REMREV
1. Through an illustration, explain how examiation of a child witness
operates as an exception to the hearsay rule.
• Under Sec 28 on Examiination of CW: A statemetn made by a child
describing any attempted/act of child abuse (hearsay) may be
admitted in evidence in any non/CR proceeding, subject to ff rules”
◦ The proponent should make known to the adverse party its
intention to offer such statement
◦ In ruling admissibility, court shall consider time, content and
circumstnces.
◦ If available, court will allow CE; if not, the fact must be proven
◦ Unavialable – hearsay testimony shall be admitted only if
corroborated by other admissible evidence
▪ deceased, suffer from infirmity, mental illness,
psychological injury
▪ absent from hearing
• In child abuse case involving SF (step father) as the
accused/abuser and V (victim/minor abused). One night, V told her
mother that her step father has been abusing her.
◦ Under the said law, the statement of M, although hearsay, may
be admitted in evidence in a child abuse case.
2. Give 3 material distinctions between harmless error rule between trial
and apellate courts.
◦ Entertain
▪ Trial court – its error as to admission of evidence is presumed
to cause prejudice, thus almost automatically requires new
trial.
▪ AC – disregard any error or defect which does not affect
substantial rights of parties
◦ RTC as TC/AC
▪ TC – must entertain
▪ AC – can only be looked into by a higher court
◦ MTC
▪ Not entertain harmless error rule?
◦ Rule 51 – No error in either admission or exclusion of evidence
and no error/defect in any ruling/order/done/omitted by trial court or
by any other parties is aground for granting NT or for setting aside,
modifying, or otherwise disturbing a judgment or order, unless
refusal to take such action appears to be inconsistent w/
substantial justice.
▪ Court at any stage of proceedings must disregard any error or
defect which does not affect substantial rights of parties
◦ People v Tehankee
▪ In dealing with evidence improperly admitted in trial, we
examine its damaging quality and its impact to the substantive
rights of the litigant. If the impact is slight and insignificant, we
disregard the error as it will not overcome the weight of the
properly admitted evidence against the prejudiced party
3. Can 3 or more unrelated and unconnected transactions be properly be
object of 1 complaint?
◦ A plaintiff can file a complaint against a defendant for accion
reindivicatoria, recovery of money arising from a loan, recovery of
damages from a quasi-delict committed by the latter, although
these are in relaity different transactions.
▪ Joinder of COA is encouraged by the Rules, although such
COA are totally unrelated to one another, as long as the
parties remain the same.
▪ The only limitations on joinder of COA are found on Rule 2,
Sec.5 (a)(b) and (c)
◦ UD and collection for sum of money worth 1m and damages,
although there is misjoinder as they pertain to different jurisdictions
(RTC/MTC), if case is filed with RTC, joinder will still be held valid
under R2S5(b).
◦ When COA accrue in favor of same plaintiff and defendant, not
necessary to ask WON COA arose from same transaciton or series
of action and WON there exists a common question law or fact,
subject to the rules on jurisdiction under BP 129.
4. Why is double jeopardy referred to as res judicata in prison-grey?
• Ordeal of CR prosecution is inflcited only once, not whenever it
plrases the state to do so.
• Res judicata is a doctrine of civil law and has no bearing criminal
proceeding.
◦ Res judiciata in prison grey is the criminal law concept of
double jeopardy.
• It protects the accused from harrassment by the strong arm of the
state.
◦ The constitutional mandate is (thus) a rule of finality. A single
prosecution for any offense is all the law allows. It protects an
accused from harassment, enables him to treat what had
transpired as a closed chapter in his life, either to exult in his
freedom or to be resigned to whatever penalty is imposed, and
is a bar to unnecessary litigation, in itself time-consuming and
expense-producing for the state as well. It has been referred
to as 'res judicata in prison grey.' The ordeal of a criminal
prosecution is inflicted only once, not whenever it pleases the
state to do so. (Fernando, The Constitution of the Philippines,
2nd Ed., pp. 722-723.)
• The right against DJ prohibits the prosecution of a person for a
crime of which he has been previously acquitted or convicted.
• The purpose is to set the effects of the first prosecution forever at
rest, assuring the accused that he shall not thereafter be subjected
to the danger and anxiety of a second charge against him for the
same offense.