8. What is the effect of failure to appear during pre-trial?

According to Sec. 5, Rule 18 of the Rules of Court, The failure of the plaintiff to appear when so
required pursuant to the next preceding section shall be cause for dismissal of the action. The
dismissal shall be with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court. A similar failure on the
part of the defendant shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to present his evidence ex parte and
the court to render judgment on the basis thereof.
9. What is the order of the trial?
1. The prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper case, the civil
liability.
2. The accused may present evidence to prove his defense and damages, if any,
arising, from the issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
3. The prosecution and the defense may, in that order, present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal
evidence unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them to present additional
evidence bearing
upon the main issue.
4. Upon admission of evidence of the parties, the case shall be deemed submitted for
decision unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit written memoranda.
5. When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or
information but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be modified.

10. What is direct examination? What is the primary purpose of direct examination?
Rule 132, Sec. 5 of ROC. Direct examination is the examination-chief of a witness by the party
presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue.
11.
Leading question. A question which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining
party desires is a leading question. It is not allowed, except:
a. On cross-examination;
b. On preliminary matters;
c. When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
d. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
e. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public
or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.

12. what are the grounds for objection

In any case, the grounds for the objections must be specified.
Grounds for objection Hearsay, argumentative, leading, misleading, incompetent, irrelevant,
best evidence rule, parol evidence rule, question has no basis
13. What is the purpose and extent of Cross examination?

Rule 132, Sec. 8, ibid:

"Cross-examination, its purpose and extent. Leading, but not misleading, questions allowed.
Upon the termination of the direct examination witness may be cross-examined by the adverse
party to any matters stated in the direct examination, or connected with sufficient fullness and
freedom to test his accuracy truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and
to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. On cross-examination, leading but not
misleading questions, are allowed."
14. What is the scope of cross examination?
Cross-examination should not go beyond the subject matter of the direct examination and
matters affecting the witnesss credibility. The court may allow inquiry into additional matters as
if on direct examination.
15. What is the value of cross examination?
16. Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent. After the cross-examination of the witness
has been concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling him, to explain or supplement
his answers given during the cross-examination. On re-direct-examination, questions on matters
not dealt with during the cross-examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
17. Re-cross-examination. Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party
may re-cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his re-direct examination, and also on
such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
18. The function of the rebuttal evidence is to explain, repel, counteract, or disprove the
evidence of the adversary. 25Its office is "to meet the new facts put in by the opponent in his case
in reply" and is "necessary only because, on a plea in denial, new subordinate evidential facts
have been offered, or because, on an affirmative plea, its substantive facts have been put
forward, or because, on any issue whatever, facts discrediting the proponent's witnesses have
been offered."
19. This doctrine is enshrined in Article 3, Section 12 (1) of the Constitution, which provides:
Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be
informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably
of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with
one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

20. a phrase minted by Mr. Justice Felix Frankfurter in the celebrated case of Nardone v. United
States. 18 According to this rule, once the primary source (the "tree") is shown to have been
unlawfully obtained, any secondary or derivative evidence (the " fruit " ) derived from it is also
inadmissible. 19 Stated otherwise, illegally seized evidence is obtained as a direct result of the
illegal act, whereas the "fruit of the poisonous tree" is the indirect result of the same illegal act.
The "fruit of the poisonous tree" is at least once removed from the illegally seized evidence, but
it is equally inadmissible. The rule is based on the principle that evidence illegally obtained by
the State should not be used to gain other evidence because the originally illegally obtained
evidence taints all evidence subsequently obtained.