For July 9, 2016

1. Accused was charged with murder. To prove that he fired a gun, the
prosecution presented the results of a paraffin test which showed that
his hand was positive for nitrates or nitrites. What is the value of the
paraffin test as evidence?[1] Explain.
2. Toro was charged with rape. Presented as evidence was a showing
that the Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) of the sperm specimen from the
vagina of the victim was identical semen to that of Toro. Is the
evidence admissible?[2] Explain.
3. What is the value of blood test as evidence in a rape and paternity
cases?[3]
4. In the investigation of the crime of robbery with rape, the officers of
the Crime Laboratory discovered no fingerprints of the accused in the
objects found at the crime scene. Should the accused be acquitted?[4]
Explain.
5. Accused was charged with homicide but only one eyewitness
testified. He denied the same and submitted himself to a lie detector
test which established that he did not show physiological changes when
monitored by the use of sensors. Should he be acquitted?[5] Explain.
6. In a complaint for collection for a sum of money, paragraph four of
the complaint states, that defendant borrowed the sum of P400,000
from the plaintiff on January 2, 2015, to be paid one year thereafter.
The Answer stated that Paragraph four of the complaint is admitted.
During the trial, Plaintiff failed to present the promissory note hence
the court dismissed the case. Was the court correct?[6] Explain.
7. Define issue under the rules of the proceeding.[7]
8. Define a fact?[8]
9. Define collateral facts.[9]
10. Is evidence on collateral facts admissible?[10]
11. Enumerate the rules on the interpretation of documents. (Secs 1019, Rule 130)[11]
12. Who are qualified to be witnesses?[12] Explain.
13. Are religious or political beliefs grounds to disqualify a witness?[13]
Explain.
14. Enumerate the group of persons who cannot be witnesses.[14]
15. What are matters
mandatorily?[15]

that

the

court

will take

judicial notice

16. Explain the terms disqualification by reason of marriage.[16]

17. Explain the terms disqualification by reason of death or insanity of
adverse party.[17]
18. Who are disqualified to
communication?[18] Enumerate.

testify

by

reason

of

privileged

19. Ernesto was charged of homicide. The prosecution called to the

witness stand Ernesto Jr, son of Ernesto, as a witness. Ernesto Jr was
reluctant to testify but he was compelled to go to the stand when the
court threatened to cite him in contempt of court. Was the court correct
in his order?[19] Explain.
20. What if Ernesto Jr volunteered to testify against his father, will his
testimony be admissible?[20] Explain.
21. Teddy and Edna told the spouses Miguel and Teresa that they were
legally married. The truth, however, is that Teddy and Edna were not
legally married but merely living together in a live-in relationship. The
first couple borrowed money from the second couple in the sum of
P100,000 but only Teddy signed the promissory note. Having failed to
pay, the second couple filed a collection case against the first couple. In
her defense, Edna argued that the obligation is that of Teddy only
because they were not legally married. Do you think Edna is solidarily
liable with Teddy?[21] Explain.
22. Leinad was charged of frustrated homicide of Oirad. Leinad offered
to pay Oirad the sum of P100,000 just to settle the case. What is the
implication of Leinads offer to pay P100,000 to Oirad?[22] Explain.
23. What about if Leinad merely offered to pay the hospital bills of
Oriad, will your answer be the same?[23] Explain.
24. May a right of a party be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another?[24] Explain.
25. A, B and C were partners of a business from 1999 to 2010.
Yesterday, A testified against the activities of B in 2012 as a
businessman. Will As testimony be given weight?[25] Explain.
26. When may a testimony of a conspirator be admissible?[26] Explain.
27. Explain the terms admission by privies?[27]
28. Explain the terms admission by silence?[28]
29. S was suspected to have killed F. While in police custody and after a
questioning by the Chief of Police, S admitted to have killed F. Was his
confession to the Chief of Police admissible in evidence against him in
court?[29] Explain.
30. Explain the terms similar acts as evidence.[30]

31. D offered to pay E the sum of P100,000, in a letter dated 10 days

ago. Yesterday, E rejected the offer. What is the implication of the acts
of the two?[31] Explain.
32. X testified that Y told him that Q stabbed to death Z. Is Xs
testimony admissible to prove that indeed Q stabbed to death Z?[32]
Explain.
33. Give the eleven exceptions to the hearsay rule and explain each.
[33]
34. When may a testimony of an expert witness be admissible?[34]
35. When may the opinion of an ordinary witness be admissible?[35]
Enumerate.
36. When may character evidence admissible?[36] Enumerate and
explain when warranted.
37. What is burden of proof?[37]
38. Are persons convicted of falsification of a document, perjury, or
false testimony disqualified from being a witness?[38] Explain.
39. D, E and F are solidarily indebted to P in the amount of P900,000. P
filed a complaint for collection of the P900,000 against the three in the
RTC. D filed his answer but E and F did not. In due time, E and F were
declared in default upon Ps motion. May E and F testify in behalf of D?
[39] Explain.
40. A and N were married on August 1, 1989. After two months, N told
A in confidence that the 10-year old L whom she claimed to be her
niece was actually her daughter by a certain B, a married man. In
1992, N obtained a judicial decree of nullity of her marriage with A on
the latters psychological incapacity to fulfill his marital obligations.
When the decree became final, L, assisted by N, filed ten cases of rape
against A purportedly committed in 1991. During the trial, N was called
to testify as a witness against A who objected thereto on the ground of
marital disqualification. (1) As a public prosecutor, how would you meet
the objection?[40] Explain. (2) Suppose Ns testimony was offered
while the decision nullifying her marriage to A was pending appeal,
would your answer be the different?[41] Explain.
41. S is the private complainant in a criminal case for arson against
accused M, the husband of Ss sister, E. prior to the filing of the criminal
case, E and M were separated de facto for six months. The prosecution
called its first witness E for the purpose of proving that M had poured
gasoline on the house of S knowing fully well that S and E were in the
house and that M ignited the gasoline resulting in a fire which
destroyed parts of the house. The defense counsel did not object to the
offer of Es testimony. In the course of her testimony E testified that
she saw M pour gasoline on the house and then ignited the gasoline.
Her direct examination was suspended after she broke down and cried.
Afterwards, the defense counsel filed a motion to disqualify E from

testifying against M on the basis of the marital disqualification rule. The

trial court granted the motion and expunged from the records the direct
testimony of E. Was the trial courts ruling proper?[42] Explain.
42. V was estranged and separated from his wife C, because of the
latters affair with B. While C and B were having dinner in a restaurant,
V appeared and before Cs shocked eyes, shot and killed B. V was
prosecuted for murder of B. the prosecution called to the witness stand
C. Vs counsel objected on the ground of marital disqualification rule. If
you were the judge, how would you rule on the objection?[43] Explain.
43. S filed a criminal case against R for bigamy, alleging that R married
her during the existence of his prior marriage to M. during the trial, S
cited M to testify against R. R objected to the testimony of M invoking
the marital disqualification rule being Ms husband. Is the objection
sustainable?[44] Explain.
44. State the rule on disqualification by reason of the insanity of the
adverse party.[45]
45. State the rule on disqualification by reason of the death of the
adverse party, also known as the dead mans rule.[46]
46. D borrowed P500,000 from C evidenced by a promissory note. W
witnessed the loan transaction. C assigned the note to P. D died. P
brought a money claim against the estate of D. (a) May P testify on the
ante-mortem facts regarding the loan?[47] Explain. (b) May P present
C as a witness to testify on ante-mortem facts regarding the loan?[48]
Explain. (c) May P present W as a witness to testify on ante-mortem
facts regarding the loan?[49] Explain. (d) May P present the promissory
note as evidence in his money claim against the estate of D?[50]
Explain.
47. P brought a money claim against the estate of D for the unpaid
price of a car sold to D. the administrator filed a counterclaim against P
for money loaned by D during his lifetime to P. (a) May P testify that D
had condoned his loan to P?[51] Explain. (b) May P testify that D had
said that he had paid only the downpayment of the cars price but that
the balance be paid in a months time?[52] Explain.
48. D borrowed P1,000,000 from HF Lending Corporation. D died and
HF brought a money claim against the estate of D. May the loan office
of HF testify on ante-mortem facts regarding the loan of D?[53]
Explain.
49. May the survivor testify against the estate of the deceased if the
decedent was guilty of fraud?[54] Explain.
50. What are the privileges under the Rules on Evidence?[55]
Enumerate.
51. May a law enforcement official undertake surveillance, interception,
or recording of communications by terrorists or suspected terrorists?
[56] Explain.

52. Is the confidential character of a privileged communication lost if it

is in the form of an electronic document?[57] Explain.
53. What is the marital communication privilege?[58]
54. Distinguish the marital disqualification
communication privilege.[59] Enumerate.

rule

from

marital

55. (a) If a confidential communication by one spouse to the other

comes into the hands of a third person, may the third person testify
thereon?[60] Explain. (b) What is the exception?[61]
56. In the prosecution of H for the murder of P, the paramour of Hs
wife W, the prosecutor called to the witness stand and offers the
testimony of W in order to prove the circumstances surrounding Ps
killing. After preliminary questions, the Prosecutor asked w if she saw H
leave the crime scene minutes after the killing of P. The defense
objected on the ground of marital disqualification rule. (a) If you were
the judge, how will you rule on the objection?[62] Explain. (b)
subsequently the prosecutor asked W whether, days before the killing
while resting in their bedroom, H had told her that he hates P because
of Ws feelings for P. The defense objected on the ground of marital
communication privilege. If you were the judge, how would you rule on
the objection?[63] Explain.
57. Suit by the Plaintiff wife against her husband. The husband did not
object to the wife taking the witness stand against him. The wife was
asked regarding the contents of a letter written by her husband to her.
The husband objected to the question on the ground of marital
communication privilege. The Plaintiff argued that the husband had
waived he privilege when he did not object to his wife taking the
witness stand. Should the objection be sustained?[64] Explain.