You are on page 1of 3

BIT-IC COLLEGE OF LAW

City of Tagbilaran

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW


Atty. Angel S. Ucat, Jr., Professor
Final Exam

March 22, 2009


I

1. If an evidence is relevant to the fact in issue in a case pending in court, does it


necessarily follow that it is likewise admissible? Discuss and touch upon collateral
matters in your discussion.
2. Explain whether the following evidence is corroborative or cumulative:
a. testimony of W, a friend of A, the accused, supporting the alibi of A who
testified ahead of W and his defense to the charge of murder is denial and alibi.
b. a marriage certificate identified by H, the husband, in the course of his
testimony to support his claim that W, accused of adultery, is his (Hs) wife.
II
1. Is a written extrajudicial confession of an accused which was taken in
conformity with the constitutional safeguards admissible against a. the said accused who is charged with the crime of murder? Explain.
b. his co-accused (in the same case)? Cite the general rule and the exceptions, if
any. Explain.
2. Point out and explain which of the following is the factum probans and which
is the factum probandum?
a. That X killed Y.
b. Eyewitness testimonies of A and B establishing the fact that X killed Y.
III
1. X, a beautiful and young lady student in the first year, College of Law, BIT-IC,
was the object of a defamation in writing written on a wall of the room assigned to First
Year Law students. Using a Pilot Super Color Marker colored red, the culprit wrote: X
is a prostitute. At the instance of X, A, a male classmate of X whose love proposal she
spurned, is now facing a libel case in the RTC. In this connection, under what
circumstance may the wall and the writing thereon be admitted as
a. a documentary evidence? Explain.
b. an object evidence? Explain.
2. S sold to B a parcel of an untitled land for the amount of P300,000. The sale is
evidenced by a deed of absolute sale which S alone signed. Trouble arose because
although after the sale B was able to possess and cultivate the land, S, who has filed an
action to recover ownership and possession of the land, is now claiming ownership
thereof. Bs problem is compounded because only S has a copy of the deed of absolute
sale which was not notarized. As counsel for B, you assisted him in the filing of his

2
answer. In this case, you are required to state the procedural step for you to take so
that, as Bs counsel, you could prove the sale between S and B. Discuss.
IV
1. A and B are brothers. Although A could write his name, he is unschooled
while B is a lawyer and a notary public. One time, A requested B to prepare a special
power of attorney empowering B to sell a parcel of titled land belonging to A. At the
same time, A delivered to B his copy of the title to the land. However, B, instead prepared
a deed of absolute sale making it appear therein that A sold to B that parcel of land.
Believing the assurance of B that the document was a special power of attorney, A signed
the same. Forthwith, B registered the sale with the Register of Deeds who cancelled the
title in the name of A and issued a new one in the name of B. Thus, B is now possessing
and cultivating As land under a claim of ownership. A intends to recover the land from
B. He hires you as his counsel to assist him in the filing of the complaint for the recovery
of the ownership and possession of the land from B. Since it is expected that B would
present in evidence the deed of absolute sale signed by A, in the preparation of the
complaint, what will be your focus an exception to the best evidence rule or an
exception to the parol evidence rule? Explain.
2. H and W are husband and wife, respectively. During their marriage, H killed
his enemy E. (E was not a relative of W whether by consanguinity or affinity).
Although there was no eyewitness to the killing, the police suspected H as the killer not
only because of the bad blood existing between H and E before the incident but also
because there are witnesses who claimed having seen H at the time the latter left the
place where E was found dead by the authorities. After H killed E, he confided to W that
he was the killer. Thereafter, the marriage between H and W was declared void by the
RTC under Art. 36 of the Family Code (psychological incapacity on the part of W).
Based on circumstantial evidence, an information for murder was filed against H. The
prosecution intends to present W as a witness against H. At the time the prosecution
makes a formal offer for W to testify, as counsel for H, what ground of objection would
you invoke, assuming that the offer for W to testify against H is made a. prior to the declaration of nullity of their marriage spousal immunity or
marital privilege rule? Explain.
b. after the declaration of nullity of their marriage spousal immunity or marital
privilege rule? Explain.
V
1. A and B, lady friends, are both single. One time, C, also a lady friend of B,
who has an axe to grind against A, confided to B that A is a concubine of their parish
priest. During the trial of the crime of grave slander which A caused to be filed against C,
and during the time for B to testify, the trial prosecutor made a formal offer that B would
testify on what C told her (B), that is, that A is a concubine of their parish priest.
a. As counsel for C, what ground for objection would you interpose against the
intended testimony of B? Explain.
b. As the trial prosecutor, how would you refute the objection of Cs counsel?
Explain.
c. (1) As the trial judge, when will you give your ruling on the formal offer and
the objection thereon? Explain. (2) What is your ruling? Explain.

3
2. The testimony of a witness was completed only on direct examination. During
the next hearing, he could no longer be cross-examined because he was no longer
available.
a. Is the testimony of that witness admissible in evidence? Explain.
b. Cite the applicable rule if the witness has been partly cross-examined. Discuss.
END
PRACTICE COURT 2
1. In the course of the fact-finding investigation conducted by the police in
connection with the killing of V, three persons, namely, A, B and C were summoned by
the police investigators as possible witnesses. A and B executed their affidavits pointing
to X as the killer of V. On the other hand, C refused to execute an affidavit because,
according to him, he was not present at the time of the incident. Thereafter, a murder
case was filed against X on the basis of the affidavits of A and B. X, who entered a plea
of not guilty, is now presenting his evidence and C is his first witness. C declared on
direct examination that he was present at the time V was killed and that the killer was not
X but A and B, the prosecution witnesses. You are the trial prosecutor. Lay down the
procedure for you to impeach the credibility of C as a witness. Discuss.
2. a. During the Clarificatory Hearing conducted by the Investigating Prosecutor,
does the counsel of either party have the right to intervene in the asking of clarificatory
questions to the witnesses? Explain.
b. If your answer to No. (a) hereof is No, point out the advantage which a party
to a criminal case may derive by hiring a lawyer as his counsel during the preliminary
investigation of the case. Explain.
c. Point out the participation, if any, of the counsel of either party during the
Clarificatory Hearing. Explain.
d. During the preliminary investigation, are the parties required/allowed to make
a formal offer of their respective evidence? Explain.
3. a. Explain the term Tender of excluded evidence.
b. Explain how the tender of excluded evidence is made if the evidence excluded
by the trial court is (1) testimonial?
(2) documentary?
(3) object?
4.
Explain.

a. What is the importance of the rule on tender of excluded evidence?

b. If a partys tender of excluded evidence is denied by the court, what is the


appropriate remedy of the aggrieved party? Explain.
END