Fiscal: That would be all for our witness your honor, he/she is

ready for cross.

Judge: Cross..?

PAO: Cross your Honor...

With the kind permission of this court.

Judge: Proceed..

PAO: Good Evening Ms. Witness.

W: Good Evening.

PAO: In your direct testimony, you said that on ________ you

were at ______ conducting a check point?

W: Yes.
 --Police Blotter--
PAO: Do you have a police blotter reflecting your operation that
you conducted a check point?
--No--
PAO: Are you aware that under the PNP Operation Manual, that
every operation conducted by your office must be reflected in a
police blotter?
PAO: In your case you did not have any police blotter as to the
check point, correct?
--Yes--
PAO: But you would agree with me it is not attached to the
record?
PAO: Do you want to impress to this court that it was recorded in
the Police Blotter, although you have not attached any in the court
records?
PAO: Prior to the incident, do you know the Accused?
PAO: So you are saying on _____ it was the first time that you
met the Accused?

-Illegal Search--
PAO: You mentioned that during the check point you were the
one who arrested the accused?
PAO: You agree with me, that you arrested the Accused because,
as you alleged, you were able to retrieved an AK47 and a ____
from his person?
 PAO: And you were able to retrieved this firearms, since you
conducted a body search on his person, correct?
PAO: If you have not conducted a body search, you have not
known that he was carrying these firearms?
PAO: And the justification of searching the accused is because,
as you claim, you have a search warrant issued against him?
--yes by virtue of search warrant--
PAO: And without this SW you would not search the Accused?
PAO: You would agree with me that this search warrant is not
attached to the record?
PAO: Since you first met the accused at the time of his arrest, is it
safe for me to say that you were neither the applicant nor the
witness for the application of the search warrant?
PAO: And when this search warrant was issued you would agree
with me that you were not designated as the searcher?
PAO: Nor was this issued for you to implement?
--yes--
PAO: And since you were not tasked to implement it, you would
agree with me that you don't have a copy of this search warrant at
the time of the arrest of the accused?
PAO: But yet in this case you search the Accused, without
presenting him the Search warrant, correct?
PAO: And you search him although you are not the designated as
the searcher of the search warrant?
 PAO: As I scan to the record there is no inventory of the
confiscated items, you would agree with me that you did not make
an inventory of the confiscated items.
PAO: Per record also, you did not also make a certification of
orderly search?
PAO: And yet without this two documents you want this court to
believe that there was a valid search?

--if there is search warrant or the witness is the

applicant or witness--
PAO: You mentioned that the SW was issued by the court
ordering the search of the person of the Accused?
PAO: Are you aware that under the Rules of court, one of the
requisite for the issuance of the sw is for the sw to particularly
describe the place to be searched and the things to be seized
which may be anywhere in the Philippines?
PAO: And you want this court to believed that the issuing court
ordered the Accused's body as the place to be search?
PAO: As I scan to the record there is no inventory of the
confiscated items, you would agree with me that you did not make
an inventory of the confiscated items?
PAO: Per record also, you did not also make a certification of
orderly search?
PAO: would you agree with me, in order for the implementation of
the search to be valid, you have to execute this two documents?
PAO: But In this case you did not execute these documents?
 --No, the accused permit us to search him, he was the one who
voluntary shown us the contents of his coat--
PAO: You are saying that although the Accused knew he was
carrying firearms, you want this court to believe that he voluntarily
shown/surrender this firearm to you?
PAO: Although, public knowledge would dictates that possession
of firearms is against the law and you may be imprisoned for
possessing the same?

--identity--
PAO: Going back to the time the Accused was arrest, didn't you
mentioned that before he was search and eventually arrested, the
accused was just walking at the check point when you stopped
him, correct?
PAO: And correct me if I'm wrong, you stopped him because, as
you claim, there was a SW issued against him?
--yes--
PAO: But didn't you said that you met the accused for the first
time, during the arrest?
PAO: And yet you were positive that the accused who was just
walking by at that time was the same person subject to the SW
although you have not met him?
PAO: In fact based in your testimony, you didn't even ask for his
name, correct?
 --no because it was a checkpoint--
PAO: You want this court to believed that you conduct a
checkpoint on persons walking by?
PAO: And that every time someone walks by the checkpoint, you
would search him, is that what you want to impress to this court?
PAO: Do you know what is a checkpoint?
PAO: Are you not aware that a checkpoint is for the valid search
of vehicles?
PAO: And such search is limited to visual search, you are not
allowed open compartments, nor are you allowed to asked the
passenger and drivers to go down the vehicle to search them?

--certification from the PNP Firearm and

Explosive Office--
PAO: Going back to the arrest, you Arrest that accused because
he has firearms is that correct?
PAO: and that is the only reason you arrested him?
PAO: you would agree me, based on your previous testimony you
immediately transfer him to the station?
PAO: Following the series of events in your testimony, is it safe
for me to say that you did not inquire to the Accused if he has
license to carry these firearm?
--yes--
PAO: Are you aware that any person can carry a firearm provided
he has permit to carry the same?
 PAO: And yet you arrested him just because he has a firearm
without even inquiring if he has permit to carry?

Re-cross:
If they open-up about the firearm and about the license to carry.
And they did not present the firearm and the certification to the
court.
-the main elements in illegal possession of firearm:
a. there is a firearm; - Prosecution must produce the firearm,
since it is the corpus delicti
b. he has no license to carry. Prosecution must produce a
certification from FESAGS or the PNP Firearm and Explosive
office, certifying that the Accused has no license to carry firearm.

- I place this question in the re-cross because the Fiscal can no

longer ask question after re-cross, hence he no longer has the
chance to present the firearm and the certification to be identified
by the witness. You cannot offer in evidence that is not identify by
the witness.-

PAO: You mentioned a firearm was confiscated?

PAO: and yet you did not present any firearm in this court?
PAO: you want this court to believe your word that there is an
actual firearm confiscated from the Accused, although you didn't
present any in this court?
PAO: Per record, you did not obtain a certification from the PNP
Firearm and Explosive office (FESAGS) that the Accused has no
license to carry firearms?
PAO: So you would agree with me you don't know if the Accused
has license to carry the said firearm that you confiscated?
PAO: And for all we know, he can validly carry the said firearm?