Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT MISSAMIS ORIENTAL

Branch 40
Cagayan de Oro City

People of the Philippines Crim. Case No.2012-031

Plaintiffs,
for: VIOLATION OF SEC.
5 OF RA 9165

-Versus-

ALIMOZAMAN MALAN y MALNA

Accused,
X----------------------------------/

VERY URGENT MOTION TO RELEASE

THE MOTORCYLE NOT OWNED BY THE
ACCUSED

ACCUSED, joined by the registered owner of the Motorcycle,

thru the Public Attorney’s Office and unto the Honorable Court most

respectfully submits this MOTION and aver:

1. That the accused was illegally arrested last January 10, 2012 at

High Time Inn Patag, Cagayan De Oro City for alleged violation of

Section 5 of RA 9165;

2. That the accused was illegally arrested inside the room where he

checked-in with her girlfriend by the CAIDTF of Cagayan De Oro City;

1
3. That before the accused checked-in at the said hotel where he will

meet his girlfrined, he borrowed a motorcycle vehicle owned by

MARGIE NICHOLE LEANO-FULLANTE. When the accused arrived at

the said Hotel, he parked the motorcycle vehicle outside the room;

4. That while inside the room, the personnel of CDTF barged in and

illegally arrested the accused for alleged selling of shabu to her

girlfriend inside the room they rented at High time Inn. Accused was

then brought to Police station;

5. That the motorcycle vehicle was likewise seized and now in

custody of the CDTF of Cagayan De Oro City;

6. That Section 3, Rule 126 of the Rules of Court is pertinent:

SEC. 3. Personal property to be seized. – A search

warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of
personal property:

(a) Subject of the offense;

(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of

the offense; or

(c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an

offense.

7. That motorcycle vehicle is not a fruit of the offense neither was it

used in the commission of the offense charged. In fact, a careful

reading of the information filed as well as the affidavit of the

2
arresting officers NEVER ALLEGED that the said motorcycle vehicle

was used by the accused in the commission of the offense charged.

Thus, we respectfully submit that the said motorcycle vehicle cannot

be the subject of seizure.

8. That more so, the motorcycle vehicle is not owned by the accused

because he just borrowed the same from MARGIE NICHOLE LEANO-

FULLANTE, the accused’s former sister in-law. Copy of Certificate of

Registration is attached hereto as ANNEX “A.

9. That the instant motion is anchored on Section 14, Rule 126 of the

Rules of Court, which says that:

Section 14. Motion to quash a search warrant or to

suppress the evidence, where to file.

A motion to quash a search warrant and/or

to suppress evidence obtained thereof may be
filed in and acted upon only by the court where
the action has been instituted.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(Emphasis Ours)

10. That while it is true that the aforementioned rule deals with the

Court where a motion to quash a search warrant should be

filed, we humbly submit that the instant motion for release of

an item incidentally and illegally seized should also be filed

before the Court where the case has been filed. This is based

on the doctrine of necessary implication This doctrine states

3
 that what is implied in a statute is as much a part thereof as

that which is expressed, as elucidated in several cases 26

the

latest of which is Chua v. Civil Service Commission 27

where we

said:

No statute can be enacted that can provide all the

details involved in its application. There is always an
omission that may not meet a particular situation. What is
thought, at the time of enactment, to be an all-embracing
legislation may be inadequate to provide for the unfolding
events of the future. So-called gaps in the law develop as
the law is enforced. One of the rules of statutory
construction used to fill in the gap is the doctrine of
necessary implication . . . . Every statute is understood,
by implication, to contain all such provisions as may be
necessary to effectuate its object and purpose, or to make
effective rights, powers, privileges or jurisdiction which it
grants, including all such collateral and subsidiary
consequences as may be fairly and logically inferred from
its terms. Ex necessitate
legis1 . . . .

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is ,most earnestly prayed of the Honorable

Court that an ORDER be issued DIRECTING the CAIDTF of Cagayan

De Oro City or any person from the said Office who is in custody of

the same to immediately release to the registered owner

MARGIE NICHOLE LEANO-FULLANTE the motorcycle particularly

described as follows:

Engine# XRM16E07180
CHASIS# XRM16071076
COLOR: BLACK
OFFICIAL RECEIPT # 968778285
1
G.R. No. 93468 December 29, 1994 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TRADE UNIONS (NATU)-
REPUBLIC PLANTERS BANK SUPERVISORS CHAPTER,
vs. HON. RUBEN D. TORRES, SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT and REPUBLIC
PLANTERS BANK,

4
 CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION NO. 11815396-5
PLATE # MC6491

Such other reliefs and remedies just and equitable under the

premises are likewise prayed for. Cagayan De Oro City. January 19,

2012

MARGIE NICHOLE LEANO-FULLANTE

Registered Owner

Assisted by:
Department of Justice
PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
2/F Hall of Justice, Hayes St., Cagayan de Oro City
For Accused
By:

ATTY. YUSOPH M. ABBAS, JR

Public Attorney I
Attorney Roll No. 59118
IBP No. 859565
MCLE EXEMPT

NOTICE

The Honorable Branch Clerk of Court

RTC Br. 40, Cagayan De Oro City

City Prosecutor’s Office

Cagayan de Oro City

GREETINGS!

Please take notice that the undersigned will submit the foregoing motion
for the consideration and approval of the Honorable Court immediately sans
appearances and arguments.

ATTY. YUSOPH M. ABBAS, JR

CC:
City Prosecutor’s Office
Cagayan de Oro City
Hall of Justice
Cagayan De Oro City