Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

Municipality of Kalibo

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,
- versus - Criminal Case No. 0718-A
For: THEFT
RAFAEL RODRIQUEZ y JIRESSANO
and RONNIE YECLA y YECLA,
Accused.
x ---------------------------------------------- x
MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF ORDER
TO RELEASE SEIZED PROPERTY
“Whenever police act illegally - whatever their purpose -our society
suffers. Even if the tasks of the police are made somewhat more difficult by
adherence to lawful procedures, it would be a small price to pay for the
preservation of individual liberty. If it is conceded that law enforcement is
not as effective as it could be, it is fallacious to argue that it would
necessarily be improved if short cut methods were approved.” — Associate
Justice Lucas Bersamin.
The ACCUSED Ronnie Yecla, through the undersigned counsel, most
respectfully moves for the issuance of an Order to Release of the motorized
tricycle wrongfully seized by the PNP Kalibo police on August 28, 2014,
based on the following considerations:
1. The property seized belongs to a third person not involved in,
much less liable for the above-captioned case, in violation of the
second paragraph of Article 45, Revised Penal Code;
2. The property was seized neither by virtue of a valid search
warrant, nor as an incident to a lawful warrantless arrest;
1 Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin in G.R. No. 182010, Esquillo V. People of
the Philippines
3. The procedure for seizure or confiscation of property was not
properly observed;
4. There is no necessity for the property to be taken in custody of
court or the police since it is not listed as evidence in the case,
per Information filed in this case; and
5. The continued unfounded custody of the property by the police
violates its possessor and the owner’s right to property and right
against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Premises
1. The seized property is a motorized tricycle owned by and registered in
the name of Adove A. Dalida Sr. but was in the lawful possession of
 accused Ronnie Yecla which he used as means of livelihood. The object
of the case is two sacks of cement allegedly stolen by accused Rafael
Rodriguez who was a checker of Ang Pue Hardware in charge of taking
out the ordered items from the stockroom, and Ronnie Yecla who was
in charge of the delivery of orders to customers.

1.2. On August 28, 2014 at 9AM, accused Ronnie Yecla was to deliver
20 sacks of cement using the subject motorized tricycle but
instead he loaded 22 sacks released from the stockroom. The
security guard of Ang Pue discovered the excess before Yecla
could leave the premises.
1.3. The incident was reported to the Kalibo PNP and the police
arrested and detained the two accused. The fact that 22 sacks
were loaded in the tricycle was not denied. The accused claimed
that a miscounting happened.
1.4. After 5 days of detention, on September 2, 2014, accused Yecla
was released on bail. That was when he learned that the tricycle
was seized. He did not know the circumstances of the seizure.
The Certification on record executed by PO3 Ephraem Pura who
received the tricycle shows that the seizure happened several
hours after the arrest at 4PM on August 28, 2014. Since then,
the tricycle has been detained at Kalibo PNP.
1.5. No receipt of property seized was given to the accused or any of
his family. The seized item was not inventoried. PO3 Pura who
executed the Certification was not present during said seizure.

Discussion
2. The seizure was done in
violation of Article 45 of the
Revised Penal Code.

2.1 Second paragraph of Article 45 provides:

“Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and

forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be property of
a third person not liable for the offense...xxx (underscoring
added)

2.2. The motorized tricycle seized is owned and registered in the

name of Adove A. Dalida Sr. Said owner is not in any way
involved in the case, much less liable for the offense charged.
Hence, his tricycle is exempt from seizure. Moreover, the motor
vehicle is not a mala in se article that would justify seizure
thereof.

3. The property was seized

neither by virtue of a
valid search warrant, nor as an
incident of a warrantless arrest.
 3.1 There was no search warrant or warrant of arrest issued against
the accused. A warrantless arrest of the accused was made
allegedly in flagrante delicto. The seizure of the tricycle,
however, was not done on the occasion of the warrantless arrest
but several hours afterwards as indicated in the Certification of
PO3 Pura.

4. The procedure for seizure

of property was not observed.

4.1 No receipt for property seized was issued by the confiscating

officers. No proper inventory of the seized property was made by
them. Consequently, they also failed to secure a Certification of
Orderly Search from the owner or custodian of the property.
Moreover, PO3 Ephraem S. Pura Jr. who executed a Certification
in relation to the seizure was not present during the seizure.

5. The property seized is not

listed as evidence in the case.

5.1 Objects which are not illegal per se which may be used as
evidence in a case are kept in the custody of the Court to
preserve its condition and to secure its presentation when
necessary. In this case, the seized tricycle does not need to be
presented in court as evidence nor is there anything in its
condition that needs to be preserved through confiscation.

5.2 The Information filed in this case made no mention of the seized
tricycle as evidence. In fact, the presentation of the tricycle is
immaterial to the case because the object allegedly stolen is
cement, not the tricycle itself. If the purpose was to show how
the bags were arranged in the tricycle to conceal the excess, it is
no longer possible as they were already unloaded. They should
have been photographed before the unloading.

6. Accused is deprived of
his Constitutional rights to
possession of property and
against unreasonable searches
and seizures.
6.1 The legal concept of Multi-Factor Balancing Test requires officers
to weigh the manner and intensity of the interference to the right
of the people, the gravity of the crime committed, and the
circumstances attending the incident. The right to property of a
person must be given more weight under the circumstances of
this case.
6.2. As the rules and procedures for the seizure of property were not
properly observed by the confiscating officer, there has been an
impairment of the constitutional rights against unreasonable
 searches and seizures not only of the accused but also of the
owner of the seized tricycle.
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed of the Honorable
Court that an Order be issued forthwith to release the subject tricycle
to the accused Ronnie Yecla to curtail the continuing oppressive
violation of his rights.
Kalibo, Aklan, Philippines, October 28, 2014.
INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
(Counsel for Accused Ronnie Yecla)
By:
ROWENA MAE N. MENCIAS
IBP-Aklan, Godofredo P. Ramos Hall
of Justice, Kalibo, Aklan;
PTR No. 4310038, Kalibo, Aklan,
May 12, 2014;
IBP No. 968800, Apr. 23, 2014;
Roll No. 62828,
MCLE Compliance Exempt

NOTICE OF HEARING
The Clerk of Court
Municipal Trial Court
Kalibo Aklan
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor
Kalibo, Aklan
Greetings: Please take notice that the foregoing Motion shall be
submitted for the consideration and approval of the Honorable Court
immediately upon receipt thereof or as soon as counsel and matter
maybe heard by the Honorable Court.

Rowena Mae N. Mencias

Counsel for Accused Ronnie Yecla

COPY FURNISHED:
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor
Kalibo, Aklan