Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT


7th JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 666, CEBU CITY

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES


Plaintiff,

-versus- Criminal Case No.14344


For Murder

JOB HUTT
Accused,
X---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO QUASH

Plaintiff, People of the Philippines, through counsel, and unto this Honorable Court, most
humbly and respectfully files this Opposition to Motion to Quash and states that:
Crimes should be taken into immediate action for justice to prevail. The warrantless arrest was
valid because the crime had just been committed, and witness thereof is certain that the crime
was committed by the accused.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On February 8, 2016, Amy Gala was murdered but a witness named Jan Go went to the police
office on February 9 to identify the murderer. Jan Go identified Job Hutt, as the shooter of Amy
Gala. On February 10, 2016, Job Hutt got arrested by the police office without securing a warrant
of arrest since the offense had just been committed and there was a probable cause to believe
based on the personal knowledge of the witness of the facts or circumstances that Job Hutt had
committed the crime.

ISSUE

A. Whether or not, the arrest of Job Hutt was valid.

DISCUSSIONS AND ARGUMENTS

Valid Warrantless arrest


Job Hutt arrest was justifiable pursuant to Sec. 5 Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Court Arrest
without warrant; when lawful. A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant,
arrest a person when an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it. The warrantless arrest to Job Hutt was valid because it falls under Section 5 of
Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Court. The crime had just been committed when the
warrantless arrest to Job Hutt took place, on the other hand there was as well a witness that
pointing out that Job Hutt is the culprit. Police just acted in performance of their duty to
protect, look for criminals, and serve justice when they went directly to arrest Job Hutt who is
the primary suspect of the murder. The warrantless arrest was justifiable pursuant to Section 5,
Rule 113 of the Revise Rules of Court.
CONCLUSION

In view of all the foregoing, Plaintiff submit that the warrantless arrest of Job Hutt was lawful
because it is in accordance under Section 5, Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of Court.

PRAYER
The Above Premises Considered, Plaintiff, People of the Philippines, respectfully prays to the
Honorable Court to oppose to quash the information filed by the Defendant, and pursue the
criminal charge against him.
People of the Philippines respectfully prays for other just and equitable relief.
Cebu City, Philippines. April 4, 2016.

Counsel for the Accused


(Attorney)