REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 282, VALENZUELA CITY

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

-versus- Crim. Case Nos. 447-V-19 to 448-V-

19
RODERICK SANTOS y BADANA For: Violation of Sec. 32 of R.A.
a.k.a. RODYRICK SANTOS y 10591 (Comprehensive Firearms
BADANA @ RR, and Ammunition Regulation Act);
Accused. Violation of Sec. 11, Art. II, RA 9165
x--------------------x
-versus- Crim. Case No. 449-V-19
For: Violation of Sec. 11, Art. II, RA
EDUARDO MATIAS y CORTAL, 9165
Accused.
x--------------------x

MOTION TO SET HEARING

THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

The above-named accused, represented by the Public Attorney’s

Office, unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully avers as follows:

1. On 29 May 2020, Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta issued

Administrative Circular No. 41-2020 (Re: Court Operations Beginning
1 June 2020) which states, among others, that the hearings of
cases, regardless of the stage of the trial, shall all be in-court,
except in cases involving Persons Deprived of Liberty (PDLs) who
shall continue to appear remotely from the detention facility, and in
cases with extraordinary circumstances as may be determined by
the justices and judges, which shall be heard through
videoconferencing.

2. Subsequently, the Supreme Court Public Information Office released

an Announcement dated 31 May 2020 in which it said that courts in
areas under general community quarantine may hold hearings in
criminal and civil cases through videoconferencing provided that a
proper motion is filed: “Videoconferencing hearings will continue
during GCQ. This is authorized by both AC 40-2020 and AC 41-2020
which were issued by Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta. Hence, for
example, if a party wishes his/her case to be heard via
videoconferencing, the proper motion just needs to be filed, and the
court, using its sound discretion, can either grant or deny the
motion. This remedy is available in both civil and criminal
cases.”
 3. The defense intends to present Reynel Roxas who was already
released from the Valenzuela City Jail on 22 May 2020 after he has
fully served the sentence which was imposed upon him by the
Honorable Court when he pleaded guilty to the lower offense of
violation of Section 12, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. In this
regard, in order to safeguard all the parties and their counsel as well
as the judge and the court staff against the risk of possible COVID-
19 infection, the defense humbly implores the Honorable Court to
set the hearing of the above-captioned case through
videoconferencing in lieu of an in-court hearing.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that

this motion be granted.

Other relief and remedies, just and equitable, are likewise prayed
for.

Valenzuela City, 8 June 2020.

PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

VALENZUELA DISTRICT OFFICE
1st Floor, Metropolitan Trial Court Bldg.
Justice Hall Compound, C.J. Santos St., Poblacion II,
Malinta, Valenzuela City

Through:

Through:

ATTY. RAFAEL D. PANGILINAN

Public Attorney II
Roll No. 64684
IBP OR No. 035862 dated 8/1/18 / CALMANA
MCLE Compliance No. VI - 0006876 dated 3/20/18

Copy furnished:
ACP Aileen S. Agacita
Office of the City Prosecutor
Valenzuela City