Republic of the Philippines

COURT OF APPEALS
Dipolog City, Philippines
Zamboanga Del Norte

Zamboanga Del Norte DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CA-GR No. 00121

Plaintiff-Appellee,
(Crim. Cases Nos. 001-2021)
- versus -
For: VIOLATION OF SEC. 5 &
SEC. 11 OF R.A 9165
Patrick Sayly,
Accused-Appellant.

x x

APPELLANT’S BRIEF

COMES NOW, accused-appellant, Patrick Sayly, by

counsel, and to this Honorable Court, most respectfully states:

Timeliness of the Brief

1. On October 1, 2010, accused-appellant received from

this Honorable Court a Notice dated September 22, 2010
directing the filing of an Appellant’s Brief within the non-
extendible period of thirty (30) days from receipt and with proof
of service thereof upon the appellee. As such, accused-appellant
has until November 1, 2010 within which he may file his
Appellant’s Brief. Hence, the timely filing of the instant
Appellant’s Brief;

Subject Index

2. The following are the digest of the arguments and their

page references, viz.:

3. The following are the table of cases alphabetically

arranged with reference to the pages where they are cited, viz.:

Jurisprudence Page
People vs. Sale CA-GR No. 00121

Salum v. People 10
Jaime Dela Cruz v. People 12
Diokno v. Rehabilitation 12
Finance Corporation
People v. Sulit 13
People v. Ramos 13

Book reference
Evidence Series 11
2009 (The
Bar Lectures Series)
by Willard B. Riano, p.119

Assignment of Errors

4. Accused-appellant presents the following assignment of

errors committed by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch ABC
of Zamboanga Del Norte, viz.:

First, the RTC gravely erred in his order finding

the:

Statement of the Case

5. The information from the office of the Prosecutor of Dipolog City

gravely erred in his order finding that:
The name of the accused cited from the information made
by the office of the Prosecutor, was erred. “Patrick Saelie”
was indicated as the name of the accused instead of
“Patrick Sayly”;
The arresting officers gravely erred in arresting because
the accused-appellant was not “Patrick Saelie”;
The accused-appellant “Patrick Sale” was in the Maputik,
Dipolog City not Miputak, Dipolog City which is indicated
from the information provided by the office of the
Prosecutor.

Statement of Facts

6. On June 22, 2010, 2:15 in the afternoon, the accused-appellant,

Patrick Sale was in his house, bedridden and have a stroke;

That the accused-appellant doesn’t possess any illegal drugs that

indicated from the information provided by the office of the
Prosecutor;
Page 2 of 5
People vs. Sale CA-GR No. 00121

That the real suspect ran toward to the direction of the accused-
appellant and successfully escaped. After several hours, the
arresting officers arrested the accused-appellant because of
violation for Sec. 5 & 11 of R.A. 9165 wherein witnesses said that
the arresting officers are apprehending for “Patrick Saelie” but
instead, they arrested the accused-appellant, “Patrick Sayly”.

Issues

7. Accused-appellant respectfully submits the following

issues of fact and law for its judgment, to wit:

Arguments

8. In fine, appellant is of the considered view that the

arresting officers erred in arresting the right person and the
accused-appellant is bedridden which indicated that he can’t even
stand on his own. So that, the RTC erred in convicting the
accused-appellant.

Relief

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it most respectfully

prays of this Honorable Court that the accused-appellant criminal
case will be dismissed.

Such other reliefs just and equitable under the circumstances

are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted.

Atty. ROLLEN NICO B. TERTE

Page 3 of 5
 People vs. Sale CA-GR No. 00121

EXPLANATION ON SERVICE
BY PRIVATE COURIER SERVICE
AND/OR REGISTERED MAIL

Accused-appellant, by counsel, respectfully states that due

to time constraints, the distance between counsel’s office and
that of the adverse parties, the number of adverse parties, and
the lack of sufficient messengerial personnel to effect personal
service, copies of the foregoing Appellant’s Brief were thus
served upon the adverse parties by private courier service and/or
registered mail.

Republic of the Philippines

City of Dipolog
x x

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

Service upon the adverse parties of the foregoing

Appellant’s Brief was effected by private courier service and/or
registered mail as hereunder evinced by the receipts attached
opposite their names, viz.:
WITNESS MY HAND this 15th day of October, 2010 in
Dipolog City, Philippines.

xxx

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 15th day of

October, 2010 in Dipolog City, Philippines by affiant who has
satisfactorily proven his identity through his IBP Identification Card
with Roll of Attorney No.

Doc. No.: 7718

Page No.: 7
Book No.: 7
Series of 2010.

Page 4 of 5
People vs. Sale CA-GR No. 00121

NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

The Division Clerk of Court

Zamboanga Del Norte Division
Court of Appeals
Dipolog City

The undersigned respectfully submits the foregoing

Appellant’s Brief for the consideration and appropriate action of
the Honorable Court.

xxxx

Page 5 of 5