REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 104, QUEZON CITY

PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,

-versus- Crim. Case No. R-QZN-16-

14385-CR
For: Violation of Sec 11,
DARWIN DEE y ERLANDEZ Article II of RA 9165
Accused.

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

MOTION FOR CONSOLIDATION

Accused DARWIN DEE y ERLANDEZ, through the undersigned
counsel, and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states:

1. The said accused stand charged before this Honorable

Court for Violation of Section 11, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. A
perusal of the records of this case would show that, a charge for
violation of the same law was also filed against the same Accused
docketed as Criminal Case No. R-QZN-16-14394-CRN which is now
pending before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 87.

2. It bears to stress that the aforesaid charges arose out of the

same incident and/or closely related and interwoven with one another,
and founded on the same facts and/or forming part of a series of offenses
or similar parties, which may be tried by only one sala.

3. In the case of DOMDOM vs. SANDIGANBAYAN1, the

Supreme Court citing the case of Teston vs. Development Bank of the
Philippines2 laid down the requisites for consolidation of cases and the
rationale in allowing said consolidation, thus:

A court may order several actions pending before it to

be tried together where they arise from the same act, event

1 G.R. Nos. 182382-83, February 24, 2010.

2 G.R. No. 144374, November 11, 2005.
 Motion for Consolidation
Crim. Case No. R-QZN-16-12593-CR
Page 2 of 4

or transaction, involve the same or like issues, and

depend largely or substantially on the same evidence,
provided that the court has jurisdiction over the cases to be
consolidated and that a joint trial will not give one party an
undue advantage or prejudice the substantial rights of any of
the parties. (emphasis and underscoring supplied.)

The rule allowing consolidation is designed to avoid

multiplicity of suits, to guard against oppression or abuse, to
prevent delays, to clear congested dockets, and to simplify the
work of the trial court in short, the attainment of justice with
the least expense and vexation to the parties-litigants.

Thus, in Philippine Savings Bank v. Maalac, Jr., the

Court disregarded the technical difference between an action
and a proceeding, and upheld the consolidation of a petition
for the issuance of a writ of possession with an ordinary civil
action in order to achieve a more expeditious resolution of the
cases.

x x x

It need not be underscored that consolidation of cases,

when proper, results in the simplification of proceedings which
saves time, the resources of the parties and the courts, and a
possible major abbreviation of trial. It contributes to the swift
dispensation of justice, and is in accord with the aim of
affording the parties a just, speedy and inexpensive
determination of their cases before the courts. Above all,
consolidation avoids the possibility of rendering conflicting
decisions in two or more cases which would otherwise require
a single judgment. (Underscoring supplied)

4. Based on the foregoing and applying the provisions of Section

22, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, Accused
respectfully submits that the instant case before this Honorable Court may
be consolidated with Criminal Case No. R-QZN-16-14385-CRN pending
before RTC Branch 104 which has the lower docket case.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed of this
Honorable Court that the above-captioned case pending before this
Honorable Court be consolidated with Criminal Case No. R-QZN-16-
14385-CRN pending before RTC Branch 104.
 Motion for Consolidation
Crim. Case No. R-QZN-16-12593-CR
Page 3 of 4

Other relief just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.

Quezon City, Philippines. 15 May 2017.

Department of Justice
PUBLIC ATTORNEYS OFFICE
6F Justice Cecilia Muoz Palma Hall
Quezon City Hall Compound
Quezon City

By:

PHILIP CESAR R. CASTEL

Public Attorney III, Quezon City District Office
IBP No. 1061973 / 01-09-2017
MCLE Compliance No. V0005460 / 04-14-19
Roll of Attorneys No. 51962

NOTICE OF HEARING

THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT/OIC

RTC 104, Quezon City

SACP CAROLINE I. TOBIAS

Office of the City Prosecutor

Greetings!

Please take notice that the foregoing Motion shall be submitted for
the consideration and approval of the Honorable Court immediately upon
receipt hereof.

PHILIP CESAR R. CASTEL

Copy Furnished:

SACP CAROLINE I. TOBIAS

Office of the City Prosecutor
Quezon City
 Motion for Consolidation
Crim. Case No. R-QZN-16-12593-CR
Page 4 of 4