The Rules on Evidence provide that evidence to be
admissible must have such relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief
in its existence or non – existence. ( Rule 128, Section 4, Rules of Court)

Exhibit “E” (Certificate of Inventory and its submarkings)

Comment. It is being objected to on the ground that it is


INCOMPETENT as evidence because it was not made or prepared where
the accused was allegedly apprehended which is a clear defiance of the
requirements set by Republic Act 9165.

Exhibits “G” and “H” ( Spot Report and Booking Sheet/Arrest


Report inclusive of its submarkings)

Comment: It is being objected to on the ground that it is


IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL as evidence as the prosecution failed to
establish its relation to the crime charged and to the accused himself

Exhibit “I” ( Kusang Loob na Sinumpaang Salaysay of P02 Michael


Tircero Fetizanan and its submarkings)

Comment: It is being objected to for being self serving and


unworthy of credence. It is further objected on the ground that the same is
contrary and inconsistent with the declarations made by the affiant in open
court.

Exhibits “J” and “K” (Request for Drug Test and Chemistry Report
No. BCRIMDT 014-08 inclusive of their submarkings)

Comment. These are being objected to on the ground that these are
INCOMPETENT, IMMATERIAL and IRRELEVANT as the prosecution
failed to establish the relationship of the same to the offense charged and
to the accused himself. It is to be noted that accused is charged for
Violation of Section 11 of RA 9165. These pieces of evidence are violative
of the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and causes of the
accusations against himself which is guaranteed by the Constitution.

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court


that the foregoing Comment/Objection be duly noted and that all the
exhibits offered in evidence by the prosecution be denied admission.

Other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.

Batangas City, November 3, 2009.


PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
BATANGAS DISTRICT OFFICE
HALL OF JUSTICE BUILDING
PALLOCAN, BATANGAS CITY
Counsel for the Accused

By:
NELVIN M. ASI
Roll No. 50530
Public Attorney
2
MCLE Compliance No. II -
0010852

The Branch Clerk of Court


RTC -Branch 8, Batangas City

GREETINGS:

Kindly submit the foregoing Comment/Objection to the Honorable


Court immediately upon receipt hereof.

NELVIN M. ASI

Copy furnished:

Office of the City Prosecutor


Batangas City

You might also like