PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROLANDO A. CUEVAS Owner/Proprietor of MONACAT TRADING (with business address at Unit 2, Matic Building, National Highway, Canlalay, Bi?an City, Laguna or 2915 Calia Street, Elvinda Village, San Pedro City, Laguna) MERMELINDA C. DELA CRUZ Room 437, 4th Floor, Regina Building, Escolta, Manila (-ALL AT LARGE)-

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF TAX APPEALS QUEZON CITY SECOND DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, CTA CRIM. CASE NO. 0-1176 Plaintiff, For: Violation of Section 3602, in relation to Section 2503 of the -versus- Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines (TCCP), as ROLANDO A. CUEVAS amended. Owner/Proprietor of MONACAT TRADING, Members: (with business address at Unit 2, Matic Building, National Highway, RINGPIS-LIBAN, Chairperson, Canlalay, Bifian City, Laguna or 2915 MODESTO-SAN PEDRO, and Calia Street, Elvinda Village, San FERRER-FLORES, JJ Pedro City, Laguna) MERMELINDA C. DELA CRUZ, Room 437, 4th Floor, Regina Building, Escolta, Manila Promulgated: (All at large), Accused. ~~ ~ X----------------------------------------- - - - /_� _":_ - - - - - - - X RESOLUTION In the Resolution dated August 30, 2024, the Court directed the prosecution to submit the annexes referred to in the Complaint-Affidavit of Mr. Alexander D.G. Ugay and Mr. Doy 0. De Castro within five (5) days from notice. 1 Subsequently, Legaspina Uayan Josol Alparaque (Alparaque) filed a Formal Entry of Appearance on September 20, 2024 allegedly for accused Mermelinda C. Dela Cruz (accused Dela Cruz). On September 25, 2024, Alparaque also filed a Motion to Dismiss (on the ground ofInordinate Delay) for accused Dela Cruz. Docket, pp. 71 to 73 .

RESOLUTION CTA CRIM. CASE NO. 0-1176 Page 2 of2 However, the Formal Entry of Appearance was deemed not filed for failure to email its pdf copy pursuant to the En Bane Resolution No. 8- 2024.2 It is worthy to note that the Formal Entry of Appearance has no confirmation of accused DelaCruz and she is still at-large. Considering the foregoing, the Court is constrained not to act on the Motion to Dismiss (on the ground ofInordinate Delay). On September 24, 2024,3 the prosecution received the Resolution dated August 30, 2024. Counting five days therefrom, the prosecution should have filed the subject annexes on September 30, 2024.4 Despite notice, the prosecution failed to comply with the said Resolution. 5 Based on the foregoing, the Court finds the supporting documents on record insufficient to establish probable cause. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Information 1s DISMISSED without prejudice. SO ORDERED. ~. ~ -; "-- MA. BELEN M. RINGPIS-LIBAN Associate Justice ~~.~~ CORAtk6N G. FERRER-FLOR S Associate Justice Minute Resolution dated November 12, 2024, Docket. Notice of Resolution dated August 30, 2024, Docket, p. 70. 4 Considering September 29, 2024 fell on Sunday, the next business day is September 30, 2024. Records Verification dated October I, 2024, Docket.