Republic of the Philippines

Regional Trial Court

National Capital Judicial Region
Branch 123
Pasig City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Plaintiff,

versus - CRIM. CASE NO. 12345-

H
Violation of R.A No.
6539
Anti-Carnapping Act of
1972

ROMULO C. TAKAD.
Accused.

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

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PROSECUTION:

The People, by the undersigned

prosecutors, and unto this Honorable Court,
respectfully submit this Memorandum as
follows:

The Case:

In the Criminal Case No. 12345-H

Romulo Takad was charged of the crime
under Republic Act No. 6539 or the Anti-
Carnapping Act of 1972 claiming that
Romulo Takad the accused stole the tricycle
of one Carlos Parlade on November 21, 2007
at Pasig City, Philippines. Carlos Parlade and
one other witness identified the latter as
accused Romulo Takad and gave their
affidavits.

The Facts:

At around 1:00 in the early morning of

November 21, 2007 at #84 West Road,
Maybunga, Pasig City, Carlos Parlade was
going to chain his tricycle near his house
when suddenly a man was seen pushing his
tricycle and kicked start the engine and
drove away. Carlos Parlade was able to
identify the latter as the accused Romulo
Takad and is also identified by another
witness Mario Mankas. Carlos Parlade then
called Ms. Zenny Aguirre to inform her that
the tricycle was stolen. On the same day
Romulo Takad has been arrested by the
police and at 1:30pm Parlade appeared to
the police station to identify the suspect and
he pointed out Romulo Takad alleging he
stole his tricycle.

At the trial, the prosecution gave their

version of the incident. Ms. Zenny Aguirre,
an employee of Bayan Development
Corporation granted a loan to Ms. Maria
Teresa Lacsamana, a group loan amounting
to 480,000 and her share is 80,000 to buy a
tricycle since Bayan Development
Corporation (BDC) extends loans to
Sakbayan members and Toda members. The
loan provides documents such as promissory
notes, chattel mortgage and the Kasunduan.
The loan is payable for 30 months in a daily
installment basis according to the
Kasunduan marked as exhibit A. Ma. Teresa
Lacsamana defaulted in paying the loan
since the last payment made is July 2007
then BDC pulled out the tricycle and gave
the tricycle to Mr. Marasigan, treasure of
their group for temporary custody and care
for more or less 15 days. After 15 days,
Ms.Zenny Aguirre gave Ms. Ma. Teresa
Lacsamana until October 17, 2007 to redeem
the tricycle and pay her arrears or else the
company will permanently repossess the
tricycle. Ms. Ma. Teresa Lacsamana failed to
comply again and BDC pulled out the tricycle
and took it to Mr. Marasigan. On October 22,
2007, Ms. Ma. Teresa Lacsamana and the
accused Romulo Takad went to BDC and
wanted to pay the outstanding balance of
her loan to release the tricycle but it was not
granted. Romulo Takad then warned Ms.
Zenny Aguirre saying Huwag na huwag
kong makikita yang tricycle sa Pasig. The
tricycle was kept until Nov 20 and after Nov
20 BDC gave the tricycle to the new
assignee Mr. Carlos Parlade but on Nov. 21,
2007 at 1:00 in the early morning the
tricycle was stolen.

Carlos Parlade, 50 years old, married

and a construction worker residing at #84
West Road, Maybunga, Pasig City was going
to chain his tricycle near his house when a
man stole his tricycle he was able to identify
him because according to him the place was
lighted by a big streetlight and they faced
each other. Parlade ran after the accused but
was not able to catch up. Parlade then called
Ms. Zenny Aguirre to inform that the tricycle
was stolen and was not able to locate the
said tricycle. He went to police station to
give his statement. At the police station,
police presented the accused Romula Takad
and was identified by Parlade together with
the other witness Mario Mankas.

Mario Mankas, 19 years old, jobless

and residing at #66 West Road, Maybunga,
Pasig City. Mankas was playing computer
games at his neighbors house when he saw
Parlade running after a tricycle and he also
ran after the tricycle behind Parlade. Mario
Mankas was able to identify the thief and
describe him in his affidavit.

The Issues:

The Court defined the issues in this

case in its pre-trial order as follows:

1. Whether or not Bayan

Development Corporation is the owner of the
tricycle;

2. Whether or not accused Romulo

Takad stole the tricycle of Carlos Parlade.

Arguments:

I.
BAYAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
IS THE OWNER OF THE TRICYCLE

The loan granted by Ms. Zenny Aguirre

to Maria Teresa Lacsamana was used to buy
the tricycle and it includes promissory notes,
chattel mortgage and the Kasunduan.
According to the Official Receipt and Car
Registration dated May 29, 2007 the tricycle
with a Plate No. TS-992 was named to Maria
Teresa Lacsamana the live-in partner of the
accused Romulo Takad. Since Maria Teresa
Lacsamana failed to comply with the
agreements under the Kasunduan, Bayan
Development Corporation on the other hand
pulled out the tricycle and gave its custody
to Mr. Marasigan the treasurer. Bayan
Development Bank gave Maria Teresa
Lacsamana to redeem the tricycle but failed
to comply again so the BDC permanently
repossess the tricycle and gave it to its new
assignee. Under the Kasunduan, if one
member of the group failed to pay
installments, BDC could pull out the tricycle.

The Kasunduan provides the following

rules:

15.1 Kapag and isang kasapi ay hindi

makabigay ng tatlong karampatang arawang
hulog-bayad sa loob ng isang kinsenas o
napapaloob sa isang tseke ng BDC, ang
kanyang tricycle ay hahatakin ng SAMAHAN
kasama ang kanyang linya (TODA) at/o
prangkisa at ito ay pangangasiwaan ng
samahan upang ang arawang kita nito ay
tuweirang gagamitin ng SAMAHAN para sa
darating na arawang hulog-bayad ng
kasaping nagkasala;

15.2 Ang nahatak na tricycle ay

mananatili sa pangangasiwa ng SAMAHAN
hanggatt hindi lubos na nababayaran ang
naging pagkukulang sa samahan.

15.4 Bilang pagtataguyod sa mga

nabanggit sa Kasunduan bilang 15.2 at
bilang proteksyon para sa SAMAHAN laban
sa anumang maaaring pagmamalabis ng
sinumang kasapi, ang buong SAMAHAN ay
lalagda sa isang DEED OF SALE na ilalagak
sa pag-iingat ng BDC. Pinagtitibay din ng
Kasunduan na hanggat tumupad ng lubos
sa Kasunduan ang buong SAMAHAN, and
nasabing DEED OF SALE ay winawalang
halaga ng BDC.

20. Na ang bawat kasapi ng

SAMAHANay nauunawan at sumasang-ayon
sa lahat ng nilalaman nitong Kasunduan at
anumang paglabag ninuman sa mga kasapi
nito ay magsisilbing daan upang ang BDC,
sa pamamagitan ng SAMAHAN ay putulin
ang ugnayan sa tiwaling kasapi at gawin ang
sumusunod:

20.1 Hatakin ang tricycle kasama ng

linya sa TODA at/o prangkisa ng tiwaling
kasapi na kabilang sa Chattel Mortgage
Contract sa BDC.
 Zenny Aguirre contended that it is true
that the loan was used to buy the tricycle
and the tricycle is named to Maria Teresa
Lacsamana but the failure of Lacsamana to
comply made the BDC pulled out the tricycle
and assign it to its new assignee. Although
when asked if Aguirre got court order on
transferring ownership of the tricycle from
Lacsamana to BDC and authorization to take
the tricycle, Aguirre took the tricycle
because of the signed Kasunduan that in her
understanding if Lacsamana failed to pay her
debt the ownership will automatically
transferred to BDC since the Kasunduan also
provide Deed of Sale of the tricycle.

II
ROMULO TAKAD WARNED AGUIRRE
ABOUT THE TRICYCLE

BDC gave a chance to Maria Teresa

Lacsamana to pay her arrears after the
tricycle was delivered to the treasurer of
their group Mr. Marasigan, but when Aguirre
did not grant the request to redeem the
tricycle accused Takad said to Aguirre
Huwag na wag kong makikita ang tricycle
na yan sa Pasig this statement made
Aguirre presume that the suspect when the
incident happen is no other than Mr. Romulo
Takad.

III

ROMULO TAKAD STOLE THE TRICYCLE

OF CARLOS PARLADE

According to the witnesses Parlade and

Mankas, they both saw the accused when he
drove away with the tricycle. The witness
Carlos Parlade describes the suspect in his
sworn statement and identified him when
police presented Takad in the police station.
During the trial Parlade confirmed and
pointed out the accused as Romulo Takad
who stole his tricycle at his house on
November 21, 2007. Mario Mankas the other
witness also described the suspect and able
to identify him and pointed out in the court
as one Romulo Takad.

Romulo Takad has been charged and

must be convicted of the crime under R.A
6539 or the Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972.
Section 2 of the act defines carnapping and
motor vehicle as follows:

Carnapping is the taking with intent to

gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to
another without the latters consent, or by
means of violence against or intimidation of
person, or by using force upon things.

Motor Vehicle is any vehicle propelled

by any power other than muscular power
using public highways, but excepting road
rollers, trolley cars, street-sweeper,
sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders,
fork-lifts, amphibian tricks, and cranes if not
used on public highways, vehicles, which run
only on rails or tracts and tractors, trailers
and traction engines of all kinds used
exclusively for agricultural purposes. Trailers
having any number of wheels, when
propelled or intended to be propelled by
attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be
classified as separate motor vehicle with no
power rating.

The elements of carnapping as

defined and penalized under the Anti-
Carnapping Act of 1972 are the
following:
1. That there is an
actual taking of the vehicle;
2. That the vehicle
belongs to another other that
the offender himself
3. That the taking is
without the consent of the
owner thereof; or that the
taking was committed by
means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by
using force upon things;
4. That the offender
intends to gain from the taking
of the vehicle.

In the People of the Philippines

vs Lagat- Palalay it was held that all
the elements of carnapping was
present during the trial. In this case
the second element of carnapping iss
slightly questionable because the
vehicle was named to Lacsamana the
live-in partner of Takad but according
to Aguirre they were unable to
produce the documents to show that
the new assignee of the tricycle was
Mr. Carlos Parlade because before
Aguirre could draw up the document
the tricycle was already missing. The
tricycle which was definitely
ascertained to belong to Parlade, who
was the new assignee was stolen by
Takad. The Prosecution was able to
establish that Takad was the one who
stole the tricycle because the
witnesses are credible to warrant the
conviction of the accused.

Prayer:

WHEREFORE, the Prosecution

respectfully prays that a decision be
rendered finding the accused Romulo
Takad guilty beyond reasonable doubt
for the crime of Carnapping as
penalized under R.A No. 6539 and be
adjudge civilly liable for the
irrespective value of the vehicle taken.