Sample-appellants-brief-capin.docx

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 1 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

Republic of the Philippines COURT OF APPEALS National Capital Judicial Region Ermita, Manila THIRD DIVISION

ALFRED GREGORIO Accused-Appellant,

-

versus -

CA-GR. No. 1234-2018 For: Rape under Article 266 – A Revised Penal Code.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee. x-------------------------------------x

BRIEF FOR APPELLEE Complainant-Appellee, by counsel, and

to this Honorable Court

respectfully files his brief for the Appellee. PREFATORY STATEMENT The Trial Court did not commit any error on its decision and so must be sustained.

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 2 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

THE PARTIES ALFRED GREGORIO is the appellant as represented by Binangkal’s Associate where process and notice from this court may be served at room 270 Washington St., Makati City, while THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES is the Appellee as represented by the CITY PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF MAKATI.

TIMELINESS OF THE APPEAL Accused-appellant received on February 9, 2018 the Decision of the Regional Trial Court promulgated on the same date. A Notice of Appeal was timely filed on February 21, 2018. Accused-appellant received on May 7, 2018 the Order from the Court of Appeals directing Accused-appellant to file his Appeal Brief within fifteen (15) days from receipt. Appellee received the appellant’s brief on May 20, 2018. Appellee filed his Appellee’s Brief on May 23, 2018. Hence, this timely compliance.

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 3 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

I STATEMENT OF FACTS 1.1 Appellee admits the statements of Facts in the Appellant’s Brief from statement 1.1-1.6 but denies statement 1.7. 1.2 Appellant was at the scene of the crime of rape alleged and was not drinking beer with his buddies. 1.3 The common law wife was not aware of the whereabouts of her husband, herein accused between 9 in the evening up to 1 in the early morning.

II ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

The trial court did not commit any error which injuriously affected the substantial rights of the accused.

III ARGUMENTS Appellant’s failure to question the existence of the knife is deemed an admission to its existence and use during the crime.

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 4 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

During the trial, the accused depended heavily on his alibi and the testimony of his common law wife. The appellant failed to question the knife used in the crime and only raises for the first time on appeal its production. His failure should be deemed an admission that the knife existed and that it was possessed and used by him during the scene of the crime. Lack of scream nor plea for help does not amount to consensual rape. A victim of rape acts in different ways when confronted in such a situation. Not every rape victim can be expected to act conformably to the usual expectations of everyone. Some may shout, some may faint; and some may be shocked into insensibility, while others may openly welcome the intrusion. The force or violence that is required in rape cases is relative. When applied, it need not be overpowering or irresistible. It is enough that it has enabled the offender to consummate his purpose to bring about the desired result. It is not even necessary that the offender be armed with a weapon. (PEOPLE V CAMBI ,G.R. No.127131 June 8, 2000)

Appellant’s accusation that victim had sexual intercourse with another party and was hiding a relationship is baseless. Accused-Appellant’s accusation of the relationship is without proof and must be disregarded.

victim

as

hiding

a

Evidence of bruises, attempts to scratch are not required to prove rape. As already stated earlier, each victim reacts to a crime of rape differently. The law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of proving resistance. (People v Sending G.R. 141773 Jan 20, 2003)

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 5 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

Medico Legal’s corroborates that committed.

testimony rape was

Dr Tan’s discovery that there were no other bruises nor DNA evidence of scratches does not discount the occurrence of rape, as already stated earlier, the victim reacts to the crime differently. Where resistance would be futile, offering none at all does not amount to consent to the sexual assault. (People v Las Pinas G.R. 133444 Feb 20, 2002). It is enough that Dr Tan’s testimony states that the injuries on her vagina are consistent that a sexual assault was committed against her within 24 hours since this is only corroborating evidence from the lone testimony of the victim. Accused’s alibi and testimony of the common law wife are self-serving. The alibi of the accused and the testimony of his common law wife are self-serving and the trial court was correct in rejecting it.

The trial court did not commit any substantial error in its judgment of conviction.

Except for the question on the existence of the knife which was raised only for the first time on appeal, all of the other defences of the acussedappellant are mere rehash of its argument in the lower court which was already decided upon. Under Sec 10, Rule 124 of the Rules of Court “Judgment not to be reversed or modified except for substantial error. — No judgment shall be reversed or modified unless the Court of Appeals, after an examination of the

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 6 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

record and of the evidence adduced by the parties, is of the opinion that error was committed which injuriously affected the substantial rights of the appellant.

The information is sufficient in form and substance. Contrary to what the accused-appellant stated, the information was sufficient in all aspects and with regards particularly to the element of force or intimidation, it was enough that the complainant mentioned the use of a knife to show force or intimidation. The information need not describe the weapon nor describe further in detail how it was used. (Sec 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court)

IV PRAYER WHEREFORE, the Appellee respectfully prays that Decisions of the trial court be sustained. Appellee further prays for such other relief as may be just and equitable in the premises.

May 23, 2018.

Appellant’s Brief People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio Page 7 of 7

Maria Ria Vic Capin LLB III B Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

EXPLANATION (Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)

Undersigned counsel informs this Honorable Court that this Appellant’s Brief was furnished and filed by registered mail due to lack of messengerial services.