Question 16

Not yet graded / 5 pts

Patrick is married to Tina. Juan is the first cousin of Tina. While in the market, Patrick saw a
man stabbing Juan. Seeing the attack on Juan, Patrick picked up a spade nearby and hit the
attacker on his head which caused the latter's death.
Can Patrick be absolved of the killing on the ground that it is in defense of a relative? Explain.
(5%)
Your Answer:
No. The act cannot be considered as defense of a a relative because well-settled in the rule in the
Revised Penal Code that the following are entitled to the defense of relatives:

1. spouse
2. ascendants
3. descendants
4. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters
5. relatives by affinity in the same degree
6. relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree.

The same does not fall in the case at hand because Juan is a relative of Tina, not Patrick
 
Question 17
Not yet graded / 5 pts
A is the driver of B's Mercedes Benz car. When B was on a trip to Paris, A used the car for a joy
ride with C whom he is courting. Unfortunately, A met an accident. Upon his return, B came to
know about the unauthorized use of the car and sued A for qualified theft. B alleged that A took
and used the car with intent to gain as he derived some benefit or satisfaction from its use. On the
other hand, A argued that he has no intent of making himself the owner of the car as he in fact
returned it to the garage after the joy ride. What crime or crimes, if any, were committed?
Explain. 
Your Answer:
“The elements of qualified theft are as follows:
(a) the taking of personal property; (b) the said property belongs to another; (c) the said taking be
done with intent to gain; (d) it be done without the owner’s consent; (e) it be accomplished
without the use of violence or intimidation against persons, nor of force upon things; and (j) it be
done under any of the circumstances enumerated in Article 310 of the RPC, i.e., with grave
abuse of confidence” 
 
The case at hand shows that there was intent to gain on the part of A and done without the
owner's consent and with intent to gain.
 
Question 18
Not yet graded / 5 pts
Explain the "Chain of Custody" requirement in drug offenses. 
Your Answer:
The law prescribes a strict procedure for handling object evidence, particularly the custody of
confiscated dangerous drugs by law enforcement agencies and by the courts. Non-compliance
with the said procedure renders the evidence non-admissible, resulting in the eventual acquittal
of the accused if there is no other sufficient evidence to convict him. 
Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 states that the apprehending team who obtains the initial custody
and control of the drugs must undertake an immediate physical inventory of the confiscated
drugs, and to take photographs, in the presence of the accused or the persons from whom such
items were confiscated and seized, or their counsel. The law also requires a representative from
the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), or any elected public official who shall be
required to sign the copies of the inventory.
Within 24 hours upon confiscation of dangerous drugs, it must be submitted to the PDEA
Forensic Laboratory for the examination. The forensic laboratory examiner then makes a
certificattion regarding the  results. from the seized drugs. The said certification must be issued
within 24 hours after the receipt of the subject items.