Preliminary Examination

Evidence

1. The barangay captain reported to the police that X was illegally keeping in his house
in the barangay an Armalite M16 rifle. On the strength of that information, the police
conducted a search of the house of X and indeed found said rifle. The police raiders
seized the rifle and brought X to the police station. During the investigation, he
voluntarily signed a Sworn Statement that he was possessing said rifle without
license or authority to possess, and a Waiver of Right to Counsel. During the trial of
X for illegal possession of firearm, the prosecution submitted in evidence the Rifle,
Sworn Statement and Waiver of Right to Counsel.
A. Is the riffle admissible in evidence?
1. Admissible because X was caught in act possessing the rifle without
license.
2. Inadmissible because it was seized without proper search warrant.
3. Inadmissible because there was no license to possess the rifle.
B. Is the sworn statement admissible in evidence?
1. Admissible because it was voluntarily executed.
2. Inadmissible because it was taken without informing the custodial
rights.
3. Inadmissible because X was not assisted by counsel.
C. Is the waiver of right to counsel admissible in evidence?
1. Inadmissible because it was made without the assistance of counsel.
2. Inadmissible because right to counsel cannot be waived.
3. Admissible because it was written and signed by X.

2. Acting on a tip by an informant, police officers stopped a car being driven by D and
ordered him to open the trunk. The officers found a bag containing several kilos of
cocaine. They seized the car and the cocaine as evidence and placed D under arrest.
Without advising him of his right to remain silent and to have the assistance of an
attorney, they questioned him regarding the cocaine. In reply, D said, “I don’t know
anything about it. It isn’t even my car.” D was charged with illegal possession of
cocaine, a prohibited drug. Upon motion of D, the court suppressed the use of
cocaine as evidence and dismissed the charges against him. D commenced
proceedings against the police for the recovery of his car.
A. Is the cocaine admissible in evidence?
1. No because there was no search warrant.
2. Yes because it was a search of moving vehicle, hence, exempted from
search warrant.
3. No because he was not informed of his rights.
B. Is D’s admission that he doesn’t own the car admissible in evidence?
1. Yes because it was his voluntary statement.
2. No because it was an extra-judicial confession.
3. No because he was not informed of his rights before his admission.
C. Can the police be charged for not informing D of his rights?
1. Yes because they violated the rights of the accused.
2. No because they enjoy the presumption of regularity.
3. No because they are in the performance of their duties as police.

3. Sgt. GR of WPD arrested two NPA suspects, Max and Brix, both aged 22, in the act
of robbing a grocery in Ermita. As he handcuffed them he noted a pistol tucked in
Max's waist and a dagger hidden under Brix's shirt, which he promptly confiscated.
 At the police investigation room, Max and Brix orally waived their right to counsel
and to remain silent. Then under oath, they freely answered questions asked by the
police desk officer. Thereafter they signed their sworn statements before the police
captain, a lawyer. Max admitted his part in the robbery, his possession of a pistol and
his ownership of the packet of shabu found in his pocket. Brix admitted his role in
the robbery and his possession of a dagger. But they denied being NPA hit men. In
due course, proper charges were filed by the City Prosecutor against both arrestees
before the MM RTC.
A. Are the written statements admissible in evidence?
1. No because it was made without the assistance of counsel.
2. No because Max and Brix were intimidated by the presence of the
police.
3. Yes because they admitted under oath the crimes charged against
them.
B. Can Max and Brix waive their right to counsel?
1. No because right to counsel is their constitutional right and cannot be
waived.
2. No because the presence of counsel is always required in custodial
investigation.
3. Yes provided the waiver is in writing and in the presence of
independent counsel.
C. Can the police arrest Max and Brix without warrant?
1. Yes under hot pursuit arrest.
2. Yes under inflagrante delicto arrest
3. No because they are not escapee from justice nor fugitives
D. Can Max and Brix question the search conducted to them by the police?

1. Yes because there was no search warrant

2. No because they are caught in the act.
3. No because it was a search incidental to a lawful arrest.

4. At the trial of Ace for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act, the prosecution offers
in evidence a photocopy of the marked P100.00 bills used in the “buy-bust”
operation. Ace objects to the introduction of the photocopy on the ground that the
Best Evidence Rule prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the
original.
a) Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or documentary evidence? Why? (3
points)

b) Is the photocopy admissible in evidence? Why? (3 points)

5. A was accused of having raped X.Rule on the admissibility of the following pieces of
evidence:
a) offer of A to marry X (3 points)

b) a pair of short pants allegedly left by A at the crime which the court, over the
objection of A, required him to put on, and when he did, it fit him well. (3
points)
6. May a private document be offered, and admitted in evidence both as documentary
evidence and as object evidence? Explain. (3 points)

7. Give the reasons underlying the adoption of the following rules of evidence:
a) Dead Man Rule(3 points)

b) Parol Evidence Rule (3 points)

c) Best Evidence Rule(3 points)

d) The rule against the admission of illegally obtained extrajudicial confession (3

points)

e) The rule against the admission of an offer of compromise in civil cases(3

points)

8. When A loaned a sum of money to B. A typed a single copy of the promissory note,
which they both signed A made two photo (xeroxed) copies of the promissory note,
giving one copy to B and retaining the other copy. A entrusted the typewritten copy
to his counsel for safekeeping. The copy with A's counsel was destroyed when the
law office was burned.
a) In an action to collect on the promissory note, which is deemed to be the
"original" copy for the purpose of the "Best Evidence Rule"? (3 points)

b) Can the photocopies in the hands of the parties be considered "duplicate

original copies"? (3 points)

c) Can the Xerox copies be presented as secondary evidence? (3 points)

9. Distinguish Burden of proof and burden of evidence. (3 points)

10. Romeo is sued for damages for injuries suffered by the plaintiff in a vehicular
accident. Julieta, a witness in court, testifies that Romeo told her (Julieta) that he
(Romeo) heard Antonio, a witness to the accident, give an excited account of the
accident immediately after its occurrence. Is Julieta’s testimony admissible against
Romeo over proper and timely objection? Why? (10 points)

11. Maximo filed an action against Pedro, the administrator of the estate of deceased
Juan, for the recovery of a car which is part of the latter’s estate. During the trial,
Maximo presented witness Mariano who testified that he was present when Maximo
and Juan agreed that the latter would pay a rental of P20,000.00 for the use of
Maximo’s car for one month after which Juan should immediately return the car to
Maximo. Pedro objected to the admission of Mariano’s testimony. Is Mariano’s
testimony admissinle in evidence? Why? (10 points)

12. Pedro filed a complaint against Lucio for the recovery of a sum of money based on a
promissory note executed by Lucio. In his complaint, Pedro alleged that although the
promissory note says that it is payable within 120 days, the truth is that the note is
payable immediately after 90 days but that if Pedro is willing, he may, upon request
of Lucio give the latter up to 120 days to pay the note. During the hearing, Pedro
testified that the truth is that the agreement between him and Lucio is for the latter to
pay immediately after ninety day’s time. Also, since the original note was with Lucio
and the latter would not surrender to Pedro the original note which Lucio kept in a
place about one day’s trip from where he received the notice to produce the note and
in spite of such notice to produce the same within six hours from receipt of such
notice, Lucio failed to do so. Pedro presented a copy of the note which was executed
at the same time as the original and with identical contents.
a) Over the objection of Lucio, will Pedro be allowed to testify as to the true
agreement or contents of the promissory note? Why? (10 points)
 b) OvertheobjectionofLucio,canPedropresenta copy of the promissory note and
have it admitted as valid evidence in his favor? Why? (10 points)

13. Vida and Romeo are legally married. Romeo is charged to court with the crime of
serious physical injuries committed against Selmo, son of Vida, step- son of Romeo.
Vida witnessed the infliction of the injuries on Selmo by Romeo. The public
prosecutor called Vida to the witness stand and offered her testimony as an
eyewitness. Counsel for Romeo objected on the ground of the marital
disqualification rule under the Rules of Court. Is the objection valid?(10 points)

14. XYZ, an alien, was criminally charged of promoting and facilitating child
prostitution and other sexual abuses under Rep. Act No. 7610. The principal witness
against him was his Filipina wife, ABC. Earlier, she had complained that XYZ's
hotel was used as a center for sex tourism and child trafficking. The defense counsel
for XYZ objected to the testimony of ABC at the trial of the child prostitution case
and the introduction of the affidavits she executed against her husband as a violation
of espousal confidentiality and marital privilege rule. It turned out that DEF, the
minor daughter of ABC by her first husband who was a Filipino, was molested by
XYZ earlier. Thus, ABC had filed for legal separation from XYZ since last year.

May the court admit the testimony and affidavits of the wife, ABC, against her
husband, XYZ, in the criminal case involving child prostitution? (10 points)