REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW 2

QUIZ

1. In a criminal case for murder, accused pleaded not guilty and

raised self-defense as justifying circumstance. Prosecution offered
as documentary evidence, a graphic representation of the travel
path of the bullets from the entry to the exit points on the body of
the victim. On the basis of the bullet’s trajectory, prosecution’s
witness, Dr. Aranas, concluded that the shooter must have been
positioned higher than the victim when the shots were fired. If you
are the judge, how will you give weight to the accused allegation of
self-defense vis-à-vis the graphic representation of the travel path
of the bullets?

If I were the Judge, I will consider the graphic representation of

the travel path of the bullets to support the prosecution’s stand
that the accused is guilty of murder. This representation illustrates
the physical evidence that the intent is not self-defense but murder
because of the way the bullets had entered the victim’s body.

2. Is the printout of a photograph from your mobile phone showing a

fly in the soup you ordered admissible as evidence in an action for
damages against the restaurant owner? Explain briefly.

Yes. The printout of a photograph from a mobile phone is

admissible as evidence in an action for damages against the
restaurant owner. The Rules of Court provides that a photograph
includes still pictures and is included in the definition of
documentary evidence. In the case at bar, what has to be proven
is the presence of a fly in the soup for the action for damages to
prosper. Hence, a printout of the the photograph showing the
same is admissible.

3. Jerry accused Leo of stealing fishes from his fishpond. Jerry’s

caretaker, Allan, was presented as one of the witnesses for the
prosecution. Allan is a deaf-mute. Leo’s counsel moved to
disqualify Allan as a witness on the ground that he could not
verbally communicate his thoughts and narration of the event.
Rule on the motion.
The motion to disqualify Allan as witness should be dismissed. The
Rules of Court provides that for as long as he can be able to make
observations and make those observations be known to others, he
is qualified to be a witness. In the case at bar, being a deaf-mute
does not disqualify Allan as a witness.
4. Leticia had not been talking to Paul, her husband, for a day
because the latter went home late from a drinking spree with his
friends. Leticia decided to go to her sister’s house to tell her about
her problem with Paul. Paul has not been in good terms with
Leticia’s sister ever since.

For unknown reasons, the house of Leticia's sister was burned,

killing the latter. Leticia survived. Before the fire incident, Paul
called Leticia and was convincing her to go home or else Paul will
fetch her.

Leticia saw her husband in the vicinity during the incident. Later,
Paul was charged with arson in an Information filed with the
Regional Trial Court, Pasig City. The complaint was filed by
Leticia’s sister.

During the trial, the prosecutor called Leticia to the witness stand
and offered her testimony to prove that her husband committed
arson.

Can Leticia testify over the objection of her husband on the ground
of martial disqualification rule?  Explain.

Leticia cannot testify against her husband. The Rules of Court

provides that the husband or wife cannot testify against the other.
Exceptions to this rules are when in a civil case against each other
and in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the
other or the latter’s direct descendants/ascendants. In the case at
bar, Leticia’s sister filed the case against Paul. And is not among
the exceptions to the rule being contemplated. Hence, Leticia
cannot testify.

5. G files a complaint for recovery of possession and damage against

F. After the trial, G formally offered as evidence a certificate of title
covering the subject property which was never identified and
marked during the trial. F failed to object to the admissibility of
the evidence. Thereafter, the court admitted as evidence G’s
certificate of title.

a. Is the certificate of title admissible?

Yes. The certificate of title is admissible because the failure of
F to object.
 b. Differentiate admissibility of evidence from weight of
evidence.
Admissibility of evidence pertains to the relevance and
competence of an evidence while the weight of evidence
pertains to evidence that were already admitted and how it
will persuade and convince the court.
6. In a prosecution for illegal possession of dangerous drugs (shabu),
the prosecution has already rested its case but from the records, it
appeared that the illegal substance allegedly involved has not been
identified by any of the prosecution witnesses nor has it been the
subject of any stipulation.

a. Can the prosecution prove the guilt of the accused beyond

reasonable doubt despite its failure to present the illegal
substance as evidence?
No. Since the very material that has to be proven in the case
has not been identified.
b. In a prosecution for illegal possession of firearm, is the
presentation of the firearm required for the conviction of the
accused?
NO. The presentation of the firearm is not required for the
conviction of the accused for as long as the existence of such
can be established by a testimony.

7. In a criminal case for statutory rape, the prosecution alleged that

the victim was ten years old when the alleged rape incident
happened. Prosecution failed to present the victim’s certificate of
live birth to prove the victim’s age nevertheless, the court
convicted the accused and took judicial notice of the victim’s age.
Apparently, the judge who tried and heard the case was the
victim’s neighbor and she had personal knowledge of the victim’s
age. Was the act of taking judicial notice of the victim’s age
proper? Explain.

NO. The act of taking judicial notice of the victim’s age of the judge
is not proper. This is because the Judge was not acting in his
authority as Judge when he took judicial notice of the victim’s age
but as the victim’s neighbor.

8. John filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage with

Anne on the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36 of
the Family Code. He obtained a copy of the confidential psychiatric
evaluation report on his wife from the secretary of the psychiatrist.
John testified on the report. Rule on the qualification and
admissibility of the testimonies of John as a witness.
 The testimony of John pertaining to the report is admissible. This is
because the confidentiality of the psychiatric evaluation is not
applicable in this case. Since the case is for a petition for
declaration of nullity of marriage which is a civil case.

9. Jea filed a criminal complaint for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg.

22 (Bouncing Checks Law) against Karen. The prosecution
presented secondary copies of the Notice of Dishonor sent to and
received by Karen, after the dishonor of the checks issued by the
latter. The defense objected to the admissibility of the evidence
arguing that it violates the Original Document Rule. Rule on the
objection.

The objection should not be sustained. The Rules of Court provides that
the Original Document Rule allows the presentation of secondary copies
when the original has been lost, destroyed or cannot be produced in
court, when proven of the cause of its unavailability and without bad
faith on the offeror. In the case at bar, it has to be proven first that the
documents are authentic.