Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

10th Judicial Region
Municipality of Plaridel
Misamis Occidental

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES CRIM. CASE No. 30-2023

Plaintiff,
-versus- For: Slight Physical Injuries

ROLDAN DUMASAPAL y MONGIT

Accused.
x--------------------------------------------------------------x

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES CRIM. CASE No. 31-2023

Plaintiff,
-versus- For: Slight Physical Injuries

ROLDAN DUMASAPAL y MONGIT

Accused.
x--------------------------------------------------------------x

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

The Accused, through the undersigned counsel, unto this

Honorable Court, most respectfully states:

TIMELINESS

The undersigned counsel received the joint Resolution on the

Demurrer to Evidence in CC Nos. 30-2023 and 31-2023 of the Honorable
Court dated December 22, 2023 on January 5, 2024, as such, the
accused has until January 21, 2024 to file a Motion for Reconsideration
inasmuch as the last day of filing on January 20, 2024 fell on a
Saturday.
.

ARGUMENTS AND DISCUSSION

The accused reiterates the arguments as stated in the Demurrer to

Evidence and further argues that:

ON THE PROPRIETY OF NON-DISMISSAL ON ACCOUNT

OF NON-REFERRAL TO THE APPROPRIATE BARANGAY

While the undersigned agrees with the statement of the Honorable

Court that the accused is not without recourse if he raised the issue of
non-referral to the appropriate barangay prior to arraignment, however,
the Honorable Court may have erred in not considering the statement of
the accused in his Counter Affidavit filed “prior” to his arraignment,
quoted as follows: …

Q12: Unsa pa ang tambag sa imoa kung naa man? (What other
advise did you receive if any?)
 A12: Walay Certificate to file action nga naattach sa sumbong kay
wla nakaagi ug Lupon. (No certificate to file action was attached to the
complaint because the case did not reach the Lupon.)

The court should take cognizance of the fact that the accused was
not furnished with the necessary documents ought to be attached in a
Notice to File counter affidavit, as the accused would have it in his
Judicial Affidavit:

Q3: Ngano nakabalo man ka nga naay sumbong batok nimo?

(How did you know that a case was filed against you?
A3: Kay nakadawat ko ug order gikan sa korte sa Plaridel nga
patubagon ko sa mga sumbong batok nako. (Because I received an order
from the court in plaridel, ordering me to file a counter affidavit relative to
the complaints filed against me)

Q4: Unsa man ang nalukip sa imoa nadawatan nga order gikan
sa korte? (What were the inclusions of the order you received from the
court?)
A4: Sa criminal case no. 30-2023 kay ang order ug information.
Sa Criminal Case No. 31-2023 kay mao ra gihapon, order ug information,
wala nay lain pa.( In Criminal Case No. 30-2023, I received the order and
information. In Criminal Case No. 31-2023, I also received an order and an
information and nothing more.)

Q5: Aha man diay ang affidavit complaint kung naa man gani?
(Where is the affidavit complaint if any exist?)
A5: Wala giapil ug padala sa korte Attorney pero niadtong Hunyo
14, 2023, miadto ko sa korte sa plaridel uban nimo para makakuha ug
photocopies sa affidavit complaint sa mga kaso nga gipasaka batok nako.
(It was not included when I received it Attorney but last June 14, 2023, we
went to the court in Plaridel to obtain photocopies of the complaint filed
against me.)

That despite the non-service from the court of the affidavits and
the attachments, the accused endeavored to obtain, copies of the
affidavits in court. The attachments were however not included.

That it was only during the first hearing when the accused was
able to peruse copies of the attachments from the affidavits and it was
only then when the accused noticed that the Certificate to File Action
was issued by the Lupong Tagapamayapa of Barangay Southern
Poblacion. No notice to constitute the Lupon was issued, no proofs of
receipt for all hearings, no appointment letter, no complainants form, no
proof of filing in the barangay, not all notices of hearing were attached,
no notices from the Lupon with proof that the accused received a copy
thereof, no notice of return.

Like manifestations were also expressed in open court, however,

instead of ruling, the court stated that the manifestations are duly
‘NOTED”.

Now the accused is faulted that he did not raise the objections in a
Motion to Quash, without giving any credence to the statements in his
Judicial Counter Affidavit filed before arraignment. Had statements been
considered and not merely, presumably just “noted”, the Honorable
Court could have possibly appreciated the plight of the accused.
 It is the humble submission of the undersigned counsel that the
accused would have intelligently answered all the issues had he been
furnished with the affidavits and its attachments.

It is also unfortunate on the part of the accused that some

manifestations/statements made in open court were not transcribed and
made part of the records of this case. Nevertheless, in order not to delay
the administration of justice and for lack of material time, the accused
utilized the available documents and exhibits.

ON THE PROPRIETY OF NON-DISMISSAL DESPITE THE

LAPSE OF 61 DAYS (PRESCRIPTION)

The accused agrees with the Honorable Court that the running of
prescription is interrupted upon the filing of the case before the
Barangay.

However, the accused argues that the Barangay contemplated in

the instant case is the Barangay with the proper venue, otherwise, it
would be easy to refer to wherever barangay, have it antedated in the
records and thereafter argue that cases were duly filed on time. This is
not intended to impute falsehood, rather, this is a manifestation of the
danger of allowing these kinds of irregularities, when the benefit due, on
reasonable doubt, ought to favor the accused.

Worse, in this case, no representative from the barangay was

presented by the prosecution to testify that all proceedings contemplated
under the Katarungang Pambarangay law were duly observed.

No jurisprudence exists to justify this argument, nevertheless, this

might be a good avenue to test the merits on these issues, which the
accused, is very interested to pursue if granted the chance.

ON THE PROPRIETY OF ALLOWING THE TESTIMONY OF

DR. MANISAN ABSENT A JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

The Honorable Court ruled that Dr. Manisan may testify absent a
Judicial Affidavit, albeit a continuing objection, because Doctor Manisan
is an expert witness and that he was only presented to identify the
Medical Certificates. This is another way of saying that a Medical Doctor,
who is an expert, and is only presented to identify Medical Certificates, is
EXEMPT FROM THE JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE. The accused however,
cannot locate this exemption in A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC.

It should likewise be emphasized that the prosecution offered no

reason whatsoever why no Judicial Affidavit was executed by Dr.
Manisan for his presentation in court. The accused settled not to cross
examine the expert witness due to the perceived violation of the Judicial
Affidavit rule, otherwise, he might be declared to be estopped by
acquiescence, and barred from questioning it later on. Thus, it is thus
respectfully submitted, with due respect, that the accused cannot be
faulted for insisting the application of the Rule, and not cross-examining
the “exempt” expert witness.
 WHEREFORE, premised on the foregoing consideration and in the
interest of justice, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court
that the instant Motion for Reconsideration be granted, and the above-
captioned cases, dismissed.

Such other relief as may be just and equitable in the premises are
also prayed for.

Oroquieta City, Province of Misamis Occidental, January 20, 2024.

SANTIAGO LAW OFFICE

By:

PHILIPPE EMILE R. SANTIAGO

Counsel for the Accused
Sinodivila Bldg. Dullin Street, Canubay, Oroquieta City
Contact No. 09175241048/ 088-530-5452
E-Mail Address: pers61761@gmail.com
Roll No. 61761
IBP Lifetime No. 013555, Misamis Occidental Chapter
PTR NO. 4713594- January 2, 2024, Oroquieta City
MCLE Exemption No. VII-BEP004431
Issued on May 31, 2022, Valid Until 04/14/2025

Copy furnished:

Prosecutor Jerry Anonat

Provincial Prosecutor’s Office
Calamba Satellite Office
Calamba, Misamis Occidental