REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

6th JUDICIAL REGION

2ND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT
BANGA-LIBACAO-MADALAG
Banga, Aklan

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No: 3589-B
-versus-
For: DIRECT ASSAULT
JENNIFER REVICENTE y PERALTA
Accused.
X----------------------------------------------X

DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

COMES NOW, Accused, thru the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable
Court, most respectfully submits her demurrer to evidence, to wit:

TIMELINESS OF THE DEMURRER

Accused, upon motion in open court, was given ten (10) days after the
prosecution rested its case within which to file her demurrer to evidence. On July
28, 2022, the prosecution rested its case, thus, accused has until August 7, 2022
to file her demurrer. Since August 7, 2022 is a Sunday, the expiration of said
period is on August 8, 2022, which is Monday.

FACTS CONSTITUTING THE CHARGE

On February 9, 2022, Accused was charged of direct assault through an

Information filed by the Deputy Provincial Prosecutor, which states thus:

“That at about 4 o’clock in the afternoon of September 24,

2021, at Barangay Cupang, Municipality of Banga, Province of
Aklan, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction
of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then
and there, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously assault,
intimidate, pressed hard the hands off and pushed away RISA
R. RELOJO, a Barangay Chairwoman, a person in authority,
who was engaged in the performance of her official duty of
maintaining order during a Barangay conciliation proceedings,
by pacifying the accused who was unruly and engaged in a
commotion, to the damage and prejudice of the said victim in
the amount of TEN THOUSAND PESOS (P 10,000.00).”

“CONTRARY TO LAW”.
At the outset and before the Information was filed, the accused was not able to
submit her counter-affidavit due to lack of legal counsel. As stated in paragraph 2
of the Resolution dated December 3, 2021, the Respondent pro se asked time to
file her counter-affidavit, but failed to submit any, hence, the case was resolved
on the basis of the evidence presented by the complainant, herein Barangay
Chairwoman RISA R. RELOJO.

During Pre-Trial, the following facts were stipulated: the identity of the accused,
and that the accused filed a barangay complaint in Brgy. Cupang, Banga, Aklan on
September 24, 2021 against Woody and Lourdes Zambrona and Isagani Revicente
for Recovery of Sum of Money.

The prosecution has four (4) witnesses, namely: RISA R. RELOJO; PSSG. ELMAR T.
RELENTE; SHIRLEY N. RENTINO; and another reserved witness whom the
prosecution did not opt to present.

The following exhibits were marked for the prosecution: Exhibit “A” – the letter
complaint filed by RISA R. RELOJO; Exhibit “B” – Complaint Affidavit of RISA R.
RELOJO; Exhibit “C” – Affidavit of witness executed by SHIRLEY N. RENTINO; and
Exhibit “D” – Certification from the Banga MPS.

SUPERVENING FACTS DURING TRIAL

During trial, the prosecution initially presented two (2) witnesses, namely: PSSG.
ELMAR T. RELENTE and RISA R. RELOJO (the Complainant).

PSSG. ELMAR T. RELENTE is the investigating officer who interviewed the

Complainant and her witness, and prepared the documents to be filed before the
Prosecutor’s Office. As investigating officer whose participation in the case was
limited to documentations, he has no personal knowledge of the facts stated in
the charge, and as admitted during the cross-examination.

After presenting the investigating officer, the prosecution then presented the
Complainant Barangay Chairwoman RISA R. RELOJO. She testified as to the
statements she made in her Complaint-Affidavit.

On her Direct Examination, she admitted that there was failure of the barangay
conciliation proceedings dated September 24, 2021 between the accused and
Woody and Lourdes Zambrona and Isagani Revicente for Recovery of Sum of
Money. Likewise, she admitted that after failure of such conciliation proceedings,
the accused walked-out. As the accused was about to leave the barangay hall, the
Complainant held the hand of the accused. Accused then pressed the hand of the
Complainant and pushed her away, causing injury to the Complainant’s hand. The
Complainant followed the accused stating that there is a need to finish the
conciliation proceedings. Furthermore, accused uttered unsavory words which
caused intimidation.
2
Upon Cross-Examination, the Complainant was asked about her injury, and she
stated she had a medical certificate to support the allegation. However, upon
being asked further to show in open court said medical certificate, she cannot
produce it saying that she forgot to bring it during that trial. Furthermore, the
Complainant was asked why she followed the accused when the latter walked-out
of the proceedings and the Complaint said that they need to finish the
proceedings on that day. That barangay conciliation proceeding was on its second
call.

At another date, trial continued and the prosecution presented the third (3 rd)
witness SHIRLEY N. RENTINO who testified on her witness-affidavit.

On her Direct-Examination, she alleged that she was present during the barangay
conciliation proceedings and that the accused was unruly, having uttered
unsavory words, to quote “Barangay malang ra uwa tang nahadlok”.

However, during her Cross-Examination, she was not sure as to the alleged
utterance, and instead, stated that she has read the same in the minutes, and that
the utterance was recorded in the minutes of the barangay conciliation
proceedings. Furthermore, she admitted that she did not see the accused and the
Complainant holding hands because it happened elsewhere in the Barangay after
the accused walked-out with the Complainant following her. This is contrary to
paragraph four (4) of her witness-affidavit stating otherwise.

GROUND FOR DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

Based on the facts and the law, and as shown by the testimonies of the
Complainant and her witnesses, there is insufficient evidence to convict the
accused for direct assault.

ACCUSED DID NOT COMMIT DIRECT ASSAULT

The Revised Penal Code provides:

ARTICLE 148. Direct Assaults. — Any person or persons who, without a public
uprising, shall employ force or intimidation for the attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition, or shall
attack, employ force or seriously intimidate or resist any person in authority or
any of his agents, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on
occasion of such performance, shall suffer the penalty of prisión correccional in its
medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos, when the
assault is committed with a weapon or when the offender is a public officer or
employee, or when the offender lays hands upon a person in authority. If none of
these circumstances be present, the penalty of prisión correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed.
3
There are two (2) ways of committing direct assault, first is by, without public
uprising, by employing force or intimidation for the attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion or sedition; second is by,
without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force, or by seriously
intimidating or seriously resisting any person in authority or any of his agents,
while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on occasion of such
performance.1

The core element of direct assault is that the assault was made in the
performance of duty or by reason thereof.

In the case of People v. Sorrano, C.A., 38 O.G. 2243, it was held that “during a
political meeting held by a candidate supported by the municipal mayor, the
accused created a disturbance. The mayor approached the accused and a
personal encounter between the two ensued. The mayor was injured. It was held
that the accused was not guilty of direct assault, because the mayor approached
the accused, not to maintain order, but to prevent the meeting from becoming a
failure”. (italics and underscore supplied)

Similar in this case, accused JENNIFER REVICENTE y PERALTA walked-out of the

barangay hall during the conciliation proceeding. The Complainant Barangay
Chairwoman RISA R. RELOJO followed her, and held the accused by the hand. The
accused then tried to free herself and consequently pressed the hand or pushed
away the Complainant, causing injury to the latter.

Even assuming the fact that the accused pressed the hand or pushed away the
Complainant, there was no Direct Assault as the Complainant Barangay
Chairwoman was no longer in the performance of her official duty as barangay
mediator when the barangay conciliation has failed because the accused has
already walked-out of the meeting hall. Moreover, there was no evidence that the
Complainant was injured as she did not present any medical certificate or even a
physician to substantiate it.

What should the Complainant do is to terminate the proceedings for failure of

mediation, not to follow the accused and hold her or detain her inside the
barangay hall.

As to the utterances made by accused, it was merely an exercise of her

constitutional right of freedom of expression against the barangay, not directly
intended against the Complainant. To quote “Barangay malang ra uwa tang
nahadlok” clearly expresses her sentiment to the Government, not to the
Barangay Chairwoman herself. Moreover, it is contrary to human experience and
natural order of things that a Barangay Chairwoman who was accompanied by
her staffs inside the barangay, to be seriously intimidated to the utterances made,

1
REVISED PENAL CODE authored by LUIS B. REYES, 18TH EDITION
4
or even to the alleged pressing of hand or pushing her away. There may be other
crimes committed by the act of the accused but, certainly not direct assault.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed before this

Honorable Court that an Order be rendered acquitting the accused for the charge
of Direct Assault for failure to present sufficient evidence under the facts and the
law to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted.
August 08, 2022
Banga, Aklan

ATTY. JANMAR BARRIOS

Counsel for the Accused
IBP No. 165625 (valid until 31/12/2022)/ Aklan Chapter
PTR No. 7709028 (valid until 31/12/2022) / Aklan
MCLE Compliance No: VII-0013944
Roll of Attorney’s No. 74526
0390 L. Barrios Street, Poblacion, Kalibo, Aklan
E-mail: barriosjanmar@yahoo.com
Cp No. 0929 517 9616

Copy furnished by personal service:

OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR

Capitol Site, Kalibo, Aklan

Copy furnished by registered mail:

RISA R. RELOJO
Complainant
Brgy. Cupang, Banga, Aklan

EXPLANATION

Due to lack of messenger and material time, undersigned was constrained to

serve this pleading via registered mail.

ATTY. JANMAR BARRIOS