[go: up one dir, main page]

100% found this document useful (1 vote)
10K views3 pages

Motion For Reconsideration

1) The complainant filed a motion for reconsideration of a resolution dismissing a case against a respondent for acts of lasciviousness. 2) The resolution found no probable cause and stated the acts only constituted unjust vexation under the jurisdiction of the local barangay. 3) The complainant argues the evidence shows elements of unjust vexation and the acts disturbed her, proving the crime was committed. Supreme Court precedent also defines unjust vexation broadly.

Uploaded by

Aileen Gaviola
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
100% found this document useful (1 vote)
10K views3 pages

Motion For Reconsideration

1) The complainant filed a motion for reconsideration of a resolution dismissing a case against a respondent for acts of lasciviousness. 2) The resolution found no probable cause and stated the acts only constituted unjust vexation under the jurisdiction of the local barangay. 3) The complainant argues the evidence shows elements of unjust vexation and the acts disturbed her, proving the crime was committed. Supreme Court precedent also defines unjust vexation broadly.

Uploaded by

Aileen Gaviola
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
PROVINCIAL PROSECUTION OFFICE

Complainant, NPS NO.

-versus- -for-

ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
Respondent.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION ON A DECISION DATED

Comes now the undersigned Complainant unto this Honorable Office most
respectfully move for the reconsideration of the Resolution dated,respectfully states:

1.In the Resolution dated August 26, 2020, the Honorable Office of the Provincial
Prosecutor of Masbate City ruled:

“After Judicious evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the incident in


question and the defense raised by the respondent, the undersigned honestly
believes that there is no probable cause to indict the respondent of the crime
charged as massaging the legs of the complainant who is his colleague in the
same profession being both police officers does not automatically constitute
lasciviousness with lewd design.

While the said act is clearly annoying on the part of the complinant, however the
same only constitute unjust vexation.Considering that the crime of unjust is
within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Barangay Lupon under the Katarungan ng
Pambarangay Law, the present address of both parties being located in the same
barangay, the instant complaint must undergo the mandatory mediation and
conciliation proceedings before the Lupon.It appears on records that the said
requirement has not been complied yet thus the filling of this case.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully recommended to the Provincial Prosecutor that


the case against the respondent be dismissed.”

2.The complainant received on March 08, 2021, a Resolution dated August 26,
2020 from this Honorable Office finding no probable cause to indict the
respondent _____________ for Acts of Lasiviousness but recommended that the
acts complained only constitutes Unjust Vexation.

3.The complainant respectfully moves for the reconsideration of the above-


mentioned resolution on the ground that the evidence on hand clearly points to
the elements of Unjust Vexation which is present in this complaint. Clearly, there
was a violation of her right which is tantamount to the commission the crime by

1|Page
the Respondent as reflected on the resolution itself issued by the Assistant
Provincial Prosecutor;

4.The Supreme Court has held in the case of RENATO BALEROS, JR. vs. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES,G.R. NO. 138033, January 30, 2007 that:

“Unjust vexation exists even without the element of restraint or


compulsion for the reason that the term is broad enough to include any
human conduct which, although not productive of some physical or
material harm, would unjustly annoy or irritate an innocent person”.

5.That Complainant, after the incident in question, cried while relating to one of
her colleagues what she perceived to be a sexual attack and the fact that she
filed a case proved beyond cavil that she was disturbed, if not distressed, by the
acts of the respondent.

6.That as discussed above, there is no obstinate refusal nor inordinate neglect on


the part of the Complainant to comply with the necessary actions taken on her
part contrary to the allegation of the respondent that she failed to attend on the
scheduled clarificatory hearing conducted by the Assistant Provincial Prsoecutor.
In fact, there was no notice given to the complainant regarding the scheduled of
the clarificatory hearing. Hence, this was the first notice she received from this
Honorable Office dismissing the instant case.

8.That with all due respect, the Complainant has a meritorious claim armed with
the evidences to support her claim against the respondent for the commission of
the crime and therefore should not be denied of her right to due process;

9.This Motion is not submitted for the purpose of delay but soley for the reasons
stated above and in the interest of substantial justice.

Prayer

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the undersigned respectfully prays that this


Honorable Office to grant the Motion for Recondsideration of the said Resolution.

Other Reliefs just and equitable under the premises likewise prayed for.

Masbate City, March 9, 2021.

Complainant

Copy Furnished:

Provincial Prosecutor

2|Page
3|Page

You might also like