You are on page 1of 8

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
Branch 25

People of the Philippines,
- versus -

CRIM. CASE NO. 454300-CR
Serious Physical Injuries

Ray Charles Herrera,
Comes now the undersigned counsel, and unto this
Honorable Court, most respectfully entering his appearance
for the accused in the above-captioned case. As such, he prays
to be furnished with orders and other processes of this
Honorable Court.
Comes now, the accused, through the undersigned
counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully
manifests as follows:
1. He is the accused in the above-captioned case for Serious
Physical Injuries;
2. The case arose from the complaint filed by Darren Marc
Bautista at the City Prosecutor’s Office of the City Manila
alleging about an incident that transpired on November 22,

8. leading to non-acceptance by the accused of the same because he stopped studying in said institution. 6. as shown in the Information. Nonetheless. . he was deprived of the opportunity to be heard and challenge the finding that what was allegedly committed by him is Serious Physical Injuries based on the finding that the fracture in private complainant’s nose lead to deformity which would eventually heal and is not even permanent and noticeable as required by jurisprudence in classifying the subject offense. accused was not heard in all other aspects of the complaint against him. it is apparent that only one notice was sent to the accused at an address that does not belong to him and that he was not heard during the preliminary investigation. Due to denial of accused right to due process during preliminary investigation. What could have happened was that the notice was sent to the accused using the PLM as address. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x 2008 within the vicinity of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila (PLM) where he was then studying. After the conduct of the preliminary investigation where the accused’s side was never heard. 3. Likewise. 2014 where he was advised by the NBI personnel that he cannot obtain a clearance because a criminal case is pending against him.2 Charles Herrera. the Honorable Prosecutor filed the information against him for Serious Physical Injuries. 4. 5. Perusal of the Honorable Prosecutor’s Resolution stated that the accused was notified per registry receipt no. 0001971 but the accused now manifests before this Honorable Court that he never received any notice from the Honorable Prosecutor. 7. In fact. the accused learned of the case against him only when he applied for a National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Clearance on August 12.

the said accused. and feloniously attacked one Darren Marc Bautista. 2008.” 11. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x 9. Philippines. 10. However. assault and use personal violence upon one DARREN MARC BAUTISTA. a reading of the Information filed by the Honorable Prosecutor shows that the facts charged are incongruently unclear. the private complainant. . Art. Also. and incapacitated and will incapacitate the said Ray Charles Herrera from performing his customary labor during the same period of time. in the City of Manila. The Information reads: “That on or about November 22. the succeeding allegations in the same Information state that accused Ray Charles Herrera inflicted upon said Ray Charles Herrera physical injuries requiring medical attendance for a period of thirty (30) days and incapacitated Ray Charles Herrera from performing his customary labor for a period of thirty (30) days.3 Charles Herrera.” What happened in this case is a clear violation of the quoted provision because the accused was made to answer for a criminal offense before this Honorable Court without having accorded of his right to due process. it was stated that accused Ray Charles Herrera willfully. III of the 1987 Constitution that “No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. did then and there willfully unlawfully and feloniously attack. The notice sent to him at PLM is defective and deprived him of his right to be heard. by then and there boxing him on his face and on the his (sic) left eye. thereby inflicting upon the said Ray Charles Herrera physical injuries which have required medical attendance for a period of more than (30) Thirty days. Clear is Section 14(1). unlawfully. The afore-quoted Information failed to clearly aver the facts which constitute the offense of Serious Physical Injuries against the accused because at first.

17. thus did not acquire jurisdiction. Rule 117 of the Rules of Court is the provision that “The accused may move to quash the complaint or information on any of the following grounds: (a) That the facts charge do not constitute an offense” (underscoring supplied). 14. 16. Accused also manifests before this Honorable Court that the instant case was pending since July 2009 and has not moved forward from the time the Information was filed. Since the facts in the Information failed to aver with clarity and certainty the alleged actions of accused Ray Charles Herrera constituting the offense of Serious Physical Injuries. 2014.4 Charles Herrera. and he learned only of this case when he applied for NBI clearance on August 12. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x 12. the accused Ray Charles Herrera would not. the time that had lapsed since July . he was not arraigned. 15. said Information and the corresponding warrant of arrest merits to be quashed by this Honorable Court. inflict physical injuries nor incapacitate himself to perform his customary labor. in right frame of mind. He was not notified that an Information for Serious Physical Injuries was filed against him. the complainant and the Prosecution never presented any evidence. With all due respect to this Honorable Court and the Honorable Prosecutor. the instant case was in fact archived already. the accused never appeared before this Honorable Court. These undeniable allegations in the Information are fatal because it confuses the facts as to how the felony was committed and the accused cannot possibly defend himself intelligently considering that he was being charged of physically assaulting one Darren Marc Bautista then he is also charged of inflicting physical injuries and incapacitating himself. 13. his Certainly. From the wordings of Section 3(a).

However. Art. III. Saniboy St.5 Charles Herrera. he was never found and the people living in the place and even those closely within it state that they do not know any Marc Darren Bautista. 19. 20. the Information is fatally defective as it failed to aver facts that constitute the offense.. 18. This circumstance gives way to a safe conclusion that private complainant shows no interest in pursuing his complaint because if he is. As such. accused through his father Ray B. and. Mandaluyong City. this case warrants dismissal by this Honorable Court. after two (2) hours of searching for private complainant at No. Hulo. it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court to dismiss the Information against Ray Charles B. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x 2009 up to the filing of this motion is more than five (5) years already which amounts to failure to prosecute on the part of the complainant and the Prosecution. 586 Int. Herrera went to the address of the complainant appearing in the case record. the violation of accused’s right to speedy trial and the resulting vexation to him because he cannot obtain NBI Clearance to be used in seeking employment. 1987 Constitution). He would have notified the Honorable Prosecutor and this Honorable Court if he merely changed his address so that he may be notified of any orders emanating from the court. he should have made follow-ups as to the status of his complaint. Herrera for Serious Physical Injuries and to quash the Warrant of Arrest issued against him in relation to the instant case. It is further manifested that aiming to amicably settle the matter involved in this case. Considering that the Preliminary Investigation was conducted and the Information in this case was filed in violation of the accused’s right to due process. WHEREFORE. accused is now entitled to the dismissal of this case pursuant to his Constitutional right to due process and speedy trial (Section 14(2). the manifests disinterest of the complainant in pursuing his complaint. .

6.6 Charles Herrera.14/Or. Desiree V..14/QC Admitted to the Bar May 6. Branch 25 Manila Darren March Bautista 586 Int. West Triangle Quezon City 09195955479 mangyan007@yahoo. just and equitable under the circumstances. Quezon City for Manila City. 2014. Hulo Mandaluyong City Atty. 9904600/6. 62780 IBP No. Brgy. Saniboy St. are likewise prayed for. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x Other reliefs.4. Dayag-Macaraeg Asst. City Prosecutor Office of the City Prosecutor Manila .com Roll of Attorneys No.. 2014 With my conformity: RAY CHARLES HERRERA NOTICE OF HEARING THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT Metropolitan Trial Court. Mindoro PTR No. MACARIO M. 968200/6. DE VILLA 21B Chronicle St. September 10.

Filipino. Dayag-Macaraeg Asst. of legal age.7 Charles Herrera. Hulo Mandaluyong City Atty. Desiree V. Brgy. DE VILLA Counsel for Ray Charles Herrera Copy furnished: Darren March Bautista 586 Int. and a resident of ___________________________. DE VILLA Counsel for Movant EXPLANATION The undersigned counsel served the private complainant a copy of this motion through registered mail as shown by the attached registry receipt due to personnel constraint. MACARIO M. MACARIO M.. Saniboy St. after having been . Herrea. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x Please set the foregoing motion for consideration and approval of this Honorable Court on ______________ at 8:30 AM. City Prosecutor Office of the City Prosecutor Manila VERIFICATION I. Ray Charles B.

3. 2. RAY CHARLES B. and. do hereby depose and state that: 1. HERRERA Affiant-Movant . I am the petitioner-movant in this motion. I have caused the preparation of the foregoing pleading. Manifestation and Motion x-----------------------------------------------------------------x sworn to in accordance with law.8 Charles Herrera. I have read and understood all the allegations herein and affirm that the same are true and correct based on my personal knowledge and on authentic records.