Evidence MCQs and Essays - Final

EVIDENCE ( MCQs and Essay Qs pp 1-9; Answers pp 10-21) MCQs – 30 ITEMS ADMISSIBILITY 1.

Which of the following is true about admissibility and evidentiary weight of a certain item of evidence? a.

A particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation within the guidelines guidelines provided by the rules of evidence . b. A certain item of evidence may be admissible as per stipulation of parties and its evidentiary weight depends on such stipulation alone. c. A particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial determination even beyond parameters set forth in the rules rules of evidence. d. A certain item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation of both the stipulation of the parties and guidelines provided by the rules of evidence.

2.

Is evidence on collateral matters allowed? a. b. c. d.

Evidence on collateral matters shall be allowed, except if it establishes improbability of the fact in issue. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except if it establishes probability of the fact in issue. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be a llowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. Evidence on collateral matters shall be allowed only when it does not establish probability or improbability of the fact in issue.

3.

Which is true about denial? a. A denial is a positive evidence and considered by jurisprudence to be a very strong form of defense which can overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness b. A denial is a negative evidenc e but considered by jurisprudence to be a very strong form of defense which can never overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness c. A denial is a positive evidence but considered by jurisprudence to be a very weak form of defense and can never overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness. d. A denial is a negative evidence and considered by jurisprudence to be a very weak form of defense and can never overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness.

4.

The legal maxim, maxim , “Ei “Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, no qui negat” provides negat” provides that the burden of proof lies on which of the parties? a. b. c.

The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the negative of the issue at the beginning of the case and continues on him throughout the case. The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the affirmative of the issue at the beginning of the case and c ontinues on him throughout the case. The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the negative of the issue at the beginning of the case but abandons the same prior to rendering of judgment.

Law on Evidence: MCQ’s and Essay Q’s with Suggested Answers Compiled by Benj Hernandez Jr. (Remedial Law Review – Evidence Group - PCU-Law Batch 2013)

Page 1

d.

The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the affirmative of the issue at the beginning of the case but abandons the same prior to rendering of judgment.

JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS 5.

The following are TRUE about the concept of common knowledge in judicial notice, EXCEPT: a. They are those matters coming to the knowledge of men generally in the course of o rdinary experiences of life. b. They may be matters which are generally accepted by mankind as true and are capable of ready and unquestioned demonstration. c. They are facts which are universally known, and which may be found in encyclopedias, dictionaries or other publications, provided, they are of such universal notoriety and so generally understood that they may be regarded as forming part of the common knowledge of every person. d. A court can take judicial notice of any fact which, in part, is dependent on the existence or non-existence of a fact of which the court has no constructive knowledge.

6.

Maria is the defendant in a collection suit filed Juana. Maria’s lawyer effected a written extrajudicial admission, which was signed by the latter a nd provided that she did not pay the entire amount of her loan to Juana when in fact she already paid at least 40% of the total amount due. The same written admission came into the hands of Juana who wants to use the same as an evidence to prove liability of Maria. Such written extrajudicial admission is? a. b. c. d.

Admissible because it is up to Maria to contradict the same in actual hearing. Not admissible because it is prejudicial to Maria ’s interest. interest. Admissible because a counsel binds his client with respect to admissions. Not admissible because a counsel only binds his client with respect to admissions in open court and in pleadings actually filed with the court.

7. The general rule is that foreign laws may not be taken judicial notice of and have to be proved like any other fact but the same admits o f certain exception and when said la ws are within the actual kn owledge of the court and: a. Such laws are well and generally known and none of the parties claim otherwise. b. Such laws are referred to in an obiter dictum in previous cases and none of the parties claim otherwise. c. Such laws are inconsistent with domestic laws and none of the parties claim otherwise. d. Such laws are merely applied suppletory to domestic laws and none of the parties claim otherwise. 8. The following are rules with regard to judicial notice of ordinances, EXCEPT? a. MTCs are required to take judicial notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city wherein they sit. b. RTCs must take judicial notice when expressly prohibited to do so by a statute. c. RTCs must take judicial notice in a case on a ppeal before them and wherein the inferior court took judicial notice of an ordinance involved in the same ca se. d. Appellate courts may not take judicial notice of ordinances not only because the lower courts took judicial notice thereof but because these are f acts capable of unquestionable demonstration. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE 9.

Object evidence shall include: a. Any article or object which may not be known or perceived by the use of the senses


Page 2

b. c. d. 10.

Examination of the anatomy of a person or of any substance taken for purely medical purposes Conduct of tests, demonstrations or experiments to prove scientific hypotheses Examination of representative portrayals of the object in question

May the courts refuse the introduction of object or real evidence and rely on testimonial evidence alone? a. No, even if such exhibition is contrary to public morals or decency. b. Yes, but only if to require it being viewed in court or in ocular inspection would not result in delays, inconvenience, or unnecessary expenses which are out of proportion to the evidentiary value of such object. c. No, even if such object evidence would be confusing or misleading, as when the purpose is to prove the former condition of the object and there is no preliminary showing that there has been no substantial change in said condition. d. Yes, but only if the testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly portrays the object in question as to render a view thereof unnecessary.

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 11.

Which of the following is an exception to the Best Evidence Rule? a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror. b. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party in whose favor the evidence is offered, and still the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice. c. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which may be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole. d. When the original is not a public record and not in the custody of a public officer or is not recorded in a public office.

12.

The loss or destruction of a document may be proved by the following, EXCEPT: a. Any person who knew of such fact. b. Anyone who, in the judgment of the court, had made sufficient examination in the places where the document or papers of similar character are usually kept by the person in whose custody the document was and has been unable to find it. c. Any person who has knowledge of its existence as he learned the same from another person. d. Any person who has made any other investigation which is sufficient to satisfy the court that the document is indeed lost.

13.

The following are the factors to be considered in assessing evidentiary weight of an electronic document, EXCEPT? a. The reliability of the manner or method in which it was generated, stored or communicated, including but not limited to input and output procedures, controls, tests and checks for accuracy and reliability of the electronic data message or document, in the light of all the circumstances as well as any relevant agreement. b. The reliability of the manner in which its duplicate was identified. c. The integrity of the information and communication system in which it its recorded or stored, including but not limited to the ha rdware and computer programs or software used as well as programming errors. d. The familiarity of the witness or the person who made the entry with the commun ication and information system.

14.

Carlos sought the help of NBI in order for him to to use as evidence evidence the email messages in his email email inbox inbox purported to be from Michael, the car dealer who sold him a lemon car. The said email messages contain


Page 3

relevant information pertaining to their transaction and bear the digital signature which Michael would usually use in his online business dealings. If Carlos will be successful in a uthenticating the digital signature of Michael, what will its effect be? a. It shall be presumed that the information contained in a certificate is correct. b. It shall be presumed that the digital signature was created outside the operational period of a certificate. c. It shall be presumed that there may be an existing cause to render a certificate invalid or revocable. d. It shall be presumed that the message associated with a digital signature has been altered from the time it was signed.

TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE 15.

Matt is the defendant in a parricide case for allegedly killing the father of Yvonne, his estranged wife, who who saw him fleeing from the scene of the crime. During the trial, the prosecutor offered the testimony of Yvonne as evidence to prove the guilt of Matt. Can the defendant’s counsel object on the ground of marital privilege? a. Yes, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege extends not only to testimony adverse to the spouse but also to a testimony in favor of the spouse. b. No, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege does not apply in the case of estranged spouses, where the marital and domestic relations are so strained that there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquility which may be disturbed. c. Yes, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege applies so long as the marriage exists at the time the testimony is offered. d. No, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege does not apply to crimes committed against the direct ascendants or descendants of either husband or wife.

16.

Which of the following is true regarding disqualification by reason of death or insanity of the adverse party? a. It constitutes a partial disqualification of a witness wherein he is prohibited from testifying as to any matter of fact occurring before the death or insanity of a party to the transaction. b. The witness can testify on matters which occurred in the presence and within the hearing of the decedent to which he might testify on his personal knowledge if he were alive. c. Such facts which are favorable to the deceased or insane person or their representatives are prohibited. d. Objection to such disqualification can never be wai ved.

17.

The attorney-and-client privilege does not apply to: a. Communications which are intended to be made public or be communicated to others. b. Communications which are intended for a lawful purpose. c. Communications which are received from third persons acting in behalf or as agents of the client. d. Communications which are made in the presence of third parties who are not strangers to the attorney-client relationship.

18.

The physician-and-patient privilege does not apply to: a. Communications which are given in confidence. b. Communications which are relevant to the professional employment. c. Communications which are made for a lawful purpose. d. Communications which are intended to be made public.

19.

The following pertain to a qualified witness, EXCEPT?


Page 4

a. b. c. d.

He is a person who ca n perceive and perceiving. He is a person who can make known his perception to others. He must have taken either an oath or an affirmation. He must possess the disqualifications imposed by law or the rules.

20.

What is the effect when mental unsoundness of the witness at the time the fact to be testified occurred with respect to his competency and his credibility? a. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects his credibility alone. b. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects his competency alone. c. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects either his co mpetency or his credibility. d. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects both his competency and his credibility.

21.

Are deaf-mutes competent witnesses? a. No, deaf-mutes are incompetent witnesses b. Yes, if they can comprehend facts they are not going to testify on. c. Yes, if they can understand and appreciate the sanctity of an oath. d. Yes, if they can communicate their ideas through an unqualified interpreter.

22.

Which of the following is true about disqualification by reason of privileged communication? a. The holder of the privilege, authorized persons and persons to whom privileged communication were made can assert the privilege. b. The disqualification always applies to both civil and criminal cases. c. The privilege cannot be invoked where confidential information has been made in contemplation of death or in furtherance or perpetuation of f raud. d. Unless waived, the disqualification remains even a fter the various relationships therein have ceased to exist.

23.

The following cases are not covered by the dead man statute, EXCEPT? a. Testimony of mere witnesses who are either party plaintiffs, or their assignors, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, or to a nominal party, or to officers and stockholders of a plaintiff corporation. b. If the person or persons mentioned under the rule file a counterclaim. c. Where the deceased contracted with the plaintiff through an agent and said agent is alive and can testify, but the testimony of the plaintiff should be limited to acts performed by the agent. d. Land registration cases instituted by the deceased’s representative, where the oppositor is considered as defendant or in cadastral case s where there are no oppositors.

24.

Which is a requisite for the application of the physician-and-patient privileged communication? a. The action is either civil case or criminal case. b. The relation of physician and patient existed between the person claiming the privilege or his legal representative and the physician. c. The advice or treatment given by him or any information was acquired by the physician while casually attending to the patient. d. The information was unnecessary for the performance of his professional duty.

25.

The following is true about priest-and-penitent privileged communication, EXCEPT? a. The confession must have been made to the priest in his professional character according to the discipline of the church to which the priest or minister belongs. b. Even if the communication is not penitential in character as when what is divulged is the plan to commit a crime, the privileged communication still applies. c. Communications made must be confidential and must be p enitential in character e.g., under the seal of the confessional.


Page 5

d.

Its purpose is to allow and encourage individuals to fulfill their religious, emotional or other needs by protecting confidential disclosures to religious practitioners.

26.

The following are considered other forms of privileged communication, EXCEPT? a. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any information, statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of serving as a guardian ad litem, unless the court finds it necessary to promote the best interests of the child. b. Editors, publisher, or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper, magazine o r periodical of general circulation cannot be compelled to reveal the source o f any news report or any information given to him in confidence, unless a court or a House or a committee of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded for State security. c. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted. d. Trade secrets cannot be disclosed and the same is absolute as the court may not compel disclosure even if it is indispensable for doing justice.

27.

Which of the following is a purpose of objections? a. To keep out admissible evidence that would be favorable to a client’s ca use. b. To protect the record, i.e. to present the issue of inadmissibility of the o ffered evidence in a way that if the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon as a ground for a future appeal. c. To expose a witness from being embarrassed by the adverse counsel. d. To allow the adversary’s unfair tactics like his cons istently asking obviously leading questions.

28.

May objections be waived? a. Yes, because the right to object is merely a privilege which the party may waive. b. No, because it will be prejudicial to the client if the same is waived. c. Yes, because the right of object is subject to both stipulations by parties and judicial discretion. d. No, because it will amount to an admission if the same is waived.

29.

The following shows how an objection can be made, EXCEPT? a. Before the court has ruled on the objection, in which case its function is to persuade the court to overrule the objection or deny the privilege invoked. b. After the court has sustained the objection, in which case its function is to preserve for the appeal the evidence excluded by the privilege invoked. c. When the question to which an objection has been sustained clearly reveals on its face the substance, purpose and relevancy of the excluded evidence; an offer or proof is required. d. Where the offer of proof includes the introduction of documents, or any of the physical evidence, the same should be marked for identification so that they may become part of the record.

30.

A motion to strike out or expunge inadmissible testimony or evidence is proper: a. When the answers are competent, relevant or proper. b. When the witness becomes unavailable for cross-examination with fault of the crossexamining party. c. When the witness answers prematurely before there is reasonable opportunity for the adverse party to object, and such objection is found to be meritorious. d. When the testimony was allowed conditionally and the condition for its admissibility was fulfilled.


Page 6

ESSAY QUESTIONS – 20 ITEMS ADMISSIBILITY 1.

Is direct proof of previous agreement to commit a crime necessary to prove conspiracy?

2.

What is the test to determine where the burden of proof lies?


When are judicial admissions made?

4.

When can admissions in a pleading be considered as extrajudicial admissions?

OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE 5.

After a full-blown trial, John was found guilty of murder for shooting Gerard. On appeal, John argued that the trial court should have acquitted him as his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. He contended that the paraffin test conducted on him 3 days after his arrest yielded a negative result. Hence, he could not have shot Gerard. Is John correct?

6.

In a criminal case for murder, the prosecution offered as evidence photographs showing the accused shooting the victim in front of the latter’s neighbors. The person who took the photograph was not presented as a witness. During the trial, the p rosecution presented the neighbors of the victim who testified that they were the ones in the photographs. The defense objected to the a dmissibility of the photographs because the person who took the photographs was not presented as witness. Is the contention of the defense tenable?


In a civil case for collection of money, Pamela sought to escape liability from a promissory note by showing that her signature was a forged and presented an expert witness to prove the same. Alicia objected to the presentation of Pamela’s expert witness o n the ground that the finding of said witness is based on a mere Xerox copy of the promissory note. Is the objection of Alicia tenable?


A tugboat owned by SHIP AHOY, Inc. (SAI) sank in Subic Bay while helping to tow another vessel, drowning 7 of the crew in the resulting shipwreck. At the maritime board inquiry, 3 survivors of the shipwreck testified. SAI engaged Atty. Yves to defend against potential claims and to sue the company owning the other vessel for damages to the tug. Atty. Yves obtained signed statements from the survivors. He also interviewed other persons, in some instance making memoranda. The heirs of the 7 victims filed an action for damages against SAI. The counsel of the heirs of the 7 victims sent written interrogatories to Atty.


Page 7

Yves, asking whether statements of the witnesses may be obtained. Atty. Yves refused to comply, arguing that the documents and information asked are privileged communication. Is the contention tenable? Explain.

9.

Henry filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of his marriage with Laura on the ground of psychological incapacity. Henry sought to testify on a confidential psychiatric evaluation report on his wife. Laura objected to Henry ’s testimony on the ground that it violates the physician -patient privilege. Is the objection of Laura correct?

10.

Samantha sought to offer as evidence the testimony of Dr. Reyes to prove that Ivan is not the illegitimate son of Marcus as the la tter was sterile. Ivan objected to the admissibility of the said testimony arguing that the same is covered by the physician-patient privilege because the testimony would blacken reputation of Marcus. It was alleged that Marcus became sterile because he contracted sy philis. Samantha argues that Marcus is long dead and, as such, the privilege may not be invoked. 1.

Is the testimony of Dr. Reyes covered by the physician-patient privilege?

2.

Does the fact that Marcus is long dead bar the application of the physician-patient privilege?

11.

What do similar acts of evidence prohibit?

12.

Atty. Cruz and his eight-year-old daughter, Aliya, were shot and killed. A certain Mike surfaced and executed an affidavit stating that a certain Joseph told him that he was ordered to kill Atty. Cruz by Ryan. Andres during his detention executed an extrajudicial confession where he implicated Ryan to th e crime. However, in a letter, Mike disowned the contents of his affidavit and narrated how he had been tortured until he signed the extrajudicial confession. He stated that Ryan had no participation in the killings. The prosecutor dismissed the charges. On appeal, DOJ, initially reversed the dismissal but on MR subsequently ordered the withdrawal of the information. On the contrary, the RTC held that there was probable cause to hold the Ryan for trial. CA held that the RTC judge gravely abused her discretion. Was the extrajudicial confession of Columna admissible as evidence?

13.

Brothers Castor and Pollux were charged with murder for killing Achille’s father. Achille, however, was charged with parricide for being a co -principal to the crime. The two ca ses were tried jointly not until the two brothers withdrew their not guilty plea for murder. Thus, only Achille’s ca se was tried on the merits. The prosecution offered in evidence the affidavits of Castor and Pollux containing their extra -judicial confessions. The two brothers were, however, not presented by the prosecution on the witness stand. Thereafter, the trial court convicted the accused. Is the trial court correct?

14.

A. What are independently relevant statements? B. What are the classifications of independently relevant statements?

15.

Sean was charged with the crime of kidnapping of Viktor. One of the testimonies presented by the prosecution was that of Vienne, she testified that Vik tor confided to her that he and Sean’s wife Sabina were having an affair. Undoubtedly, his wife's infidelity was ample reason for Sean to contemplate


Page 8

revenge. Consequently, the trial court convicted Sean based on the testimonies of the witnesses. Was the testimony of Vienne admissible as evidence? 16.

Andy robbed Angela. After robbing Angela, Andy fled. Angela then rushed to the police station and told SPO1 Xerxes what had happened. Andy was charged with r obbery. During the trial, Angela can no longer be located. If the prosecution presents SPO1 Xerxes to testify on what Angela had told him, would such testimony of Gilbert be hearsay? Explain.

17.

Ikoy was charged with rape of his 9 year old stepdaughter, Ella, to to which he pleaded not guilty. For the prosecution, it presented as witnesses the victim, who candidly, vividly and consistently narrated how his stepfather sexually abused her, and a Medico Legal Certificate issued by Dr. Aguilar, the results of which showed that the victim suffered hymenal laceration. For the defense, he vehemently denied the charges and presented an alibi. RTC, affirmed with modification by the CA convicted the a ccused. Should the testimony of the child be given f ull weight and credit?

18.

Jimmy, a 25-year old jeepney driver, and his 7-year old son, son, Owen., stepped out of their house in order to buy food. Upon reaching the street, father and son encountered Willie, Tito, Vic and Joey. The four were apparently waiting for Jimmy. They dragged him to a nearby warehouse. Thereafter, a gunshot was heard from the warehouse. Larry was seen running out of the warehouse followed by the four malefactors. He fell on the ground near the street corner, Willie shot him four or five times. The tragic occurence was witnessed by the Owen. It was only a fter 6 years when two of the four culprits were convicted by the trial court. On appeal, they impugned the testimony of the child that he was only 7 years old when he witnessed the shooting, and that he testified six years later or long after that extraordinary event. Is the contention tenable?

OFFER AND OBJECTION 19.

What are the purposes of objections?

20.

When should the court make its ruling on the objection?


Page 9

ANSWERS: MCQs – 30 ITEMS ADMISSIBILITY 1.

Which of the following is true about admissibility and evidentiary weight of a certain item of evidence? a.

A particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation within the guidelines guidelines provided by the rules rules of evidence . b. A certain item of evidence ma y be admissible as per stipulation of parties and its evidentiary weight depends on such stipulation alone. c. A particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial determination even beyond parameters set forth in the rules of evidence. d. A certain item of evidence ma y be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation of both the stipulation of the parties and guidelines provided by the rule s of evidence.

2.

Is evidence on collateral matters allowed? a. b. c. d.

Evidence on collateral matters shall be allowed, except if it establishes improbability of the fact in issue. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except if it establishes probability of the fact in issue. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be a llowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. Evidence on collateral matters shall be allowed only when it does not establish probability or improbability of the fact in issue.

3.

Which is true about denial? a. A denial is a positive evidence and considered by jurisprudence to be a very strong for m of defense which can overcome an a ffirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness b. A denial is a negative evidence but considered by jurisprudence to be a very strong form of defense which can never overcome an aff irmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness c. A denial is a positive evidence but considered by jurisprudence to be a very weak form of defense and can never overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness. d. A denial is a negative evidence and considered by jurisprudence to be a very weak form of defense and can never overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness.

4.

The legal maxim, “Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, no qui negat” provides negat” provides that the burden of proof lies on which of the parties? a. b. c.

The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the negative of the issue at the beginning of the case and continues on him throughout the case. The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the affirmative of the issue at the beginning of the case and continues on him throughout the case. The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the negative of the issue at the beginning of the case but abandons the same prior to rendering of judgment.


Page 10

d.

The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the affirmative of the issue at the beginning of the case but abandons the same prior to rendering of judgment.


The following are TRUE about the concept of common knowledge in judicial notice, EXCEPT: a. They are those matters coming to the k nowledge of men generally in the course of ordinary experiences of life. b. They may be matters which are generally accepted by mankind as true and are capable of ready and unquestioned demonstration. c. They are facts which are universally known, and which may be found in encyclopedias, dictionaries or other publications, provided, they are of suc h universal notoriety and so generally understood that they may be regarded as for ming part of the common knowledge of every person. d. A court can take judicial notice of any fact which, in part, is dependent on the existence or non-existence of a fact of which the court has no constructive knowledge.

6.

Maria is the defendant in a collection suit filed Juana. Maria’s lawyer effected a written extrajudicial admission, which was signed by the latter and provided that she did not pay the entire amount of her loan to Juana when in fact she already paid at least 40% of the total amount due. The same written admission came into the hands of Juana who wants to use the same as an evidence to prove liability of Maria. Such written extrajudicial admission is? a. b. c. d.

Admissible because it is up to Maria to contradict the same in actual hearing. Not admissible because it is prejudicial to Maria’s interest. Admissible because a counsel binds his client with respect to admissions. Not admissible because a counsel only binds his client with respect to admissions in open court and in pleadings actually filed with the court.

7. The general rule is that foreign laws may not be taken judicial notice of and have to be proved like any other fact but the same admits of certain exception and when said laws a re within the actual knowledge of the court and: a. Such laws are well and generally known and none of the parties claim otherwise. b. Such laws are referred to in an obiter dictum in previous cases and none of the parties claim otherwise. c. Such laws are inconsistent with domestic laws and none of the parties claim otherwise. d. Such laws are merely applied suppletory to domestic laws a nd none of the parties claim otherwise. 8. The following are rules with regard to judicial notice of ordinances, EXCEPT? a. MTCs are required to take judicial notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city wherein they sit. b. RTCs must take judicial notice when expressly prohibited to do so by a statute. c. RTCs must take judicial notice in a case on a ppeal before them and wherein the inferior court took judicial notice of an ordinance involved in the same ca se. d. Appellate courts may not take judicial notice of ordinances not only because the lower courts took judicial notice thereof but because these are facts capable of unquestionable demonstration. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE 9.

Object evidence shall include: a. Any article or object which may not be known or perceived by the use of the senses


Page 11

b. c. d. 10.

Examination of the anatomy of a person or of any substance taken for purely medical purposes Conduct of tests, demonstrations or experiments to prove scientific hypotheses Examination of representative portrayals of the object in question

May the courts refuse the introduction of object or real evidence and rely on testimonial evidence alone? a. No, even if such exhibition is contrary to public morals or decency. b. Yes, but only if to require it being viewed in court or in ocular inspection would not result in delays, inconvenience, or unnecessary expenses which are out of proportion to the evidentiary value of such object. c. No, even if such object evidence would be confusing or misleading, as when the purpose is to prove the former condition of the object and there is no p reliminary showing that there has been no substantial change in said condition. d. Yes, but only if the testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly portrays the object in question as to render a view thereof unnecessary.


Which of the following is an exception to the Best Evidence Rule? a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror. b. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party in whose favor the evidence is offered, and still t he latter fails to produce it a fter reasonable notice. c. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which may be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole. d. When the original is not a public record and not in the custody of a public officer or is not recorded in a public office.

12.

The loss or destruction of a document may be proved by the following, EXCEPT: a. Any person who knew of such fact. b. Anyone who, in the judgment of the court, had made sufficient examination in the places where the document or papers of similar character are usually kept by the person in whose custody the document was and has been unable to find it. c. Any person who has knowledge of its existence as he learned the same from another person. d. Any person who has made any other investigation which is sufficient to satisfy the court that the document is indeed lost.

13.

The following are the factors to be considered in assessing evidentiary weight of an electronic document, EXCEPT? a. The reliability of the manner or method in which it was generated, stored or commu nicated, including but not limited to input and output procedures, controls, tests and checks for accuracy and reliability of the electronic data message or document, in the light of all the circumstances as well as any relevant agreement. b. The reliability of the manner in which its duplicate was identified. c. The integrity of the information and communication system in which it its recorded or stored, including but not limited to the hardware and computer programs or software used as well as programming errors. d. The familiarity of the witness or the person who made the entry with the communication and information system.

14.

Carlos sought the help of NBI in order for him to use as evidence evidence the email messages in his email inbox purported to be from Michael, the ca r dealer who sold him a lemon car. The said email messages contain


Page 12

relevant information pertaining to their transaction and bear the digital signature which Michael would usually use in his online business dealings. If Carlos will be successful in auth enticating the digital signature of Michael, what will its effect be? a. It shall be presumed that the information contained in a certificate is correct. b. It shall be presumed that the digital signature was created outside the operational period of a certificate. c. It shall be presumed that there may be an existing cause to render a certificate invalid or revocable. d. It shall be presumed that the message associated with a digital signature has been altered from the time it was signed.


Matt is the defendant in a parricide case for allegedly killing the father of Yvonne, his estranged wife, who saw him fleeing from the scene of the crime. During the trial, the prosecutor offered the testimony of Yvonne as evidence to prove the gui lt of Matt. Can the defendant’s counsel object on the ground of marital privilege? a. Yes, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege extends not only to testimony adverse to the spouse but also to a testimony in favor of the spouse. b. No, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege does not apply in the case of estranged spouses, where the marital and domestic relations are so strained that there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquility which may be disturbed. c. Yes, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege applies so long as the marriage exists at the time the testimony is offered. d. No, the disqualification on the ground of marital privilege does not apply to crimes committed against the direct ascendants or descendants of either husband or wife.

16.

Which of the following is true regarding disqualification by reason of death or insanity of the adverse party? a. It constitutes a partial disqualification of a witness wherein he is prohibited from testifying as to any matter of fact occurring before the death or insanity of a party to the transaction. b. The witness can testify on matters which occurred in the presence and within the hearing of the decedent to which he might testify on his personal knowledge if he were alive. c. Such facts which are fa vorable to the deceased or insane person or their representatives are prohibited. d. Objection to such disqualification can never be waiv ed.

17.

The attorney-and-client privilege does not apply to: a. Communications which are intended to be made public or be communicated to others. b. Communications which are intended for a lawful purpose. c. Communications which are received from third persons acting in behalf or as agents of th e client. d. Communications which are made in the presence of third parties who are not strangers to the attorney-client relationship.

18.

The physician-and-patient privilege does not apply to: a. Communications which are given in confidence. b. Communications which are relevant to the professional employment. c. Communications which are made for a lawful purpose. d. Communications which are intended to be made public.

19.

The following pertain to a qualified witness, EXCEPT?


Page 13

a. b. c. d.

He is a person who ca n perceive and perceiving. He is a person who c an make known his perception to others. He must have taken either an oath or an affirmation. He must possess the disqualifications imposed by law or the rules.

20.

What is the effect when mental unsoundness of the witness at the time the fact to be testified occurred occurred with respect to his competency and his credibility? a. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects his credibility alone. b. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects his competency alone. c. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects either his competency or his credibility. d. The occurrence of mental unsoundness affects both his competency and his credibility.

21.

Are deaf-mutes competent witnesses? a. No, deaf-mutes are incompetent witnesses b. Yes, if they can comprehend facts they are not going to testify on. c. Yes, if they can understand and appreciate the sanctity of an oath. d. Yes, if they can communicate their ideas through an unqualified interpreter.

22.

Which of the following is true about disqualification by reason of privileged communication? a. The holder of the privilege, authorized persons and persons to whom privileged communication were made can assert the privilege. b. The disqualification always applies to both civil and criminal cases. c. The privilege cannot be invoked where confidential informa tion has been made in contemplation of death or in furtherance or perpetuation of f raud. d. Unless waived, the disqualification remains even after the various relationships therein have ceased to exist.

23.

The following cases are not covered by the dead man statute, EXCEPT? a. Testimony of mere witnesses who are either party plaintiffs, or their assignors, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, or to a nominal party, or to officers and stockholders of a plaintiff corporation. b. If the person or persons mentioned under the rule file a counterclaim. c. Where the deceased contracted with the plaintiff through an agent and said agent is alive and can testify, but the testimony of the plaintiff should be limited to acts performed by the agent. d. Land registration cases instituted by the deceased’s representative, where the oppositor is considered as defendant or in cadastral cases where there a re no oppositors.

24.

Which is a requisite for the application of the physician-and-patient privileged communication? a. The action is either civil case or criminal case. b. The relation of physician and patient existed between the person claiming the privilege or his legal representative and the physician. c. The advice or treatment given by him or any information was acquired by the physician while casually attending to the patient. d. The information was unnecessary for the performance of his professional duty.

25.

The following is true about priest-and-penitent privileged communication, EXCEPT? a. The confession must have been made to the priest in his professional character ac cording to the discipline of the church to which the priest or minister belongs. b. Even if the communication is not penitential in character as when what is divulged is the plan to commit a crime, the privileged communication still applies. c. Communications made must be confidential and must be p enitential in character e.g., under the seal of the confessional.


Page 14

d.

Its purpose is to allow and encourage individuals to fulfil their religious, emotional or other needs by protecting confidential disclosures to religious practitioners.

26.

The following are considered other forms of privileged communication, EXCEPT? a. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any information, statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of serving as a guardian ad litem, unless the court finds it necessary to promote the best interests of the child. b. Editors, publisher, or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper, magazine o r periodical of general circulation cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news report or any information given to him in confidence, unless a court or a House or a committee of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded for State security. c. Voters may not be compelled to d isclose for whom they voted. d. Trade secrets cannot be disclosed and the same is absolute as the court may not compel disclosure even if it is indispensable for doing justice.

27.

Which of the following is a purpose of objections? a. To keep out admissible evidence that would be favorable to a client’s ca use. b. To protect the record, i.e. to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered evidence in a way that if the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon as a ground for a future appeal. c. To expose a witness from being embarrassed by the adverse counsel. d. To allow the adversary’s unfair tactics like his consistently asking obviously leading questions.

28.

May objections be waived? a. Yes, because the right to object is merely a privilege which the party may waive. b. No, because it will be prejudicial to the client if the same is waived. c. Yes, because the right of object is subject to both stipulations by parties and judicial discretion. d. No, because it will amount to an admission if the same is waived.

29.

The following shows how an objection can be made, EXCEPT? a. Before the court has ruled on the objection, in which case its function is to persuade the court to overrule the objection or deny the privilege invoked. b. After the court has sustained the objection, in which case its function is to preserve for the appeal the evidence excluded by the privilege invoked. c. When the question to which an objection has been sustained clearly reveals on its face th e substance, purpose and relevancy of the excluded evidence; an offer or proof is r equired. d. Where the offer of proof inclu des the introduction of documents, or any of the physical evidence, the same should be marked for identification so that they may become part of the record.

30.

A motion to strike out or expunge inadmissible testimony or evidence is proper: a. When the answers are competent, relevant or proper. b. When the witness becomes unavailable for cross-examination with fault of the crossexamining party. c. When the witness answers prematurely before there is reasonable opportunity for the adverse party to object, and such objection is found to be meritorious. d. When the testimony was allowed conditionally and the condition for its admissibility was fulfilled.


Page 15

ESSAY QUESTIONS – 20 ITEMS ADMISSIBILITY 1.

Is direct proof of previous agreement to commit a crime necessary to prove conspiracy? No. Considering the difficulty in establishing the existence of conspiracy, settled jurisprudence finds no need to prove it by direct evidence (Fernan, Jr. and Torrevillas v. People, G.R. No. 145927, Aug. 24, 2007). It may be deduced from the acts of the perpetrators before, during and after the commission of the crime which are indicative of a common design, concerted action and concurrence of sentiments (Serrano v. CA, G.R. No. 123896, June 25, 2003).

2.

What is the test to determine where the burden of proof lies? The test is to ask which party to an action or suit will fail if he offers no evidence competent to show the facts averred as the basis for the relief he seeks to obtain. If the defendant has affirmative defenses, he bears the burden of proof as to those defenses which he sets up in a nswer to the plaintiff’s cause of action (Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Spouses Royeca, G.R. No. 176664, July 21, 2008).


When are judicial admissions made? It may be made by the party himself or by his counsel: 1. In the pleadings filed by the parties; 2. In the course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations, including depositions, written interrogatories and requests for admissions; or 3. In other stages of the judicial proceedings, as in pre-trial.

4.

When can admissions in a pleading be considered as extrajudicial admissions? Admissions in a pleading which had been withdrawn or superseded by an amended pleading, although filed in the same case, a re considered as extrajudicial admissions. The original must be proved by the party who relies thereon by formally offering it in evidence (Torres v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-37420-21, July 31, 1984).

OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE 5.

After a full-blown trial, John was found guilty of murder for shooting Gerard. On appeal, John argued that the trial court should have acquitted him as his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. He contended that the paraffin test conducted on him 3 days after his arrest yielded a negative result. Hence, he could not have shot Gerard. Is J ohn correct? No. While the paraffin test was negative, such fact alone did not ipso facto prove that John is innocent. A negative paraffin result is not conclusive proof that a person has not fired a gun. It is possible to fire a gun and yet be negative for nitrates, a s when the culprit is wearing gloves or he washes his hands afterwards. Here, since John submitted himself for paraffin testing only 3 days after the shooting, it was likely he had already washed his hands thoroughly, thus removing all traces of nitrates t herefrom (People v. Brecinio, G.R. No. 138534, Mar. 17, 2004).


Page 16

6.

In a criminal case for murder, the prosecution offered as evidence photographs showing the accused shooting the victim in front of the latter’s neighbors. The person who took the photograph was not presented as a witness. During the trial, the prosecution presented the neighbors of the victim who testified that they were the ones in the photographs. The defense objected to the a dmissibility of the photographs because the person who took the photographs was not presented as witness. Is the contention of the defense tenable? No. Photographs, when presented in evidence, must be identified by the photographer as to its production and testified as to the circumstances under which they were produced. The va lue of this kind of evidence lies in its being a correct representation or reproduction of the original, and its admissibility is determined by its accuracy in portraying the scene at the time of the crime. The photographer, however, is not the only witness who ca n identify the pictures he has taken. The correctness of the photograph as a faithful representation of the object portrayed can be proved prima facie, either by the testimony of the person who made it or by other competent witnesses who can testify to its exactness and accuracy, after which the court can admit it subject to impeachment as to its accuracy. Here, the photographs are admissible as evidence inasmuch as the correctness thereof was testified to by the companions of the victim (Sison v. People, G.R. Nos. 108280-83, Nov. 16, 1995).


In a civil case for collection of money, Pamela sought to escape liability from a promissory note by showing that her signature was a forged and presented an expert witness to prove the same. Alicia objected to the presentation of Pamela’s expert witness o n the ground that the finding of said witness is based on a mere Xerox copy of the promissory note. Is the objection of Alicia tenable? Yes. As a rule, forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive a nd convincing evidence and the burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery. The best evidence of a forged signature in an instrument is the instrument itself reflecting the alleged forged signature. The fact of forgery can only be established by a comparison between the alleged forged signature and the authentic and genuine signature of the person whose signature is theorized upon to have been forged. Without the original document containing the alleged forged signature, one ca nnot make a definitive comparison which would establish fo rgery. A comparison based on a mere photocopy or reproduction of the document under controversy cannot produce reliable results (Heirs of Gregorio v. CA, G.R. No. 117609, Dec. 29, 1998).


A tugboat owned by SHIP AHOY, Inc. (SAI) sank in Subic Bay while helping to tow another vessel, drowning 7 of the crew in the resulting shipwreck. At the maritime board inquiry, 3 survivors of the shipwreck testified. SAI engaged Atty. Yves to defend against potential claims and to sue the company owning the other vessel for damages to the tug. Atty. Yves obtained signed statements from the survivors. He also interviewed other persons, in some instance making memoranda. The heirs of the 7 victims filed an action for damages against SAI. The counsel of the heirs of the 7 victims sent written interrogatories to Atty. Yves, asking whether statements of the witnesses may be obtained. Atty. Yves refused to comply, arguing that the documents and information asked are privileged communication. Is the conte ntion tenable? Explain. Yes, the contention of counsel for SAI is tenable considering that he was acting in his professional capacity in bringing about the statement he obtained from the witnesses and the memoranda he made. The notes, memoranda, and writings made by the counsel in pursuance of his professional duty, form part of his private and confidential files in the cases handled by him; hence privileged (Air Philippines Corp v. Penswell, Inc., G.R. No. 172835, Dec. 13, 2007).


Page 17

9.

Henry filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of his marriage with Laura on the ground of psychological incapacity. Henry sought to testify on a confidential psychiatric evaluation report on his wife. Laura objected to Henry’s testimony on the ground that it violates the physician-patient privilege. Is the objection of Laura correct? No. One of the requisites before the physician -patient privilege may be invoked is that the person against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics. Here, the person against whom the privilege is claimed is not one duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery obstetrics. Henry is simply Laura's husband who wishes to testify on a document executed by medical practitioners. This does not fall within the claimed prohibition. Neither can his testimony be considered a circumvention of the prohibition because his testimony cannot have the force a nd effect of the testimony of the physician who examined the patient and executed the report report (Krohn v. CA, G.R. No . 108854, June 14, 1994).

10.

11.

Samantha sought to offer as evidence the testimony of Dr. Reyes to prove that Ivan is not the illegitimate son of Marcus as the la tter was sterile. Ivan objected to the admissibility of the said testimony arguing that the same is covered by the physician-patient privilege because the testimony would blacken reputation of Marcus. It was alleged that Marcus became sterile because he contracted syphilis. Samantha argues that Marcus is long dead and, as such, the privilege may not be invoked. 3.

Is the testimony of Dr. Reyes covered by the physician-patient privilege?

4.

Does the fact that Marcus is long dead bar the application of the physician-patient privilege?

1.

Yes. Marcus’s sterility arose when he contracted syphilis a fact which most assuredly blackens his reputation. In fact, given that society holds virility at a premium, sterility alone, without the attendant embarrassment of contracting a sexually -transmitted disease, would be sufficient to blacken the reputation of any patient (Gonzales v. CA, G.R. No. 117740, Oct. 30, 1998).

2.

No. The privilege of secrecy i s not abolished or terminated because of death. The purpose of the law would be thwarted and the policy intended to be promoted thereby would be defeated, if death removed the seal of secrecy, from the communications and disclosures which a patient should make to his physician. After one has gone to his grave, the living are not permitted to impair his name a nd disgrace his memory by dragging to light communications and disclosures made under the seal of the statute (Gonzales v. CA, G .R. No. 117740, Oct. 30, 1998)

What do similar acts of evidence prohibit? The rule prohibits the admission of the so- called “propensity evidence” which is evidence that tends to show that what a person has done at one time is probative of the contention that he has done a similar act at another time. Evidence of similar acts or occurrences compels the defendant to meet allegations that are not mentioned in the complaint, confuses him in his defense, raises a variety of relevant issues, and diverts the attention of the court from the issues immediately before it. (Cruz v. Court of Appeals, 293 SCRA 239).

12.

Atty. Cruz and his eight-year-old daughter, Aliya, were shot and killed. A certain Mike surfaced and executed an affidavit stating that a certain Joseph told him that he was ordered to kill Atty. Cruz by Ryan. Andres during his detention executed an extrajudicial confession where he implicated Ryan to the crime. However, in a letter, Mike disowned the contents of his affidavit and narrated how he had been tortured


Page 18

until he signed the extrajudicial confession. He stated that Ryan had no participation in the killings. Th e prosecutor dismissed the charges. On appeal, DOJ, initially reversed the dismissal but on MR subsequently ordered the withdrawal of the information. On the contrary, the RTC held that there was probable cause to hold the Ryan for trial. CA held that the RTC judge gravely a bused her discretion. Was the extrajudicial confession of Columna admissible as evidence? Mike’s extrajudicial confession affidavit was not admissible as evidence against Ryan in view of the rule on res inter alios acta. The rule on res inter alios acta provides that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another. Consequently, an extrajudicial confession is binding only on the confessant, is not a dmissible against his or her co-a ccused and is considered as hearsay against them. An exception to the res inter alios acta rule is an admission made by a conspirator under Sec. 30, Rule 130 of the Rules o f Court. This rule prescribes that the act or declaration of the conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its existence may be given in evidence against co -conspirators provided that the conspiracy is shown by independent evidence aside from the extrajudicial confession. Considering the paucity and inadmissibility of the evidence presented again st the Ryan, it would be unfair to hold them for trial (Tamargo v. Awingan, G.R. No. 177727, Jan. 19, 2010). 13.

Brothers Castor and Pollux were charged with murder for killing Achille’s father. Achille, however, was charged with parricide for being a co-principal to the crime. The two cases were tried jointly not until the two brothers withdrew their not guilty plea for murder. Thus, only Achille’s ca se was tried on the merits. The prosecution offered in evidence the affidavits of Castor and Pollux containing their extra-judicial confessions. The two brothers were, however, not presented by the prosecution on the witness stand. Thereafter, the trial court convicted the accused. Is the trial court correct? No. The failure to present Castor and Pollux gives the affidavits the character of hearsay. It is hornbook doctrine that unless the affiants themselves take the witness stand to affirm the averments in their affidavits must be excluded from the judicial proceeding, being inadmissible hearsay. The voluntary admission of an accused made extra-judicially is not admissible in evidence against his co-accused when the latter had not been given an opportunity to hear him testify and cross -examine him (People v. Quidato, Jr., G.R. No. 117401. Oct. 1, 199 8)

14.

A. What are independently relevant statements? B. What are the classifications of independently relevant statements? A. These are statements which are relevant independently of whether they are true or not. They are neither hearsay nor an exception to the hearsay rule as the purpose thereof is not to prove the truth of the declaration or document (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15 & 146738, Apr. 3, 2001). They are relevant since they are the facts in issue or are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.

B. The classifications of independently relevant statements are: 1.

Those statements which are the very facts in issue;

2.

Those statements which which are circumstantial evidence evidence of the fact in issue such as: a. Statements of a person showing his state of mind, that is, his mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will and other emotions; b. Statements of a person which show his physical condition, as illness and the lik e; c. Statements of a person from which an inference may be made as to the state of mind of another; Law on Evidence: MCQ’s and Essay Q’s with Suggested Answers Compiled by Benj Hernandez Jr. (Remedial Law Review – Evidence Group - PCU-Law Batch 2013)

Page 19

d. Statements which may identify the dat e, place and person in question; and e. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a witness.


Page 20

15.

Sean was charged with the crime of kidnapping of Viktor. One of the testimonies presented by the prosecution was that of Vienne, she testified that Viktor confided to her that he and Sean’s wife Sabina were having an affair. Undoubtedly, his wife's infidelity was ample reason for Sean to contemplate revenge. Consequently, the trial court convicted Sean based on the testimonies of the witnesses. Was the testimony of Vienne admissible as evidence? Yes. Viktor’s revelation to Vienne regarding his illicit relationship with Sean’s wife is admissible in evidence, pursuant to Section 38, Rule 130 of the Revised Rules on E vidence. With the deletion of the phrase "pecuniary or moral interest" from the present provision, it is safe to a ssume that "declaration against interest" has been expanded to include all kinds of interest, that is, pecuniary, proprietary, moral or even penal. Viktor having been missing since his a bduction, cannot be called upon to testify. His confession to Vienne, definitely a declaration against his o wn interest, since his affair with Sa bina was a crime, is admissible in evidence because no sane person will be presumed to tell a fals ehood to his own detriment (People v. Theodore Bernal, Bernal, G.R. No. 11368 5, June 19, 1997).

16.

Andy robbed Angela. After robbing Angela, Andy fled. Angela then rushed to the police station and told SPO1 Xerxes what had happened. Andy was charged with r obbery. During the trial, Angela can no longer be located. If the prosecution presents SPO1 Xerxes to testify on what Angela had told him, would such testimony of Gilbert be hearsay? Explain. No. It is part of res gestae. It is also an independently relevant statement. SPO1 Xerxes t estified based on his personal knowledge; that is, he was testifying to the fact that Angela told him that she was robbed by Andy and not to the truth of Angela’s statement (People v. Gaddi, G.R. No. 74065, Feb. 27, 1989).

17.

Ikoy was charged with rape of his 9 year old stepdaughter, Ella, to which he pleaded not guilty. For the prosecution, it presented as witnesses the victim, who candidly, vividly and consistently narrated how his stepfather sexually abused her, and a Medico Legal Certificate issued by Dr. Aguilar, the results of which showed that the victim suffered hymenal laceration. For the defense, he vehemently denied the charges and presented an alibi. RTC, affirmed with modification by the CA convicted the a ccused. Should the testimony of the child be given f ull weight and credit? Testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit, for when a woman or a girl-child says that she has been raped; she say s in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was indeed committed. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth a nd sincerity. Ella’s testimony testi mony that she was raped by the accused is highly trustworthy not only because of the fact that she was merely a young lass below twelve years of age at the time she testified before the trial court but also because of her ca ndid, vivid, positive, direct, a nd consistent narration of how her stepfather sexually abused her. (People v. Sobusa, G.R. G.R. No. 181083, Jan. 21, 2010).

18.

Jimmy, a 25-year old jeepney driver, and his 7-year old son, Owen., stepped out of their house in order to buy food. Upon reaching the street, father and son encountered Willie, Tito, Vic and Joey. The four were apparently waiting for Jimmy. They dragged him to a nearby warehouse. Thereafter, a gunshot was heard from the warehouse. Larry was seen running out of the warehouse followed by the four malefactors. He fell on the ground near the street corner, Willie shot him four or five ti mes. The tragic occurence was witnessed by the Owen. It was only after 6 years when two o f the four culprits were convicted by the trial court. On appeal, they impugned the testimony of the child that he was only 7 years old when he witnessed the shooting, and that he testified six years later or long after that extraordinary event. Is the contention tenable?


Page 21

No. The court in several cases had given credence to the testimony of children who had witnessed the death of their parents. In the case of Maximo, Jr., the horrible manner in which his father was killed must have been indelibly engraved in his uncluttered memory so much so that the passage of time could not efface it. When he testified, he was already fifteen y ears old and a third year high school student. He was certainly a competent witness. (People v. Sabater, G.R. No. L-381 69, Feb. 23, 1978) OFFER AND OBJECTION 19.

What are the purposes of objections? 1. To keep out inadmissible evidence that would ca use harm to a client’s cause; 2. To protect the record, i.e. to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered evidence in a way that if the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon a s a ground for a future appeal; 3. To protect a witness from b eing embarrassed by the adverse counsel; 4. To expose the adversary’s unfair tactics like his consistently asking obviously leading questions; and 5. To give the trial court an opportunity to correct its own errors and at the same time warn the court that a ruling adverse to the objector may supply a reason to invoke a higher court’s appellate jurisdiction.

20.

When should the court make its ruling on the objection? It must be given immediately after the objection is made, unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented; but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and at such time as will give the party against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling (Sec. 38).


Page 22

Evidence MCQs and Essays - Final

Recommend Documents