REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Paraaque City
Branch 274
People of the Philippines,
Vs.

Criminal Case No. 15-0074

XIAO YANU, et al.,

Accused.
x---------------------------------------------x
MOTION WITH LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

COMES NOW the ACCUSED XIAO YANU, by Counsel, and unto this Honorable
Court most respectfully moves, with leave of court, that the Accused be allowed to file her
demurrer to evidence for insufficiency of evidence in accordance with Sec. 23, Rule 119 of the
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, and hereto avers in support there to:
1. The Prosecution rested its case last June 3 and therefore has until June 8, 2015 to file a
Motion with Leave of Court to File Demurrer to Evidence.
2. The Prosecution offered the following as its relevant evidence of alleged commission by
Accused Xiao Yanu that of Estafa under Art. 315 Par. 2(e) of the Revised Penal Code:
2.1 Testimony of Antonio Siy
2.2 Hotel Billing under the name of Li Minzu
3. In the testimony of Antonio Siy, he admitted the following facts:
3.1 Private Complainant is not the owner nor operator of the Hotel Solaire;
3.2 Li Minzu, a co-accused, is an agent of the Private Complainant who refers VIP player
to the Private Complainant;
3.3 Hotel bill for the hotel accommodation of Li Minzu is deducted from the agents
commission given by the Private Complainant;
3.4 Xiao Yanu and Li Minzu stayed in one room;
3.5 No hotel guest information was presented to prove that Xiao Yanu is a guest in the
hotel but just a guest of Li Minzu
3.6 No undertaking signed by Xiao Yanu to pay hotel accommodation
3.7 No written proof of demand was given to Xiao Yanu nor any written proof that she is
obligated to pay for her accomodation
4. Other than the fact that Xiao Yanu stayed in the hotel of Solaire and shared the same
room with Li Minzu, no proof was proffered by the Prosecution to prove that Accused
Xiao Yanu was the guest of Solaire Hotel. This is precisely so because Accused Xiao

Yanu is a guest of Li Minzu and not the hotel. The hotel nor the private complainant
could not produce any hotel guest information because she was never their guest. The
witness for prosecution, Antonio Siy, even admitted that Accused Xiao Yanu never signed
any undertaking to shoulder any hotel charges which is the regular practice as can be
shown in the evidence marked and identified by the prosecution itself.
5. The fact remains that on December 26, 2014, Accused Xiao Yanu and Li Minzu were
involuntarily brought to the police station to blotter that the other two accused allegedly
escaped with alleged debts. It is apparent and human nature that from the time they were
treated as criminals by the Private Complainant and brought to the Police Station, they
would not voluntarily stay at the same hotel room supervised and controlled by the
Private Complainant.
6. Be that as it may, it is apparent that what the prosecution proved is the hotel bill named
after Li Minzu whos supposed to pay thru offsetting on his commission with the Private
Complainant. Accused Xiao Yanu did not have any business relationship with the Private
Complainant nor had any undertaking to pay for the hotel accommodation because there
was no contract between the hotel owner/operator for her accommodation. If there was
so, then a hotel guest information of Xiao Yanu should have been presented when asked
by the Defense. In fact, when asked for it, the witness Antonio Siy answered that they do
not have it.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, it is most respectfully prayed that the Accused
Xiao Yanu be allowed to file a formal Demurrer to Evidence within ten (10) days from
notice of the Order granting the same in order to give substantial justice to the Accused
who has suffered so much already for this wrongful accusation.

Respectfully submitted on June 8, 2015, Makati City.

LUSTRE SANTOS & ASSOCIATES LAW FIRM

Unit 1603 Cityland Tower I, H.V. Dela Costa

Makati City; 02-2638415

J.T. LEONARDO C. SANTOS

SC ROLL NO. 50653

Copy furnished via Registered Mail

With Return Card:
Asst. Public Prosecutor
Office of the City Prosecutor- Paranaque City
Atty. Jay De Castro
Private Prosecutor
____________________________

Notice of Hearing
The Branch Clerk of Court
RTC Br. ________
Paranque City
Asst. City Prosecutor
OCP-Paranaque
Atty. Jay De Castro
Private Prosecutor
Please take note that this Motion with leave of court to file demurrer to evidence is being
submitted for kind approval of the Honorable Court on June 19, 2015, considering that the
motion day, June 12 is a holiday or as may be earlier set by this Honorable court.
Respectfully submitted on June 8, 2015, Makati City.

JTLC

EXPLANATION

This motion is being filed via registered mail with return card due to unavailability of the
liaison and messenger of the law firm and not intended to delay the proceedings of this Court.
JTLCS