Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

th Judicial Region

Branch,

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.

Plaintiff,
–versus- For: Violation of Sec. 5 of Art.
II of R.A. 9165
,
Accused.

x-----------------------------------------x

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.

Plaintiff,

-versus- For: Violation of Sec. 11, Art.

II of R.A. 9165
,
Accused.

x-----------------------------------------x

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.

Plaintiff,

-versus- For: Violation of Sec. 12, Art.

II of R.A. 9165
,
Accused.

COMMENT TO THE FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE

OF THE PROSECUTION
The accused, with the assistance of the, through the undersigned counsel and unto
this Honorable Court, most respectfully submits his Comment to the Formal Offer of
Evidence of the Prosecution, to wit:
EXHIBITS COMMENT

“A” and its sub-markings Accused admits only the existence of said
affidavit. They are objected for being self-
Joint Affidavit of Arresting/Seizing serving. Further, they do not prove the
Officers

“B” and its sub-markings
Affidavit of Poseur-Buyer
“D” and its sub-markings
Certificate of Inventory
“E”
Request for Laboratory Examination
“F”
Chemistry Report No.
“G”
Chemistry Report No.
“H”
circumstances that led to the arrest of the
accused.
Accused admits only the existence of said
affidavit. They are objected for being self-
serving. Further, they do not prove
alleged buy-bust operation and legality of
the arrest.
Accused admits their existence and objects
to their admissibility with respect to the
purpose for which they are being offered
for being IMMATERIAL &
IRRELEVANT because the prosecution
failed to show that the mandatory
provision of Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165 was
faithfully complied with.
Accused objects to this exhibit with respect
to the purpose for which it is being offered
for being self-serving.
Accused admits its existence and objects to
their admissibility with respect to the
purpose for which they are being offered
for being IMMATERIAL &
IRRELEVANT because BOTH accused
were not seized any drug items.
Moreover, the same was NOT
IDENTIFIED IN COURT.
Accused admits only the existence but
objects to their admissibility with respect
to the purpose for which they are being
offered for being self-serving.
Accused admits only the existence but
objects to their admissibility with respect
Certificate of Coordination to the purpose for which they are being
offered for being self-serving.

“I” Accused objects to this exhibit as it

appears that it has NOT BEEN
Chain of Custody IDENTIFIED IN COURT.

“J” Accused admits only the existence of said

affidavit. They are objected for being self-
Buy-bust Money serving. Further, they do not prove
alleged buy-bust operation and legality of
the arrest.

“L” Accused admits only the existence of said

affidavit. They are objected for being self-
Judicial Affidavit of serving. Further, they do not prove the
circumstances that led to the arrest of the
accused.

“M” Accused admits only the existence but

objects to their admissibility with respect
Paraphernalia to the purpose for which they are being
offered for being self-serving.

“N” Accused admits only the existence of said

affidavit. They are objected for being self-
Judicial Affidavit of serving. Further, they do not prove
alleged buy-bust operation and legality of
the arrest.

“O” Accused admits their existence and objects

to their admissibility with respect to the
Judicial Affidavit of purpose for which they are being offered
for being IMMATERIAL &
IRRELEVANT because the prosecution
failed to show that the mandatory
provision of Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165 was
faithfully complied with.
 WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this
Honorable Court that the foregoing comment to the exhibits offered by the prosecution
be considered in resolving the Prosecution’s Formal Offer of Evidence.
Respectfully submitted this th day of 2019 at.

By:

Copy furnished: (by personal service)

Assistant Provincial Prosecutor

OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR