pg. 1

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

COURT OF APPEALS

CITY OF MANILA

CHUCK NG

Plaintiff-Appellant

-versus- G.R. No. 54321

LILIAN DVILLE

Defendant-Appellees

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

PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY

CHUCK NG

by counsel, most respectfully submit their

APPELLANTS BRIEF

pg. 2

SUBJECT INDEX

Page Number

1 Cover Page

2 Assignment of Errors

3 Statement of Facts

5 Summary of Proceedings

6 Statement of Material Dates

7 Appealed Decision

9 Issues

10 Arguments

11 Prayer

13 Appendices

Cases Cited

1. People v. Coja, supra note 30 at 186

2. People v. Layco, Sr., G.R. No. 182191, 8 May 2009, 587 SCRA 803

3. People v. Palgan, G.R. No. 186234, 21 December 2009.

4. People v. Tan, G.R. No. 177566, March 26, 2008, 549 SCRA 489, 502; citing People v. Baldogo, G.R. Nos. 128106-07

5. People vs Amper, G.R. No. 172708, 5 May 2010.

6. People vs Buntag, G.R. No. 123070, 14 April 2004.

7. Quidet vs People, G.R. No. 17028, 8 April 2010.

8. Sumbillo vs People, G.R. No. 167464, 21 January 2010.

Books Cited

Luis Reyes, Revised Penal Code, Book 1, 17th Ed. 2008.

pg. 3

ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS

I. That the complainant is not a credible witness due to her inconsistent testimonies as to important facts of the commission of the crime

II. The testimonies of the alleged eyewitnesses are not enough to pass the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt requirement in criminal cases.

III. That the Trial Court erred in ruling that conspiracy was present and that the accused-appellant, through his acts became a co-conspirator.

IV. The alibi of the accused-appellant negates the alleged direct identification of the witnesses.

V. That the Trial Court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of nighttime.

VI. That the prosecution was not able to overthrow the constitutionally guaranteed presumption of innocence of the accused-appellant.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This is an appeal from the decision of the court conviciting herein accused-appellant, CHUCK NG of the crime of Robbery with Rape filed by defendant-appellee, LILAN DVILLE.

SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS

1. On January 20, 2015, Defendant-Appellee instituted the instant case before the Makati City Regional Trial Court by filing the Complaint for Robbery

with Rape against herein accused-appellant, Tommy Pemberton and Philip

Roxas, the complaint, docketed as Criminal Case No. 54321.

2. On Feburary 17, 2015, the Quezon City Prosecutor filed the information in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City.

3. On 21 March 2015, the Regional Trial Court rendered its decision. The dispositive portion reads:

WHEREFORE, the Court finds accused Tommy Pemberton, Philip Roxas and Chuck Ng GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the crime of Robbery with Rape, committed with the use of a deadly weapon and with aggravating circumstances of dwelling, nighttime, and treachery, without any mitigating circumstance to offset the same. Considering that there was conspiracy among the accused, they are hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of DEATH and its accessory penalties; to pay Lilian Dville the

pg. 4

following amounts: P250,000.00 as actual damages; P75,000 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 as moral damages; P30,000.00 as exemplary damages; and to pay the costs.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL DATES

1. On March 21, 2015 Plaintiffs-Appellants, through counsel, received the

Decision from the Honorable RTC of Makati dated March 21, 2005 directing them

to file their Appellants Brief within 15 days from receipt thereof. The last day of

the period given to file the Brief fell on a Friday, May 5, 2015.

2. Hence, this Brief is filed on time.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On January 15, 2015 at around 10:30 pm, CHUCK NG was taking care of

his sick maternal grandmother who was confined in the ICU of the Philippine

General Hospital. She had suffered a stroke. They had no other relatives; it was

only Chuck Ng who was available to tend to his grandmother who had raised him

since he was an infant. Both his parents died in a car accident. Chuck Ng is

currently a 2nd year medical student in the University of Sto. Tomas, and while his

grandmother slept, he studied for the classes he missed.

However, on Feburary 15, 2015, he was invited by the policemen to

participate in a police line-up, there, the complainant finger-pointed herein

accused-appellant as one of the suspects who ransacked her car. All the accused

denied the charges against them. They claim that they do not know each other.

Philip Roxas claimed that it was impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime

because he was reviewing for an exam in his house at Manggahan, Fairview,

Quezon City. Meanwhile, Chuck Ng insisted that he was taking care of her

grandmother who was confined at the Philippine General Hospital. And Tommy

Pemberton claimed that he was already asleep during the time of the incident

pg. 5

somewhere in Cubao. All of them presented their relatives to prove their claim, and

Chuck Ng presented medical certificates and affidavits from the doctor that on the

date the crime happened, he had been in the hospital the entire time.

On 21 March 2015, the Regional Trial Court rendered its decision. The

dispositive portion reads:

WHEREFORE, the Court finds accused Tommy Pemberton, Philip

Roxas and Chuck Ng GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE

DOUBT of the crime of Robbery with Rape, committed with the use

of a deadly weapon and with aggravating circumstances of dwelling,

nighttime, and treachery, without any mitigating circumstance to

offset the same. Considering that there was conspiracy among the

accused, they are hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of DEATH

and its accessory penalties; to pay Lilian Dville the following

amounts: P250,000.00 as actual damages; P75,000 as civil

indemnity; P75,000.00 as moral damages; P30,000.00 as exemplary

damages; and to pay the costs.

Only herein accused-appellant filed this appeal on the matter in the Court of

Appeals.

ISSUES

I. That the complainant is not a credible witness due to her inconsistent testimonies as to important facts of the commission of the crime

II. The testimonies of the alleged eyewitnesses are not enough to pass the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt requirement in criminal cases.

III. That the Trial Court erred in ruling that conspiracy was present and that the accused-appellant, through his acts became a co-conspirator.

IV. The alibi of the accused-appellant negates the alleged direct identification of the witnesses.

V. That the Trial Court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of nighttime.

VI. That the prosecution was not able to overthrow the constitutionally

pg. 6

guaranteed presumption of innocence of the accused-appellant.

ARGUMENTS

I. That the complainant is not a credible witness

The victim has a propensity to lie1 and her testimony should not be

given credence. In a prosecution for rape, the victims credibility

becomes the single most important issue. Lilian Dville is a known

wild child and habitual drug user of cocaine, heroin and marijuana.

It is possible that she is suffering hallucinations and is mentally

deranged.

II. That the testimonies of the witnesses are not enough to pass the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt requirement in criminal

cases.

The accused-appellant espoused that his presumption of innocence

has not been overthrown because the evidence of the prosecution

is not enough to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

III. That the Trial Court erred in ruling that conspiracy was present and that the accused-appellant, through his acts became a co-conspirator.

IV. The alibi of the accused-appellant negates the alleged direct identification of the witnesses.

As seen from the affidavits and medical certificates, Chuck Ng has

a strong defense of alibi.

V. That the Trial Court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of nighttime.

The aggravating defense of nighttime was not specifically sought

in the case at bar.

VI. That the prosecution was not able to overthrow the constitutionally guaranteed presumption of innocence of the accused-appellant.

1 Records page 10

pg. 7

PRAYER

Wherefore, the plaintiff-appellant humbly asks that the motion to appeal of

accused-appellant CHUCK NG be granted by this Honorable Court.

March 7, 2015, City of Manila, Philippines.

FELICIANO & FELICIANO

Counsel for the Defendant Unit 1916 Joya South Tower

Joya Drive, Makati City Tel. No. (632) 897-8770

Telefax. (632) 896-2116 Email: fandf@law.com

By:

MERCEDES C. FELICIANO IBP No. 9139238 01-08-14/Makati City PTR No. 913458/01-08-14/Makati City

Roll of Attorneys No. 51313 MCLE Com. No. IV-002248413/06-17-14

Copy Furnished

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL 134 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village, Makati City, 1229

PAULYN DELA REYNA

Associate Solicitor General