Comment To The Formal Offer of Exhibits: ACCUSED, Through Counsel and Unto This Honorable Court

Republic of the Philippines
Eleventh Judicial Region

ND
2 MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT
OF MALUNGON-ALABEL
Alabel, Sarangani Province
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CRIM. CASE NO. 16-2608-A

Plaintiff,
-versus- -for-
CARLO ADAM, RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE

RES. IN LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES
Accused.
x----------------------------x
COMMENT TO THE FORMAL OFFER OF EXHIBITS
ACCUSED, through counsel and unto this Honorable Court,

most respectfully submit his comment and objection to the exhibits
offered in evidence by the prosecution, to wit:
EXHIBITS NATURE COMMENT/OBJECTION
“A” Affidavit of Defense objects to the

to Witness of admissibility of the
“A-2” Comodor Capitan exhibits on the ground
(Originally Y Tuk (his that it is hearsay and self-
marked as Exh. B signature and serving.
to B-2) signature of
During his presentation as
Prosecutor
witness, Comodor Tuk
Pagador)
Capitan admitted that he
was not present during
the incident. Thus, the
testimony of the witness
with regard to this matter
would all be hearsay and
is inadmissible as
1 of 5| P a g e
evidence.
“B” Extract Blotter of Defense objects to the

(Originally Alabel Municipal admissibility of the
marked as Exh. C) Police Station exhibits on the ground
dated December that it is self-serving.
(Pre-marked as 7, 2015
Exh. “F”)
“C” Traffic Accident Defense objects to the

to Report form admissibility of the
“C-1” consisting of 2 exhibits on the ground
(Originally pages that information alleged in
marked as Exh. D the Traffic Accident
to D-1) Report form was hearsay.
During its presentation as

evidence, there was no
proof as to the veracity of
the position and direction
of vehicle moments before
the collision.
“D to D-1” Photographs in Defense denies the

the scene of the existence of said exhibit,
(Originally crime and the and objects to the purpose
marked as Exh. F computer for which it was offered
to F-1) generated picture for being misleading.
showing the
victim Cristito The photographer who
Capitan in the
took the pictures was not
hospital
presented and was unable
to identify the same. In
Sison v. People 250 SCRA
58, the Supreme Court
said: The rule in this
jurisdiction is that
photographs, when
2 of 5| P a g e
presented in evidence,
must be identified by the
photographer as to its
production and testified as
to the circumstances
under which they were
produced. x x x
Photographs, however,
can be identified also by
any other competent
witness who can testify to
its exactness and accuracy.
“E” Hospital Bill (In- Defense objects to the

(Previously Patient Statement admissibility of the
marked as Exh. of Account) exhibits on the ground
H) that it is hearsay.
“F to F-9” Various official No comment.

receipts
(Previously
marked as Exh. I
to I-9)
“G to G-1” Kasabutan Defense objects to the
consisting of two admissibility of the
(Originally pages executed exhibits on the ground
marked as Exh. J before the Office that it is hearsay and self-
to J-1) of the Punong serving.
Barangay
The Kasabutan was not
properly identified by the
signatories in fact the
signatories were not
presented in court but
Comodor Capitan only.
There was no proof that if
indeed there was a pledge,
the sum of money was
used for the medication of
3 of 5| P a g e
Cristito Capitan.
“H” to “H-1” Judicial Affidavit Defense objects to the

(Previously of Comodor Tuk admissibility of the
marked as Exh. K Capitan (the exhibits on the ground
to K-1) document and his that it is hearsay and self-
signature) serving.
During his presentation as

witness, Comodor Tuk
Capitan admitted that he
was not present during
the incident. Thus, the
testimony of the witness
with regard to this matter
would all be hearsay and
is inadmissible as
evidence.
“I to I-1” Judicial Affidavit Defense objects to the

of PO2 Napoleon admissibility of the
(Previously Cahagay (the exhibits on the ground
marked as Exh. G- document and his that it is misleading.
G1) signature)
During the cross
examination, the witness
testified that he failed to
put into writing the details
of the incident. He
admitted that he
memorized all the data he
acquired in responding
the incident and when he
was asked regarding the
details, he can no longer
remember it.
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that the evidence

and exhibits submitted by the prosecution subject of the
4 of 5| P a g e
comment/objection by the accused be denied admission for the
purpose it was offered.
Other relief just and equitable are likewise prayed for.
Alabel, Sarangani Province, 04 April 2019.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
Department of Justice
Sarangani District Office
BY:
BAI ALEFHA HANNAH M. MUSA-ABUBACAR

Public Attorney I
Roll of Attorney No. 67366
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0009755
IBP OR No. 098228-01/Jan/2019
Email Add: [email protected]
09090154295
PTR Exempt
NOTICE
THE CLERK OF COURT
MCTC of Alabel-Malungon
GREETINGS!
Please submit the foregoing Comment to Formal Offer of

Exhibits for consideration and approval of the Honorable Court
immediately upon receipt hereof.
BAI ALEFHA HANNAH M. MUSA-ABUBACAR
Copy Furnished: PPO by personal service
5 of 5| P a g e

Comment To The Formal Offer of Exhibits: ACCUSED, Through Counsel and Unto This Honorable Court

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comment To The Formal Offer of Exhibits: ACCUSED, Through Counsel and Unto This Honorable Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

Eleventh Judicial Region

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CRIM. CASE NO. 16-2608-A

CARLO ADAM, RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE

COMMENT TO THE FORMAL OFFER OF EXHIBITS

ACCUSED, through counsel and unto this Honorable Court,

EXHIBITS NATURE COMMENT/OBJECTION

“A” Affidavit of Defense objects to the

“B” Extract Blotter of Defense objects to the

“C” Traffic Accident Defense objects to the

During its presentation as

“D to D-1” Photographs in Defense denies the

“E” Hospital Bill (In- Defense objects to the

“F to F-9” Various official No comment.

“H” to “H-1” Judicial Affidavit Defense objects to the

During his presentation as

“I to I-1” Judicial Affidavit Defense objects to the

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that the evidence

Other relief just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

Alabel, Sarangani Province, 04 April 2019.

BAI ALEFHA HANNAH M. MUSA-ABUBACAR

Please submit the foregoing Comment to Formal Offer of

BAI ALEFHA HANNAH M. MUSA-ABUBACAR

Copy Furnished: PPO by personal service

You might also like