REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 44, PASAY CITY

THE PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES, CRIM. CASE NO. M-PSY-14-20636-CR

- versus - For: Violation of Sec. 301, PD 1096

ROSITA ALQUERO,
Accused.
x--------------------------------x

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Comes now the prosecution before this Honorable Court

respectfully moves for the reconsideration of the Order dated 30
January 2018, a copy of which was received thru registered mail on 19
February, respectfully alleging the following grounds, facts and legal
basis in support thereof:

1. The Order should be reconsidered for the following reasons:

a. The Honorable Court held, “Corollary, the documentary

evidence offered by the prosecution has no probative value to
convict the accused beyond reasonable doubt.”

Only two elements are needed to constitute violation of

Section 301 of PD No. 1096: (1) that there was construction of
a building being undertaken by the accused; and (2) accused
proceeded with the construction without first obtaining a
building permit therefore from the Building Official assigned
in the place where the subject building is located or the
building work is to be done.

The prosecution has in fact presented sufficient evidence to

prove construction of the subject building. The three (3)
Notices of Illegal Construction were all received by the owner
as shown by her signature appearing thereon, she, in so doing,
acknowledges the on-going illegal construction of the building.
Despite receipt of the notices, accused nevertheless
disregarded them and continued with the construction;

b. Even assuming without conceding that the witness’ testimony

was stricken off from the records, the Honorable Court cannot
dismiss the case simply for the reason that the subject building
 was actually completely erected. Res ipsa loquitur, a Latin
phrase which literally means “the thing speaks for itself,” fully
satisfies elements of the offense charged herein: that the
accused had constructed a building without first obtaining the
necessary permit therefor.

2. The mere failure of the accused to present compliance with the

Section 301 of PD No. 1096 cannot merit dismissal by this Honorable
Court of the crime charged, much less grant an order of acquittal.

3. Furthermore, granting without admitting that should the Honorable

Court order the dismissal of a criminal case, this should not result in
the acquittal of the said accused. As fully explained by the Court in
People vs. Salico:1

“This argument or reasoning is predicated on a

confusion of the legal concepts of dismissal and
acquittal. Acquittal is always based on the merits,
that is, the defendant is acquitted because the
evidence does not show that defendant’s guilt is
beyond a reasonable doubt; but dismissal does not
decide the case on the merits or that the defendant
is not guilty. Dismissal terminates the proceeding,
either because the court is not a court of competent
jurisdiction, or the evidence does not show that the
offense was committed within the territorial
jurisdiction of the court, or the complaint or
information is not valid or sufficient in form and
substance, etc. “ (Underlining supplied)

4. The Honorable Court should reconsider its Order and give merit
to the following evidence submitted by the prosecution, and
which forms part of the records of this case:

a. The Joint Affidavit of Engr. Renato Sanchez, Engr. Carl Cabansag

and Arch. Ian Apostol of the Pasay City Engineering Department;
b. The photos submitted by the prosecution to serve as proof of the
existence of the illegally constructed but now fully erected three-
storey building of the accused;
c. The written complaint of Juanita C. Santos concerning the illegal
construction of the subject building by the accused.

WHEREFORE, above premises considered, it is respectfully moved

that the Order of the Honorable Court dated 30 January 2018 be
accordingly reconsidered to serve the interest of justice.

1 84 Phil. 722 (1949).

Pasay City. March 6, 2018.