November 11, 2023 6:00 P.M. – 9:00 P.M.

INSTRUCTIONS

1. This questionnaire contains five (5) pages including this page. Check the number of pages
and their proper sequencing. You may write notes on this questionnaire.

Read each question very carefully and write your answers in your Examination Booklet in the
same order as the questions. Write your answers only on the front page of every sheet. Note
well the allocated percentage points for each question or sub-question. In your answers, use the
numbering system in the questionnaire.

2. Answer the questions legibly, clearly, and concisely. Start each answer on a separate page.
An answer to a sub-question under the same number may be written continuously on the same
page and the immediately succeeding pages until completed.

3. Your answer should demonstrate your ability to analyze the facts, apply the pertinent laws
and jurisprudence, and arrive at a sound or logical conclusion. Always support your answer with
the pertinent laws, rules, and/or jurisprudence.

A MERE "YES" OR "NO" ANSWER WITHOUT ANY CORRESPONDING EXPLANATION OR

DISCUSSION WILL NOT BE GIVEN FULL CREDIT. THUS, ALWAYS BRIEFLY BUT FULLY
EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWERS ALTHOUGH THE QUESTION DOES NOT EXPRESSLY ASK
FOR AN EXPLANATION. DO NOT REWRITE OR REPEAT THE QUESTION ON YOUR
BOOKLET.

4. Do not write your name or any extraneous note/s or distinctive marking/s on your Booklet that
can serve as an identifying mark/s (such as names that are not in the given questions, prayers,
or private notes to the Examiner). Writing, leaving, or making any distinguishing or identifying
mark in the Booklet is considered cheating and can disqualify you.

ATTY. RENJOMAR CASTRO BALTAZAR

Law Professor
2023 Midterm Examinations

Page 1 of 5
 I.
(10 points)

MATTHEW, married to ATHENA, contracted another marriage with QUENNIE in Australia.

Thereafter, MATTHEW and QUENNIE returned to the Philippines and lived as husband and
wife in the hometown of MATTHEW in Kawit, Cavite.

A. Can MATTHEW be prosecuted for bigamy? (5 pts)

B. But supposed without returning to the Philippines, MATTHEW and QUENNIE continue their
illicit relationship in abroad, as such, after gaining knowledge to it, ATHENA will file a criminal
case against MATTHEW, will the case prosper? Explain. (5 pts)

II.
(10 points)

A. Define wheel conspiracy and chain conspiracy. Explain. (4 pts)

B. A had a grudge against F. Deciding to kill F, A and his friends, B, C, and D, armed
themselves with knives and proceeded to the house of F, taking a taxicab for the purpose.
About 20 meters from their destination, the group alighted and after instructing E, the driver, to
wait, traveled on foot to the house of F. B positioned himself at a distance as the group's
lookout. C and D stood guard outside the house. Before A could enter the house, D left the
scene without the knowledge of the others. A stealthily entered the house and stabbed F. F ran
to the street but was blocked by C, forcing him to flee towards another direction. Immediately
after A had stabbed F, A also stabbed G who was visiting F. Thereafter, A exiled from the house
and, together with B and C, returned to the waiting taxicab and motored away. G died. F
survived. Who are liable for the death of G and the physical injuries of F? (6 pts)

Page 2 of 5
 III.
(10 points)

A. State the concept of "implied conspiracy" and give its legal effects. (4 pts)

B. BB and CC, both armed with knives, attacked FT. The victim's son, ST, upon seeing the
attack, drew his gun but was prevented from shooting the attackers by AA, who grappled with
him for possession of the gun. FT died from knife wounds. AA, BB and CC were charged with
murder. In his defense, AA invoked the justifying circumstance of avoidance of greater evil or
injury, contending that by pre venting ST from shooting BB and CC, he merely avoided a
greater evil. Will AA's defense prosper? Reason briefly. (6 pts)

IV.
(10 points)

A. Maryjane had two suitors - Felipe and Cesar. She did not openly show her preference but on
two occasions, accepted Cesar's invitation to concerts by Regine and Pops. Felipe was a
working student and could only ask Mary to see a movie which was declined. Felipe felt insulted
and made plans to get even with Cesar by scaring him off somehow. One day, he entered
Cesar's room in their boarding house and placed a rubber snake which appeared to be real in
Cesar's back pack. Because Cesar had a weak heart, he suffered a heart attack upon opening
his backpack and seeing the snake. Cesar died without regaining consciousness. The police
in vestigation resulted in pinpointing Felipe as the culprit and he was charged with Homicide for
Cesar's death. In his defense, Felipe claimed that he did not know about Cesar's weak heart
and that he only intended to play a practical joke on Cesar. Is Felipe liable for the death of
Cesar or will his defense prosper? Why? (5 pts)

B. Cesar hated his classmate, Felipe, because the latter was assiduously courting Maryjane,
Cesar’s girlfriend. Cesar went to a veterinarian and asked for some poison on the pretext that it
would be used to kill a very sick, old dog. Actually, Cesar intended to use the poison on Felipe.
The veterinarian mistakenly gave Cesar a non-toxic powder which, when mixed with Felipe’s
food, did not kill Felipe. Did Cesar commit any crime? If so, what and why? If not, why not? (5
pts)

Page 3 of 5
 V.
(10 points)

A. Explain what is Proximate Cause. (1 pt)

B. Is the term Aberratio Ictus the same with Praeter Intentionem and Error in Personae? (3 pts)

C. On his way home from office, ZZ rode in a jeepney. Subsequently, XX boarded the same
jeepney. Upon reaching a secluded spot in QC, XX pulled out a grenade from his bag and
announced a hold-up. He told ZZ to surrender his watch, wallet and cellphone. Fearing for his
life, ZZ jumped out of the vehicle. But as he fell, his head hit the pavement, causing his instant
death . Is XX liable for ZZ's death? Explain briefly. (6 pts)

VI.
(10 points)

A. Distinguish malum in se from malum prohibitum. (1 pt)

B. Distinguish "motive" from "intent". (1 pt)

C. Mr. Carlos Gabisi, a customs guard, and Mr. Rico Yto, a private Individual, went to the office
of Mr. Diether Ocuarto, a customs broker, and represented themselves as agents of Moonglow
Commercial Trading, an Importer of children's clothes and toys. Mr. Gabisi and Mr. Yto engaged
Mr. Ocuarto to prepare and file with the Bureau of Customs the necessary Import Entry and
Internal Revenue Declaration covering Moonglow's shipment. Mr. Gabisi and Mr. Yto submitted
to Mr. Ocuarto a packing list, a commercial invoice, a bill of lading and a Sworn Import Duty
Declaration which declared the shipment as children's toys, the taxes and duties of which were
computed at P60,000.00. Mr. Ocuarto filed the aforementioned documents with the Manila
International Container Port. However, before the shipment was released, a spot check was
conducted by Customs Senior Agent James Bandido, who discovered that the contents of the
van (shipment) were not children's toys as declared in the shipping documents but 1,000 units
of video cassette recorders with taxes and duties computed at P600,000.00. A hold order and
warrant of seizure and detention were then issued by the District Collector of Customs. Further
investigation showed that Moonglow is non-existent. Consequently, Mr. Gabisi and Mr. Yto were
charged with and convicted for violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. 3019 which makes it unlawful
among others, for pub lic officers to cause any undue Injury to any party, including the
Government. In the discharge of official functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or
gross inex cusable negligence. In their motion for reconsideration, the accused alleged that the
decision was erroneous because the crime was not consummated but was only at an attempted
stage, and that in fact the Government did not suffer any undue injury. Is the contention of both
accused correct? Explain. (8 pts)

Page 4 of 5
 VII.
(10 points)

A chanced upon three men who were attacking B with fist blows. C, one of the men, was about
to stab B with a knife. Not knowing that B was actually the aggressor because he had earlier
challenged the three men to a fight, A shot C as the latter was about to stab B. May A invoke
the defense of a stranger as a justifying circumstance in his favor? Why?

VIII
(10 points)

A. While his wife was on a 2-year scholarship abroad, Romeo was having an affair with his maid
Dulcinea. Realizing that the affair was going nowhere, Dulcinea told Romeo that she was going
back to the province to marry her childhood sweetheart. Clouded by anger and jealousy, Romeo
strangled Dulcinea to death while she was sleeping in the maid’s quarters. The following day,
Romeo was found catatonic inside the maid’s quarters. He was brought to the National Center
for Mental Health (NCMH) where he was diagnosed to be mentally unstable. Charged with
murder, Romeo pleaded insanity as a defense. Will Romeo’s defense prosper? Explain. (8 pts)

B. What is the effect of the diagnosis of the NCMH on the case? (2 pts)

IX.
(20 points)

In verbatim, and in following order, cite at least 20 aggravating cricumstances under Article 14,
Revised Penal Code.

Page 5 of 5