JOSE RIZAL MEMORIAL STATE UNIVERSITY

SIOCON CAMPUS
Manaol, Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte

EVIDENCE
Offer and Objection
Activity No.3

Name: ________________ Year &Section: ______________

Date: ________________ Score: ______________

I. Essay
A) Ryan was charged with robbery. On the strength of a warrant of
arrest issued by the court, Ryan was arrested by police operatives.
They seized from his person a handgun. A charge for illegal
possession of firearm was also filed against him. In a press
conference called by the police, Ryan admitted that he had robbed
the victim of jewelry valued at P500, 000.00. The robbery and
illegal possession of firearm cases were tried jointly. The
prosecution presented in evidence a newspaper clipping of the
report to the reporter who was present during the press conference
stating that Ryan admitted the robbery. It likewise presented a
certification of the PNP Firearms and Explosive Office attesting that
the accused had no license to carry any firearm. The certifying
officer, however, was not presented as a witness. Both pieces of
evidence were objected to by the defense. Is the certification of the
PNP Firearms and Explosive Office without the certifying officer
testifying on it admissible in evidence against Ryan?
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
B) Ryan files a complaint for recovery of possession and damages
against Shydel. In the course of the trial, Ryan marked his evidence
but his counsel failed to file a formal offer of evidence. Shydel then
presented in evidence tax declarations in the name of his father to
establish that his father is a co-owner of the property. The court
ruled in favor of Shydel, saying that Ryan failed to prove sole
ownership of the property in the face of Shydel’s evidence. Was the
court correct? Explain briefly.
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________