2205918 KRAKOW

CBA LAW FIRM

Baguio City, Philippines

To: Mr. Pimentelem

Date: December 19, 2021

Re: Zuzu’s right to decide on his father John’s medical

situation and Joe’s defense on his criminal charge.

You have tasked me to prepare a legal memorandum

concerning the case of our client Zuzu on his right to decide
on behalf of his comatose father John and Joe’s defense on
his criminal charge. I have presented here the summary of
arguments, key facts, issues, our possible defense, applicable
jurisprudence and laws that can be our basis to defend our
client, including the strengths and weakness of the case.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
In the case of Zuzu, in his right to decide on behalf of his
father, John, will definitely fall. Our Court has something to
do on the constitutionality of our Family laws, the Court has
something to clear about a provision that will give the right to
choose whom to marry and who are to be validly married.
But, there is nothing we can do, even if we support it with
foreign jurisprudence or laws, if these laws or jurisprudence
are against our public policy and morals like that of same-sex
marriage of the United states and all its effects. In the case
of Joe, the other father, he cannot invoke Art 247 of the
Revised Penal code but his case may be mitigated through the
mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation.

KEY FACTS
Joe and John are both of legal and are American Citizens.
John, who is a former Filipino, acquired his American
Citizenship in 1990. They were long time couple for 20 years

Page | 1
 2205918 KRAKOW

and were married in 2017 when the same-sex marriage in the

United States was approved by the Federal Supreme Court.
In 1994, Joe donated his sperm for artificial insemination
and was used to inseminate one of their friends. The woman
gave birth to Zuzu who was subsequently jointly adopted by
the couple.
During one vacation here in the Philippines, Joe caught
John having sex with another man, Jake. Fueled by his anger.
Joe struck John in his back with an axe. Joe was arrested and
John was immediately taken to the hospital.
After hearing the incident, John’s family rushed to the
hospital and took care of Him and started to make decisions.
Zuzu claimed that he has the right to decide on his
father’s life.

CONCLUSION
Our client, Zuzu, has no defense at all and the case will
definitely fall, as provided by our laws and jurisprudence,
Zuzu has no right to decide on behalf of his bedridden or
comatose father John, for the reason that he is a stranger and
not part of his nuclear family. Joe’s situation in invoking the
defense of exceptional circumstance will also fall. However, it
can be mitigated by the mitigating circumstance of Passion
and Obfuscation.
Furthermore, it is highly recommended that we still
present foreign laws and jurisprudence to our courts for it to
take cognizance of the marriage and the rights of Zuzu.

Page | 2