REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 259 - PARAÑAQUE CITY

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

- versus - Crim. Case No. ______________

(I.S. No. ___________)

For: Violation of Sec. 11, Art. II

of R.A. 9165

ISHRA DELA HOYA,

(Presently detained at the NBI
Detention Center, NBI, Taft Ave.
Manila),
Accused.
x------------------------------------------------x

MOTION
(to grant bail to accused)

Accused, by counsel, to this Honorable Court, respectfully states:

1. On April 18, 2078, the accused filed before this Court a Petition

for bail. The determination thereof was held in abeyance as it was moved

that the hearing thereof be allowed to go hand in hand with or parallel to

the Government’s presentation of its evidence-in-chief, thereby determining

the strength thereof.

 -2-

2. The rules of court provides as follows:

“Sec. 8. Burden of proof in bail application – At the

hearing of an application for bail filed by a person who is in
custody for the commission of an offense punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, the
prosecution has the burden of showing that evidence of guilt
is strong. The evidence presented during the bail hearing
shall be considered automatically reproduced at the trial
but, upon motion of either party, the court may recall any
witness for additional examination unless the latter is dead,
outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.”

3. It is not amiss to say that accused has been languishing in jail for

about six (6) months now. In fact, he was held in custody since February

15, 2078 up to April 2078 or a woeful period of two (2) month’s

incarceration without being charged with committing any offense at all; so

that he was compelled to file his petition for habeas corpus.

A copy of said petition is attached as Annex “A”.

4. On this score, the prosecution was accorded an opportunity to

adduce such evidence which the Court shall consider in determining

whether the accused shall be granted bail. So far, the prosecution has

presented only the forensic chemist. For two (2) consecutive hearings, the

Government failed to adduce further evidence despite due notice.

Thus, the prosecution did not discharge its function showing the

non-entitlement of accused to his constitutionally given right to a

provisional liberty.
 -3-

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that accused be admitted

to bail in such amount as this Honorable Court may fix.

Quezon City, Philippines, 31 July 2078.

APPLE SAMSUNG
Law Offices
Counsel for the Petitioner
Suite 760000, Crowne 00 Condominium
No. 00 Panay Avenue, Quezon City
Tel. Nos. 3333-333333

By:

ELMO BIG BIRD

PTR No. 9999999/1-02-2078/Quezon City
IBP No. 664817/1-02-2078/Makati
Roll of Attorney No. 444444

NOTICE OF HEARING

Hon. Nikita Krushchev

State Prosecutor
Department of Justice
Manila

Sir:

Please take notice that on 4 August 2078 at 8:30 a.m. or as soon

thereafter as it may be heard, the undersigned counsel will submit the
foregoing petition for the kind consideration and approval of this Honorable
Court.

ELMO BIG BIRD

Copy Furnished:

Hon. Nikita Krushchev

State Prosecutor
Department of Justice
Manila