Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

BRANCH 80
MUNTINLUPA CITY

Presiding Judge : Hon. Jacob Macalla Montesa II


Public Prosecutor : Pros. Ruby Baclayo
PAO Lawyer : Atty. Shiela Santos
Clerk of Court : Eric Malabanan
Stenographer : Delia Mangahis

ACTUAL COURT OBSERVATION


Our group was able to observe criminal cases in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Muntinlupa
City, Branch 80 by securing a letter of intent. Out actual visit was set on September 27, 2017
(Wednesday) at 1:30 in the afternoon. The courtroom session started with the presence of
the Presiding Judge, Prosecutor, PAO lawyer, Acting Clerk of Court, Interpreter,
Stenographer, Private Lawyers, Complainant and the Accused.
We observed how the proceeding is conducted. We observed how the Lawyers in the
courtroom behaved and how they did their work, the documents presented in court and
how it is presented to the witnesses and the Judge, and how orders are given. In an actual
setting, we learned how the lessons we learned in law school were applied and we got a
sight of our profession.

THE COURTROOM
Compared to the courtroom as seen in the movies, the size of the courtroom was
surprisingly small and could accommodate only a number of people. During our visit, there
were about 43 cases to be heard and in each case, the complainant, the accused and their
respective lawyers (if they have one) are present so some of the parties to the proceeding
were waiting outside for their turn.
The Judge was seated behind a raised desk. Adjacent to the Judge is the witness stand and a
table provided for the use of the Clerk of court, stenographer, interpreter, PAO lawyer,
Prosecutor, and the Private Counsels.

PROCEEDINGS and SCHEDULED CASES


The courtroom proceedings include Arraignment, Preliminary Conference, Pre-trial
Conference, Cross-examine of the witness and Affidavits, Trial, and Judgment. During our
visit, there were five (5) cases for arraignment, four (4) cases for preliminary conference,
five (5) cases for pre-trial conference, and twenty-nine (29) cases for trial.

The cases include Grave Threats, Theft, Unjust Vexation, Damage to Property, Multiple
Physical Injuries, Violation of BP BLG. 22, Other Deceits, Less Serious Physical Injuries,
Attempted Homicide, Slight Physical Injuries, Delivering Prisoners from Jail, Other form of
Swindling, Illegal Possession of Firearms, Alarm & Scandal, Usurpation of Authority,
Malicious Mischief, Attempted Theft, Oral Defamation, Obstruction of Justice, and Direct
Assault.

THE HEARING
Upon the arrival of the Judge, everyone will be ordered to stand up and pray the prayer for
the courts. The clerk of court will call the cases to be heard and check if the parties to the
case are present.

English is the language used in the court. There is an interpreter if it is difficult for any party
to understand the questions and answers made in court.
CASES OBSERVED

ARRAIGNMENT

Criminal Case No. 56058


People vs. Willie Lopez y Presia
RIR in Multiple Physical Injuries & Damage to properties
Not Guilty Plea

Criminal Case No. 55191


People vs. Armando Astilla y Baltar
Unjust Vexation
Not Guilty Plea

TRIAL

Criminal Case No. 51541


People vs. Manuelito Basbas, Jr. Y Camacho
Attempted Theft

The complainant and the accused were present and wanted to settle the case instead of
pursuing it. Manuelito Basbas asked the complainant to withdraw the complaint and
offered payment for the crime he committed. The complainant agreed to sign the Affidavit
for desistance once they come to an agreement. They moved for the setting of payment on
October 11, 2017.

Criminal Case No. 54457


People vs. Steve M. Santillan
Slight Physical Injuries
Imelda Crawford (Complainant/victim) and Steve Santillan (Accused) was present. Imelda
took the witness stand took an oath. The prosecutor confirmed the identity of Imelda. She’s
50 years old, married to a foreigner, and currently a call center agent. Affidavits and
Documents were checked and shown to Imelda as she affirms its truthfulness and
authenticity. Medico-legal report was confirmed by the witness as hers. Cross-examination
was re-set on February 19, 2018.

Criminal Case No. 52414


People vs. Vicente Palomer Y Binamera
Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition

PO2 Noel Bulan was the complainant and was put on the witness stand under oath. The
evidence was presented and it was an improvised gun. Four (4) ammunitions were
presented as it was taken from the left pocket of the accused at the time of the arrest. The
improvised gun and the ammunition were marked as exhibits. Mug shots were confirmed
by the witness.

The prosecutor asked the witness about the facts and circumstances surrounding it. PO2
Noel Bulan, was the arresting officer of the accused. He was walking through a narrow path
when he saw the accused walking towards him. He saw a bulge on the body of the accused
(Nakabukol/Umbok sa katawan). He suspected that the bulge might be a gun and relying on
this knowledge he frisked the accused and found the improvised gun and ammunition. He
arrested the accused and said the Miranda rights.

The PAO lawyer began questioning the witness as to the manner of the arrest and how sure
was the arresting officer that the thing bulging from the body of the accused is a gun.

The case was set for continuation on January 24, 2018


Criminal Case No. 55707
People vs. Dominador Arboleda, Jay-Ar Flores
Illegal Barker

The Accused was not present. The complainant/arresting officer, PO1 MJ Galicia was
present and took the witness stand under oath.
The Prosecutor confirmed that the witness was with Police Officer Castro when the accused
was arrested. Affidavits and mug shots presented to the witness were confirmed.
The PAO Lawyer asked of the manner of the arrest and the circumstances surrounding it.
Witness stated that they were in the MMDA outpost in from of Starmall Alabang. The
jeepney (heading to Tunasan) was near the outpost. Accused was inviting passengers to
board the jeepney. PAO lawyer then asked why the drivers are not apprehended and the
police officers said that they do not have authority to arrest the drivers only the barkers
since it is prohibited by law. PAO lawyer asked if the PNP do not have the authority to arrest
any driver that would block the road but could arrest illegal barkers and the police officers
responded in the negative. Prosecutor then moved for the continuance for the next witness,
PO1 Castro.

Вам также может понравиться