Rule 131 Quiz

1. 1. In a civil case, the plaintiff presents a prima facie case. What happens to the burden of evidence?

• A) It remains with the plaintiff until the final judgment.

• B) It shifts to the defendant, who must present evidence to rebut the presumption.

• C) It ceases to exist as soon as the prima facie case is established.

• D) It is automatically resolved in favor of the plaintiff.

2. Which of the following statements regarding burden of proof in criminal cases is FALSE?

• A) The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

• B) The accused has the burden of proving their innocence once evidence is presented against them.

• C) The presumption of innocence means the prosecution must overcome the burden of proof.

• D) The burden of evidence may shift to the accused if an affirmative defense is raised.

3. Under Rule 131, a disputable presumption exists that a person who has been absent for seven years is presumed dead. Who has the burden of proving that the person is still alive?

• A) The party asserting that the person is alive.

• B) The party who invokes the presumption of death.

• C) The court, through judicial notice.

• D) The missing person’s heirs.

4. The burden of proof in self-defense cases in criminal law requires the accused to establish:

• A) Clear and convincing evidence that all elements of self-defense exist.

• B) Preponderance of evidence showing that the prosecution's evidence is weak.

• C) That self-defense was established by substantial evidence, shifting the burden back to the prosecution.

• D) Proof beyond reasonable doubt that self-defense was justified.

5. In a case where a person dies under suspicious circumstances while in police custody, a presumption arises that the officer in charge is responsible for the death. Which principle applies in shifting the burden of evidence?

• A) The burden of proof remains with the prosecution, as it is a criminal case.

• B) The prosecution must present evidence beyond a reasonable doubt before any presumption applies.

• C) No presumption applies, and the case must be proven solely by direct evidence.

• D) The burden of evidence shifts to the officer to prove that they did not cause the death.

6. Which of the following is an INCORRECT application of a disputable presumption under Rule 131?

• A) A letter duly addressed and mailed is presumed to have been received.

• B) A person who has disappeared for five years is presumed dead.

• C) A person found in possession of recently stolen property is presumed to be the thief.

• D) An official duty is presumed to have been regularly performed unless proven otherwise.

7. In civil cases, how does the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur affect the burden of evidence?

• A) It creates a conclusive presumption that the defendant is liable.

• B) It relieves the plaintiff of the need to prove negligence.

• C) It shifts the burden of evidence to the defendant to explain why they are not negligent.

• D) It requires proof beyond reasonable doubt of the defendant’s liability.

8) In the 2023 Supreme Court case People v. Lopez (G.R. No. 251732), the Court applied a disputable presumption to affirm the conviction for theft. Which specific presumption did the Court rely upon?

• A) That a person in possession of stolen property is presumed to be the thief.

• B) That a person found in possession of a thing taken during a recent wrongful act is presumed to be the taker and doer of the whole act.

• C) That a person who flees from the scene of a crime is presumed guilty.

• D) That a person who fails to present evidence of ownership is presumed to have unlawfully taken the property.

9) In a civil case for recovery of possession, the plaintiff presents a notarized deed of sale executed 15 years ago, showing that the defendant's predecessor-in-interest transferred the property to the plaintiff’s father. The defendant, however, continues to occupy the land and claims ownership based on an unnotarized private document allegedly signed by the same predecessor-in-interest, stating that the deed of sale was merely for securing a loan. The trial court initially ruled in favor of the plaintiff based on the presumption of regularity of notarized documents and the presumption that an uninterrupted long-term possession by the defendant does not ripen into ownership absent adverse possession. On appeal, the defendant argues that the presumptions were improperly applied, and that the burden of evidence should shift to the plaintiff to prove actual sale.

Which of the following BEST describes the application of presumptions in this case under Rule 131 of the Revised Rules on Evidence?

• A) The conclusive presumption of regularity in notarized documents applies, making the plaintiff’s evidence irrefutable.

• B) The presumption of regularity is inapplicable because the deed of sale is over 10 years old, and ownership should be determined solely by possession.

• C) The burden of proof shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the notarized deed of sale was not simulated, as the defendant’s private document creates doubt.

• D) The disputable presumption of regularity of notarized documents remains valid unless the defendant presents clear and convincing evidence to overcome it.

accused was charged with Parricide for the death of his wife. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted him, applying the disputable presumption under Rule 131 that a person who had the opportunity to commit a crime and whose conduct after the act indicates guilt is presumed to be the perpetrator. The RTC reasoned that:

1. 1. The accused was the last person seen with the victim before her death.

2. 2. He failed to report her disappearance for three days.

3. 3. He gave conflicting statements to authorities.

However, the Supreme Court (SC), in a 2024 en banc decision, reinstated the conviction, citing that:

1. 1. The disputable presumption created by the accused’s behavior was not sufficiently rebutted by any contrary evidence.

2. 2. The failure to explain material inconsistencies in his statements strengthened the case against him.

3. The totality of circumstantial evidence, when combined with the presumption, was sufficient for conviction.

Which of the following BEST explains why the Supreme Court upheld the conviction despite the absence of direct eyewitness testimony?

• A) The presumption that a person’s conduct after a crime indicates guilt, when unrefuted, may serve as strong circumstantial evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

• B) The disputable presumption in parricide cases becomes conclusive when circumstantial evidence supports it.

• C) The accused’s failure to report his wife’s disappearance automatically proves criminal intent under Rule 131 of the Revised Rules on Evidence.

• D) The existence of a disputable presumption relieves the prosecution of the burden to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.