Criminal Law Mock Bar Examination

JURISTS BAR REVIEW CENTER

™

2017 CRIMINAL LAW MOCK BAR EXAMINATION EXAMINATION

5 August 2017

1 pm to 5 pm INSTRUCTIONS

1. This Questionnaire contains 6 pages. Check the number of pages and make sure it has the correct number of pages and their proper numbers. All the items have to be answered answered within four (4) hours. Since there are twenty (20) questions, you have 12 minutes to answer each question. You may write on the Questionnaire for notes relating to the questions. Read each question very carefully and write your answers in your Bar Examination Notebook in the same order the questions are posed. Write your answers only on the front of every sheet in your Notebook. If not sufficient, then start with the back page of the first sheet and thereafter. In your answers, use the numbering system in the questionnaire. 2. Answer the Essay questions legibly, clearly, and concisely. Start each number 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. 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, jurisprudence, and the facts. A mere "Yes" or "No" "No" answer without without any corresponding corresponding explanation explanation or discussion 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 re-write or repeat the question in your Notebook. 3. Make sure you do not write your name or any extraneous notes or distinctive marking/s on your Notebook 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 exam Notebook is considered cheating and can disqualify you.

YOU CAN BRING HOME THE QUESTIONNAIRE

I

In 2012, Juan, John, and Johnny were convicted of Attempted Theft and sentenced to a prison term of 6 months. Three years later, the trio were accused of Frustrated Homicide. Prosecuted therefor, all of them were found guilty as charged and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 1 year of prision correccional as minimum to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor as maximum. a) In case Juan opts to apply for probation before the judgment attains finality, may the same be validly granted? Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. All rights reserved 2017 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Unauthorized reproduction, reproduction, use, or dissemination dissemination is strictly prohibited and shall be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, including administrative complaints complaints with the Office of the Bar Confidant, Supreme Court. Page 1 of 6

b) Instead of applying immediately for probation, Juan appeals the judgment. The appellate court downgrades his conviction to Attempted Homicide and consequently modifies the sentence to an indeterminate penalty of 4 months of arresto mayor as minimum to 5 years and 11 months of prision correccional as maximum. In case Juan applies for probation before the judgment attains finality, may the same be granted?

II

Petito was found guilty of homicide and sentenced to imprisonment of 12 years, 1 month and 1 day to 20 years and to pay the heirs of the victim P32,000 for funeral expenses and P30,000 as death indemnity. The judgment became final and executory in 1989. In 2010, After two decades from the entry of judgment, Probo, the son of the deceased victim, filed a Motion for Execution of Judgment insofar as the penalty of imprisonment and insofar as the civil liability is concerned. He alleged, among others, that despite his request to the City Prosecutor to file a motion for execution, the judgment has not been enforced because said prosecutor has not acted upon his request. Petito opposed the motion contending that the judgment can no longer be enforced pursuant to Section 6, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. Should the RTC grant the motion for execution?

III

Juana, who is the mother-in-law of Patty , unknowingly left her handbag, containing among other things, her ATM card, when she visited Patty at her house. After having discovered the same, Patty took said card and with it, was able to withdraw, through an ATM, P20,000.00 from Juana’s account with the issuing bank. Is Patty criminally and civilly liable therefor?

IV

Pedro has been employed as messenger of REMIT , an entity engaged in the delivery of remittances from abroad to its clients. One day, Pedro was tasked by REMIT to deliver cash money in the amount of P50,000.00 to Maria. Instead of transmitting the money to the recipient, Pedro used the same to redeem a set of jewelry which he pawned to Mario. Indicted for Estafa by conversion, Peter was convicted thereof.

Is the conviction of Pedro correct?

V

Pandoy’s savings account with VIP Bank, which had a balance of P1,000 was erroneously credited with P999,000 due to a systems glitch. Pandoy forthwith withdraw the P999,000. He deposited P500,000 with Pedro Bank, in the name of his friend Abet, but with the agreement that it was really Pandoy who was the owner of the P500,000. Abet is aware of how Pandoy came across the P500,000.

What crime or crimes if any was or were committed by Pandoy and/or Abet? Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. All rights reserved 2017 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Unauthorized reproduction, use, or dissemination is strictly prohibited and shall be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, including administrative complaints with the Office of the Bar Confidant, Supreme Court. Page 2 of 6

VI

When Peter and John went to the house of Petra, a septuagenarian, for the purpose of abducting her, they found her lifeless lying on a couch. Peter and John nevertheless carried her corpse and brought it to a safe house. Later on, Peter sent a text message to Petra’s rich daughter, Maria, and from whom he demanded ransom supposedly in exchange for her release from captivity. Believing that her mother was still alive and fearing that Peter and John would kill Petra, Maria, as instructed by Peter , deposited P 5 million to the latter’s bank account. What crime(s) may Peter and John be aptly charged of?

VII

Peter and Petra are spouses. Peter thought all along that his wife has been faithful to him until he viewed a video sent thru viber to his mobile phone where Petra was having sexual intercourse with another man. When Peter confronted Petra thereof, the latter confessed that she is the same woman captured on video taken a month earlier and begged for forgiveness. Without uttering a word, Peter drew a gun and shot Petra to death.

If Peter is prosecuted for Parricide, may he successfully interpose the absolutory cause of “Death Inflicted under Exceptional Circumstances”?

VIII

Zet threatened Paolo with a toy gun and demanded from him his mobile phone. Thinking that it was a real gun, Paolo ran away. Zet gave a chase but before Paolo could run farther away from the former, bystanders Jun and Shawn also pursued Paolo as the latter was mistaken by the duo for a robber. Upon seeing this, Zet desisted. When Jun and Shawn finally caught up with Paolo, he was mauled and beaten to death by them. May Zet be held criminally liable for the killing of Paolo?

IX

Robert lent P1 million to Naty, repayable with interest, in consideration of which Naty, simultaneous with the receipt of the money, issued to Robert six personal postdated checks. When the checks fell due, Naty told Robert not to deposit them because they were not funded and promised to replace them. Naty got back the six original checks by replacing them with four postdated checks (the replacement checks) which she handed to Robert. Later, the four replacement checks were dishonored upon presentment for payment by Robert for having been drawn against insufficient funds or against closed accounts. Naty did not pay despite receiving notice of dishonor of the checks from Robert. Naty was charged

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. All rights reserved 2017 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Unauthorized reproduction, use, or dissemination is strictly prohibited and shall be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, including administrative complaints with the Office of the Bar Confidant, Supreme Court. Page 3 of 6

with the crime of estafa under Article 315(2)(d) of the Revised Penal Code for the issuance of the four replacement checks. May Naty be convicted of such crime?

X

Ivana Korchnoi, a married woman and Boris Karpov, a married man, were indicted for adultery in an information filed by the Prosecutor of Bataan upon a sworn complaint filed by Mrs. Tatiana Karpov, wife of Boris. After trial, Ivana and Boris were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. No timely appeal was made by Ivana and Boris. The sister of Ivana comes to you and asks whether there is still a remedy available to Ivana and Boris. What would your opinion be?

XI

Rod and Manuel had a fight. Rod hit Manuel with a strong punch to the stomach, followed by a roundhouse kick to the head, which knocked down Manuel. Immediately, Rod ran away but Manuel stood up and chased Rod who tripped to the ground. When Manuel caught up with Rod, Frank, Manuel’s friend, threw his gun to Manuel and shouted “Gamitin mo to pare!” Butch, a bystander who saw the incident, made a thumbs up sign and said “Ok yan pare, tapusin mo na”. Thus, Manuel picked the gun from the ground and pointed it to Rod who was then seated begging for mercy. Manuel did not heed Rod’s plea, and shot and killed Rod. Thereupon, Manuel, Frank and Butch scampered. Manuel went to his brother Jose and surrendered the gun to him. Jose took the gun and sold it for Php10,000.00, which was divided between Jose and Manuel. Later, Manuel, Frank, Butch, and Jose, were apprehended. What crime (homicide or murder) was committed? Discuss fully the liabilities of the parties involved.

XII

Donald and Olga got married in 2005. In 2007, Donald filed with the Family Court an action for the declaration of nullity of his marriage with Olga on the ground of absence of a marriage license (the nullity case). In 2010, during the pendency of the nullity case, Donald contracted a second marriage with Ivana. When Olga found out about the second marriage of Donald and Ivana, she filed a criminal case for bigamy before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila sometime in 2011. Donald filed a motion to suspend the proceedings in the bigamy case on the ground of prejudicial question. He asserts that the proceedings in the criminal case should be suspended because if his first marriage with Olga will be declared null and void in the nullity case, it will have the effect of exculpating him from the crime of bigamy. a) Should the motion to suspend proceedings be granted? b) During the pendency of the criminal case for bigamy, a judgment was rendered in the nullity case granting Donald’s action for declaration of nullity of his marriage with Olga. The judgment became final and executory. May Donald be later convicted of bigamy in the criminal case?


XIII

Pedro deposited P10,000,000, his retirement pay, with Banko Pinoy. He also placed in a safe-deposit box with Banko Pinoy a bearer certificate of time deposit (CTD) issued by Metro Bank in the amount of P5,000,000. Later Banko Pinoy was ordered closed by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. Records showed that Igor, the principal stockholder of Banko Pinoy, had treated the bank account s therein, including Pedro’s, as a piggy bank and used the same to fund his gambling sprees, as a result of which Banko Pinoy became insolvent. Records also showed that Igor had obtained the CTD of Pedro, encashed it, and used the proceeds in gambling and womanizing. Pedro filed with the city prosecutor a complaint against Igor for estafa through misappropriation under Article 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code for Igor’s acts which resulted in the loss of Pedro’s P10 million bank deposit and the P10 million CTD. If you were the investigating prosecutor, how would you resolve the complaint?

XIV

Pokwang and Ganda are friends residing in Pasay City. Pokwang lent P500,000 to Ganda evidenced by a promissory note. Ganda failed to pay the note despite demand so Pokwang filed an action for collection of P500,000 against Ganda. In her verified answer, Ganda claimed that she never borrowed money from Pokwang which was a clear lie. Is Ganda liable for perjury?

XV

Dr. J and Dr. No attended to Johnny’ s operation to remove a cyst in his nape. Two hours after, Johnny was wheeled to the recovery room. Before evening, he was already in his hospital suite with his relatives. Johnny was discharged from the hospital after two days. Few days after, he was brought back to the hospital because an infection had developed in the incised wound made during the surgical operation. The inspection spread fast. Two days after, Johnny died. A case for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide was filed against Dr. J and Dr. No. In the prosecution against the doctors, may the prosecution prove conspiracy of the accused through circumstantial evidence?

XVI

Accused knocked on the house of the victims and asked whether she could use their telephone. After a while, she was joined by the other accused. She then excused herself to go to the toilet. When she came back, she sat in the sofa. Thereafter, the other accused poked a gun on the victim’s neck. Their other companions proceeded to the kitchen and herded the maids, the v ictim’s niece and cousin inside the bodega. Accused and her companions were able to take away valuables in the total amount of P2,701,000 . What crime or crimes was or were committed? Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. All rights reserved 2017 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Unauthorized reproduction, use, or dissemination is strictly prohibited and shall be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, including administrative complaints with the Office of the Bar Confidant, Supreme Court. Page 5 of 6

XVII

Distinguish composite crime from complex crime.

XVIII

In the heat of anger, Rodrigo pointed a gun at Reyno. With intention to kill the latter, Rodrigo pressed the trigger but no bullet came out of the gun. When he checked it, he found that the trigger had jammed. (a) For what crime is Rodrigo liable? (b) Assuming that the reason why no bullet came out was that there was no more bullet left inside the gun, would Rodrigo still be criminally liable? Explain fully.

XIX

J is an economist of the Asian Development Bank. He was assigned to the Philippine branch of the ADB as Head of the Economic Development Cluster of the Bank. He had an altercation with K, another employee of the ADB. Because of the defamatory statement that he uttered against K, the latter filed a case for grave oral defamation against him. The case was raffled in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Mandaluyong City. He claimed immunity from prosecution on account of his status as a consultant and official of the ADB pursuant to the agreement on immunity from legal process between the government and the ADB. Is he immune from suit?

XX

A Cebu Pacific Aircraft is bound for Cebu City. While the pilot and co-pilot where on their way to the aircraft, M and P followed them. As soon as the pilots entered the cockpit, M and P with drawn guns instructed them to fly the plane. The passengers were still boarding at this time. Are M and P liable for hijacking?

---NOTHING FOLLOWS---


Criminal Law Mock Bar Examination

Recommend Documents