You are on page 1of 3

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

THIRD JUDICIAL REGION


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
CITY OF SAN FERNANDO, PAMPANGA
BRANCH ____

THE PEOPLE OF THE


PHILIPPINES,

-versus- Criminal Case No. 08-02777

TEMPURA MALONZO, SPOUSES


KATSUDON VALENCIA and
TERIYAKI VALENCIA,
Accused.
x---------------------------------------------x

MOTION TO DEFER ARRAIGNMENT


AND SUSPEND PROCEEDINGS

Accused, through undersigned counsel, to this Honorable Court, respectfully


states that:

1. The arraignments of the accused in this case were set on 10 June 2011 at
1:30 in the afternoon. Copy of the Order setting the arraignment was received on 6 June
2011.

2. For the information and guidance of this Honorable Court, on 3 June 2011,
a Petition for Habeas Corpus was filed for all the accused in this case. The said Petition
is currently pending before the Court of Appeals, and in case of an adverse decision,
the petitioners in said petition will appeal to the Supreme Court; copy of which is hereto
attached and made integral part hereof as Annex “A”.

3. A perusal of the said petition would show that the issues raised therein are
prejudicial questions which must be resolved first before this Honorable Court can
proceed with the instant case.

4. With all due respect, and in view of the foregoing, this Honorable Court
should defer the arraignment and refrain from continuing with the proceedings of the
instant case under the principle of judicial courtesy as laid down in the case of Eternal
Gardens Memorial Park Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-50054 August 17,
1988, wherein the Supreme Court held in this wise –

“Although this Court did not issue any restraining


order against the Intermediate Appellate Court to prevent it
from taking any action with regard to its resolutions
respectively granting respondents' motion to expunge from
the records the petitioner's motion to discuss and denying
the latter's motion to reconsider such, order, upon learning of
the petition, the appellate court should have refrained from
ruling thereon because its jurisdiction was necessarily limited
upon the filing of a petition for certiorari with this Court
questioning the propriety of the issuance of the above-
2

mentioned resolutions. Due respect for the Supreme Court


and practical and ethical considerations should have
prompted the appellate court to wait for the final
determination of the petition before taking cognizance of the
case and trying to render moot exactly what was before this
court.”

5. Verily, so as not to render moot the issues raised before the Court of
Appeals in the petition for habeas corpus and for practical and ethical considerations,
this Honorable Court should wait for the final determination of the said petition before
taking cognizance of the case.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the Honorable


Court suspend the proceedings in this case including the arraignment of all the accused
and wait for the final determination of the petition for habeas corpus.

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

Angeles City for the City of San Fernando, Pampanga, 7 June 2011.

Atty. SASHIMI DE JESUS


Counsel for the Accused
Sps. Katsudon and Teriyaki Valencia
Roll of Attorneys No. 11111
IBP Lifetime Member No. 00222
PTR No. AC3333333/01-03-2013
MCLE Compliance No. IV-4444444
Issued on December 12, 2012
555 Sto. Entierro St., Angeles City
Tel Nos. 888-6666, 888-7777

NOTIFICATION AND COPY FURNISHED:

MAGURA TOLENTINO, JR.


City Prosecutor
City of San Fernando
Pampanga

The Branch Clerk of Court


MTC Branch III
City of San Fernando
Pampanga

Greetings:

Please submit the foregoing for the consideration and resolution of the Honorable
Court immediately upon receipt hereof.

Atty. SASHIMI DE JESUS


3

EXPLANAT IO N

(in compliance with Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)

Copies of the pleading/motion to which this explanation is appended was:


 filed with this Honorable Court by registered mail;
 sent to counsel for the adverse party/ies by registered mail; due to the
following reason/s:
 the distance between this Honorable Court and counsel’s office which
makes personal filing of the pleading/motion impracticable;
 the great distance from the office of counsels for the parties which makes
personal service impracticable;
 lack of office personnel to effect personal service;
 time constraints.

Atty. SASHIMI DE JESUS