PRACTICUM I

MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO

FILE DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

GROUP 4

DELA CRUZ, JUNE MARK

MARCELO, GRECILDA

PAKURAN, GINA

TABAS, REGINE KARLA

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

 REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
FIRST JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 8
BAGUIO CITY

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12345
FOR: Anti-Violence Against
-versus- Women and their Children

JOONG K. SONG,
Accused.
x-------------------------------------x

DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE HONORABLE COURT

The accused through the undersigned counsel most respectfully

manifests that he is filing the instant Demurrer to Evidence pursuant to the
Order of the Honorable Court dated September 16, 2017 and received by
the undersigned counsel on September 23, 2017. The Honorable Court
granted the Motion for Leave to File Demurrer to Evidence filed by the
accused through counsel and directed herein accused to submit the
announced demurrer to evidence within ten (10) days from receipt of the
Order. Hence the foregoing Demurrer to Evidence. The Demurer to Evidence
shall fall due on the 3rd day of October, 2017. Thus, this pleading is timely
filed.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The herein accused is charged with Violation of the Anti-Violence

Against Women and their Children with the information dated August 19,
2017, which state the following:

The undersigned Prosecutor hereby accuses JOONG K. SONG of the

crime of violating Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the Anti-
Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004, committed as
follows:
 1. That the accused willingly refused to provide financial support
to the private complainant and their child since 2004;

2. That the accused was having an illicit relationship with a

woman other than the private complainant since 2005;

3. That the accused pointed a gun to the private complainant

in one of their arguments sometime in 2008;

4. That the accused cohabited with the woman whom he was

having a relationship with since 2008; and

5. That the accused attempted to kick the private

complainant sometime in 2009;

After the arraignment of the accused and the pre-trial, the state
presented its evidence. In between, the accused through counsel filed an
application for bail on August 26, 2017 citing the argument that the
evidence of the prosecution was weak. In its order dated September 5,
2017, the Honorable Court issued an order granting the application of
accused for bail. The bail bond was fixed at Twenty Five Thousand Peso (P
25, 000.00).

On September 10, 2017, the state furnished counsel for accused with
a copy of its Formal Offer of Documentary Exhibit but did file it in court.
Acting on the copy of the formal offer of exhibits by the state which he
received September 15, 2017, counsel for accused filed a Motion for Leave
to File Demurrer to Evidence. The Honorable Court granted leave for
accused to file demurrer to evidence, hence, the foregoing demurrer.

DISCUSSION OF THE LEGAL AND FACTUAL BASIS OF THE DEMURRER TO

EVIDENCE

Demurrer to evidence is “an objection by one of the parties in an

action, to the effect that the evidence which is adversary produced is
insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to make out a case or
sustain the issue. The party demurring challenges the sufficiency of the
whole evidence to sustain a verdict. To be considered sufficient therefore,
the evidence must prove: (a) the commission of the crime, and (b) the
precise degree of participation therein by accused.” 1

With all due respect, the state failed to prove that the accused
committed the crime. To be liable for Violation of R.A. No. 9262, otherwise
1
Gutib vs. Court of Appeals, 371 Phil 293, 300, 305 (1999)
known as Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act, any of the
following acts should be proven beyond reasonable doubt: (a) physical
violence; (b) sexual violence; (c) psychological violence ; and (d) economic
abuse. 2

The discussion as to the factual and legal basis of this demurrer shall
be subdivided into (a) physical violence (b) psychological violence; and (c)
economic abuse, as alleged by the state in its information.

A. PHYSICAL VIOLENCE

"Physical Violence" refers to acts that include bodily or physical harm;3

The accused never inflicted physical violence against his wife as can
be proved by the following proceedings in court:

1. In the complaint-affidavit of private complainant, He K. Song, she

averred the following:

10. Then, I learned that JOONG was having an affair with a married
woman named DISNEY LANDIA (DISNEY for brevity). I confronted
JOONG about it but he denied having illicit relations with her, then
he hit me on my face. JOONG would shout at me telling me that I
should not be listening to rumors and would insult me for
believing baseless rumors. From then on, he would physically
harm me whenever we had an argument such that he would push
and even slap me, something he never did before; 4

Aside from this bare allegation, private complainant did not offer
concrete details and credible proofs to prove the alleged hitting on the face
and physical harm done by the accused. During the cross-examination of
private complainant, counsel for the defense, Atty. June Mark Dela Cruz,
asked her when and where did these physical harm happen and the private
complainant merely answered it happened several times in their house in
Sumulong. These bare allegations made it difficult for the accused to refute
them as they are very general and that the accused is not even certain
whether these physical harm happened as he was not always in their house
in Sumulong. Worst, the State cannot show any medical certificates or
witnesses to corroborate that private complainant suffered injuries inflicted
by the accused.

As to the alleged paramour, Disney Landia, the State did not even ask
the Honorable Court to subpoena her to appear in court when according to

2
Section 3, R.A. 9262
3
Section 3, par. A, RA 9262
4
Complaint-Affidavit of He K. Song, page 2
private complainant, Disney Landia is living in Irisan, Baguio City with the
accused. If Disney Landia is indeed in Baguio City, the State should have
secured her attendance during the trial to show that such person really
exists. But as shown during the trial, there is no Disney Landia.

2. In the judicial affidavit of He K. Song, she averred:

10: Q: What happened next?

A: I soon learned that he was again having an affair with another
woman, but this affair is much more deep and worse that his earlier affairs.
I confronted him about it but he denied having illicit relations with a
woman, then he hit me on my face. He would shout at me telling me that I
should not be listening to rumors and would insult me for believing baseless
rumors. From then on, he would physically harm me whenever we had an
argument such that he would push and even slap me, something he never
did before.5

Again, aside from this bare allegation, the State did not offer concrete
details and credible proofs proving the alleged hitting on the face, insulting,
pushing and slapping made by the accused on private complainant. The
Sate did not clarify when and where these incidents happened. When asked
during private complainant’s cross-examination, she merely answered that
they happened several times in their house in Sumulong. As was shown
during the trial, the house of private complainant and accused are very near
their neighbours’ houses ranging from just 10 to 15 meters away from each
other, and if private complainant and accused had several arguments
resulting to accused shouting and harming private complainant, their
neighbours would surely hear such incidents. However, the State never
presented any single witness to corroborate private complainant’s
allegations.

3. In the complaint-affidavit and in her judicial affidavit, private

complainant, respectively, averred:

21. There was a time that he came to our house with DISNEY to get his
things and when I started to ask him about our situation, he brought out his
firearm angrily, pointed the gun at me and shouted, “Ayaw ko na sa iyo!
Bakit ka ba nagpupumilit!?! Si DISNEY ang gusto kong asawa!!!!” I asked
him where I had gone wrong and he answered, “Wala kang nagawang
kamalian, basta’t ayaw na kita!” DISNEY then pushed me away saying,
“Lumayo kang desperada ka, akin lang si JOONG, wala ka ng karapatan sa
pera nya,” and then they left. I cried alone and did not want to tell my
siblings about what they did, I was ashamed and afraid and I did not know
what exactly to do. I did not report what happened to the police because

5
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 2
the police officers in our city are all his friends having been assigned
thereat;6

15: Q: What happened?

A: There was a time that he came to our house with DISNEY to get
his things and when I started to ask him about our situation, he brought out
his firearm angrily, pointed the gun at me and shouted, “Ayaw ko na sa iyo!
Bakit ka ba nagpupumilit!?! Si DISNEY ang gusto kong asawa!!!!” I asked
him where I had gone wrong and he answered, “Wala kang nagawang
kamalian, basta’t ayaw na kita!” DISNEY then pushed me away saying,
“Lumayo kang desperada ka, akin lang si JOONG, wala ka ng karapatan sa
pera nya,” and then they left. I cried alone and did not want to tell my
siblings about what they did, I was ashamed and afraid and I did not know
what exactly to do. I did not report what happened to the police because
the police officers in our city are all his friends.7

Again, these allegations are self-serving, the State did not offer proofs
as to the details regarding the incident. As was proven during the trial,
private complainant have neighbours who can corroborate such allegation if
it indeed happened, but the State failed to corroborate such self-serving
allegation. Further, not all of the police men and women in Baguio City are
friends with the accused. It is simply impossible. The accused himself does
not know every single police personnel in Baguio City. If it indeed crossed
the mind of the private complainant to report to the police and she does
not trust the police in Baguio City, there are so many police men and
women whom she can confide to in the neighbouring cities and
municipalities and even farther.

4. In the complaint-affidavit and in her judicial affidavit, private

complainant, respectively, averred:

24. In 2015, I went to seek the legal assistance of the Public Attorneys’
Office (PAO for brevity) at Baguio City where JOONG and I were scheduled
for a pre-litigation conference. Before the scheduled conference, I learned
that my mother-in-law was sick in Vigan, Ilocos Sur so I went there to visit
her. While there, JOONG arrived and upon seeing me, he shouted saying
“Anya aya ti araramidem?! Kunak nga talnaan dakon!” (What are you still
doing? I told you to leave me alone!), he attempted to kick me saying,
“Kinogtaran kan tupay!” and then he took and crumpled the pre-litigation
notice from the PAO and threw it at me. He did it in front of his mother, his
brother, our daughter, and our son-in-law. While there, JOONG and DISNEY
would overtly show their affection to each other by kissing and flirting with
each other in front of me and our daughter.8

6
Complaint Affidavit of He K. Song, page 4
7
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 3
8
Complaint-Affidavit of He K. Song, page 5
19. Q: What happened next?
A: I learned that my mother-in-law was sick in Vigan, Ilocos Sur so
I went there to visit her. While there, my husband arrived and upon seeing
me, he shouted saying “Anya aya ti araramidem?! Kunak nga talnaan
dakon!” (What are you still doing? I told you to leave me alone!), he
attempted to kick me saying, “Kinogtaran kan tupay!” and then he took
rolled up paper and threw it at me. He did it in front of his mother, his
brother, our daughter, and our son-in-law. While there, he and DISNEY
would overtly show their affection to each other by kissing and flirting with
each other in front of me and our daughter.9

20: Q: What did you do?

A: I went home insulted and betrayed. I could not go to my
husband’s home in Vigan, Ilocos Sur to seek assistance in putting sense into
him because he might be there again and hurt me. I endured all the insults,
the threats, the harsh words, the wrongs he did and failed to do, all for the
sake of my child and in the hopes that he would soon realize his mistake and
rebuild our family. However, he continues to cause me pain.10

Again, these allegations are self-serving, the State did not offer proofs
as to the details regarding the incident. The State never attempted to get
the testimony of accused’s mother, brother, and their child regarding such
incident for corroboration.

B. PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE

Psychological violence refers to acts or omissions causing or likely to

cause mental or emotional suffering of the victim such as but not limited to
intimidation, harassment, stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental infidelity. It includes causing
or allowing the victim to witness the physical, sexual or psychological abuse
of a member of the family to which the victim belongs, or to witness
pornography in any form or to witness abusive injury to pets or to unlawful
or unwanted deprivation of the right to custody and/or visitation of
common children. 11

The state attributes psychological violence committed by the accused

on his alleged illicit relationship and cohabitation with another woman
thereby resulting in her mental and emotional anguish. To establish
psychological violence as an element of the crime, it is necessary to show

9
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 3
10
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 4
11
Section 3, par. C, RA 9262
proof of commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section 5(i) or such
similar acts. And to establish mental or emotional anguish, it is necessary to
present the testimony of the victim as such experiences are personal to this
party. 12

From the aforequoted Section 5(i), in relation to other sections of RA

No. 9262, the elements of the crime are derived as follows:

(1) The offended party is a woman and/or her child or children;23

(2) The woman is either the wife or former wife of the offender, or is a
woman with whom the offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship,
or is a woman with whom such offender has a common child. As for the
woman's child or children, they may be legitimate or illegitimate, or living
within or without the family abode;

(3) The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional
anguish; and

(4) The anguish is caused through acts of public ridicule or humiliation,

repeated verbal and emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody
of minor children or access to the children or similar such acts or omissions.

In the complaint-affidavit and in her judicial affidavit, private

complainant, respectively, averred:

12. Q: Why did you say that your husband was having a
relationship with someone else?
A: It was when I confronted DISNEY about their relationship with
my husband. Once, I met the both of them in a restaurant, and they
told me that they love each other. They admitted that they have been
going out together. DISNEY added that they had been living together
as husband and wife and they did so freely because DISNEY’s husband
was assigned in another place. My husband blatantly said I should not
expect him back anymore and DISNEY herself told me that the two of
them already decided to leave their past relationships behind and stay
together.13

Such statements are bereft of concrete evidence as the allegations of

He regarding such illicit relationship are not specific. Private-complainant
merely averred that she met her husband and her alleged paramour
somewhere and sometime in a restaurant. Aside from the private-
complainant’s testimony, the State should have procured the testimonies of
other persons that could attest to such illicit relationship. For failure to do
12
Ricky Dinamling vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 199522, June 22, 2015
13
Complaint-Affidavit of He K. Song, page 2
so, such allegations are merely creations of the mind of the private-
complainant, which can be attributed to her having a Multiple Personality
Disorder.

In addition, to establish that the accused has been cohabiting with his
alleged paramour, the state has failed to present credible testimonies of
neighbors or other persons who could attest that they have been living
together. Such statements of the private-complainant are self-serving,
bereft of merit for being merely a product of her imagination. As stated
clearly in the testimony of the accused’s brother, Joong has been living not
with another woman but with him.

Further, as above, private-complainant also averred in her judicial

affidavit:
17. Q: What resulted to your communications?
A: He failed to support us. I would always send word for him to
send support but he ignored all my demands. Our child and I survived with
the help of my mother and siblings. I even had to file for solo parents’
benefits with the Department of Social Welfare and Development just to
make ends meet. 14

The State also attributes such mental and emotional anguish on the
part of the private-complainant due to the accused’s failure to provide
financial support to her and their child. Such are not as specific as to
constitute cause because the private-complainant failed to present proof
that indeed the accused has failed to give financial support. Such are merely
general statements lacking of specificity because the herein accused has
been religiously sending them money every month and every year, as
evidenced by our deposit slips. Further, if indeed the private-complainant
has been receiving financial support, she should have procured the
testimonies of her mother or siblings to attest to such fact. For failure to do
so, her allegations are baseless and are merely a result of her resentment to
the accused.

With all the statements averred herein and the lack of testimonies of
other persons aside from the private-complainant, the elements of
psychological violence are not complied with. Such acts as alleged by the
private-complainant are not sufficient as to cause mental or emotional
anguish, which must be caused through public ridicule or humiliation,
repeated verbal and emotional abuse, denial of financial support or custody
of minor children or access to the children or such similar acts or omissions.
15

14
Complaint-Affidavit of He K. Song, page 3
15
Ricky Dinamling vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 199522, June 22, 2015
 There is nothing in the allegations nor in the testimony of private-
complainant which constitutes mental or emotional anguish through public
ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal and emotional abuse, denial of
financial support or custody. The prosecution should have procured
sufficient testimonies and evidences to arrive to such conclusion. The mere
testimony of the accused is not enough to prosecute the accused.

ECONOMIC ABUSE

"Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or attempt to make a woman

financially dependent which includes, but is not limited to the following:

1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from

engaging in any legitimate profession, occupation, business or
activity, except in cases wherein the other spouse/partner objects on
valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73 of the Family
Code;

2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial resources and the

right to the use and enjoyment of the conjugal, community or
property owned in common;

3. destroying household property;

4. controlling the victims' own money or properties or solely

controlling the conjugal money or properties.16

The accused is a loving and very responsible father. He never

abandoned his family and he worked hard to support his family financially.
He did not commit economic abuse against his wife nor his son as can be
proved by the following proceedings in court:

1. In the complaint-affidavit and in her judicial affidavit, private

complainant, respectively, averred:

9. Early sometime in January 2005, JOONG informed me that he would

be availing of a loan from the AFPSLAI for purchasing additional materials
for the house we were building. When I asked when we would be going to
Baguio City for the loan so that I could also prepare, as he usually brings me
along, he said he would travel alone and come back immediately. When he
came back days later, he said he loaned the amount of Php 100,000.00.
However, I later learned that he actually loaned Php 300,000.00. I asked
him about it but JOONG just got angry at me;17

9: Q: What happened?

16
Section 3, par D, RA 9262
17
Complaint-Affidavit of He K. Song, page 2
 A: Early sometime in 2005, he informed me that he would be
availing of a loan from the AFPSLAI for purchasing additional materials for
the house we were building. He said he loaned the amount of Php
100,000.00. However, I later learned that he actually loaned Php
300,000.00. I asked him about it but he just got angry at me. 18

However, during the trial, the defense was able to prove that the
accused actually loaned P100,000.00 only, not P300,000.00, as evidenced
by the duly notarized contract of loan between accused and AFPSLAI. This
only shows private complainant’s propensities of lying. If she can lie in this
part of her allegation, who knows if she lied in her other statements. It only
proves that she has no respect for the court.

2. In her judicial affidavit, private complainant, averred the following:

16. Q: After the incident, what did you do?

A: I figured I couldn't just stand here without fighting. I said to
myself that at the least, my husband should at least support our child in any
ways possible, regardless if he would be with someone else other than me.
That is why I still communicated with him regarding his support to our
child.19

17. Q: What resulted to your communications?

A: He failed to support us. I would always send word for him to
send support but he ignored all my demands. Our child and I survived with
the help of my mother and siblings. I even had to file for solo parents’
benefits with the Department of Social Welfare and Development just to
make ends meet.20

18. Q: What else happened?

A: I went to my husband’s office to try to settle with him through
the assistance of his superiors however, despite his being notified to report
thereat, he continuously refused to heed to the order. He said, he would be
sending me Php 2,000.00 a month for support, but he only did so for a very
few months. I said it was not sufficient as he knows that our child are still
living with me, but he ignored my pleas.21

Again, these statements show that private complainant is a liar.

During the trial, the defense was able to prove that the accused was
religiously supporting his family as evidenced by the bank deposit slips
showing that the accused was depositing money in private complainant’s
bank accounts for her and their son’s support.

18
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 2
19
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 3
20
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 3
21
Judicial Affidavit of He K. Song, page 3
DODUMENTARY EVIDENCE:

The prosecution also presented the following exhibits and the accused
comments on each evidence presented:

Exhibit A- Marriage Certificate of Joong K. Song and He K. Song released

by the NSO
The accused admits the truthfulness of this marriage certificate
between him and private complainant.

Exhibit B- NSO Birth Certificate of Bae K. Song

The accused admits the truthfulness of this birth certificate of his
son, Bae K. Song.

Exhibit C- Pictures
The accused admits that it is his face in the photos. However, the
pictures do not prove anything. They merely show accused with his
female friends and co-workers socializing in various occasions.

Exhibit D- Love letters

The accused denies that he wrote the love letters.

Exhibit E- Film strip

The accused is confused as to what the film strip has to do with him.
He is not even in the developed photos.

APPLICABLE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE

1. Section 5 of RA No. 9262 enumerates the Acts of Violence Against

Women and Their Children as follows:

SECTION 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children.- The crime
of violence against women and their children is committed through any of
the following acts:

(a) Causing physical harm to the woman or her child;

(b) Threatening to cause the woman or her child physical harm;

(c) Attempting to cause the woman or her child physical harm;

(d) Placing the woman or her child in fear of imminent physical harm;
(e) Attempting to compel or compelling the woman or her child to
engage in conduct which the woman or her child has the right to
desist from or desist from conduct which the woman or her child has
the right to engage in, or attempting to restrict or restricting the
woman's or her child's freedom of movement or conduct by force or
threat of force, physical or other harm or threat of physical or other
harm, or intimidation directed against the woman or child. This shall
include, but not limited to, the following acts committed with the
purpose or effect of controlling or restricting the woman's or her
child's movement or conduct:

(1) Threatening to deprive or actually depriving the woman or

her child of custody to her/his family;

(2) Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her

children of financial support legally due her or her family, or
deliberately providing the woman's children insufficient
financial support;

(3) Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her child

of a legal right;

(4) Preventing the woman in engaging in any legitimate

profession, occupation, business or activity or controlling the
victim's own mon4ey or properties, or solely controlling the
conjugal or common money, or properties;

(f) Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm on oneself for the

purpose of controlling her actions or decisions;

(g) Causing or attempting to cause the woman or her child to engage

in any sexual activity which does not constitute rape, by force or
threat of force, physical harm, or through intimidation directed
against the woman or her child or her/his immediate family;

(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless conduct, personally

or through another, that alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child. This shall include,
but not be limited to, the following acts:

(1) Stalking or following the woman or her child in public or

private places;

(2) Peering in the window or lingering outside the residence of

the woman or her child;

(3) Entering or remaining in the dwelling or on the property of

the woman or her child against her/his will;
 (4) Destroying the property and personal belongings or
inflicting harm to animals or pets of the woman or her child;
and

(5) Engaging in any form of harassment or violence;

(i) Causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation

to the woman or her child, including, but not limited to, repeated
verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or
custody of minor children of access to the woman's child/children.22

The accused respectfully submits that he has never committed any of

the violence enumerated above. He did not did not inflict any physical,
sexual, economic or psychological abuse against his wife.

2. Ricky Dinamling vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 199522, June
22, 2015

Psychological violence is an element of violation of Section 5(i) just

like the mental or emotional anguish caused on the victim. Psychological
violence is the means employed by the perpetrator, while mental or
emotional anguish is the effect caused to or the damage sustained by the
offended party. To establish psychological violence as an element of the
crime, it is necessary to show proof of commission of any of the acts
enumerated in Section 5(i) or similar such acts. And to establish mental or
emotional anguish, it is necessary to present the testimony of the victim as
such experiences are personal to this party.

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

The accused humbly submits that the presumption of innocence has

not been overturned.

Under the EQUIPOISE RULE, when there is equilibrium in the

evidence presented by both sides, the CONSTITUTIONAL PRESUMPTIOM OF
INNOCENCE should tilt the balance of the scale in favor of the acquittal of
the accused, for, in such a situation, the offense has not been proven
beyond reasonable doubt, which is the quantum of evidence required to
convict an accused.

Suspicion alone is insufficient, the required quantum of evidence

being proof beyond reasonable doubt.23

22
Section 5, RA 9262
23
People v. Gargar, 300 SCRA 542 (1998)
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

The accused humbly submits that his guilt has not been proven proof
beyond reasonable doubt.

Proof beyond reasonable doubt is needed to overcome the

presumption of Innocence.24

Accused-appellant’s guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt25

otherwise, the Court would be left without any other recourse but to rule
for acquittal.

Courts should be guided by the principle that it would be better to

set free ten men who might be probably guilty of the crime charged than to
convict one innocent man for a crime he did not commit.26

CONCLUSION

On one hand, it is settled that in criminal prosecution, the state has

the burden to prove that all the elements of the crime charged. On the
other hand, the accused enjoys the constitutional presumption of
innocence. Accused through counsel most respectfully submits that the
state failed to discharge the burden of proving the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt. The testimonial and documentary evidence
introduced by the state are insufficient to overturn the constitutional
presumption of innocence accorded to the herein accused.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, accused through the undersigned

counsel most respectfully pray of the Honorable Court to GRANT the
foregoing demurrer and to dismiss the case against the herein accused.

Other relief, just and equitable under the premises is likewise prayed
for.

Baguio City, Philippines. September 25, 2017.

ATTY. JUNE MARK L. DELA CRUZ

Counsel for the Respondent
Unit 3, EDY Building, Kisad Road, Baguio City

24
People vs. Reyes, 60 SCRA 126 [1974]
25
People vs. Maliwanag, 58 SCRA 323 [ 1974]
26
En Banc, Melo, People v. Tagudar [G.R. No. 130588. June 8, 2000
 IBP No. 12345 | 03/03/12 | Baguio
PTR No. 54321 | 03/03/12 | Baguio
Roll No. 98765 | 03/03/12
MCLE Compliance No. 56789 | 03/03/16

NOTICE OF HEARING
COPY FURNISHED & EXPLANATION AS TO MODE OF FILING AND SERVICE

PROS. MARY THERESE GABRIELLE ESTIOKO

City Prosecutor
Baguio City, Philippines

Ma’am:

Please take notice that undersigned counsel will submit the foregoing
Demurrer to Evidence on September 29, 2017 at 2:00 o’clock in the
afternoon for the consideration of the Honorable Court sans further oral
arguments.

The foregoing motion was served personally with return card.

Thank you.

Atty. JUNE MARK L. DELA CRUZ