Font size
WorksheetsRules of Evidence Worksheet (Grade 13)
Total questions: 150
Worksheet time: 1hrs 15mins
In a labor case filed before the NLRC, the complainant attempts to introduce an affidavit without the affiant taking the witness stand. The respondent objects, citing the Hearsay Rule under the Rules of Evidence. How should the Labor Arbiter rule?
Sustain the objection because the Rules of Evidence apply to all proceedings.
Overrule the objection because the Rules of Evidence do not strictly apply to quasi-judicial proceedings, though they may be adopted.
Sustain the objection because affidavits are always hearsay without cross-examination.
Overrule the objection because the affiant is presumed credible.
A judge decides a case based solely on his personal knowledge that the specific street where the crime occurred is poorly lit, a fact not presented in evidence but known to him as a resident of the area. Is the judgment valid?
Yes, because it is a matter of public knowledge.
Yes, because it falls under matters ought to be known to judges.
No, because judicial truth must be based on evidence presented, not the judge's private knowledge of specific facts.
No, unless the judge takes the witness stand.
Determining whether a ghost appeared to the accused and commanded him to kill the victim is a question that the Rules of Evidence:
Can resolve through expert testimony on the paranormal.
Can resolve if there are eyewitnesses to the ghost's appearance.
Cannot resolve because the rules do not apply to questions involving fantasy or speculation.
Can resolve through the doctrine of independent relevant statements.
Which of the following rules of evidence is considered a "Prophylactic Rule"?
The rule excluding hearsay evidence.
The rule requiring the original document to be produced.
The rule requiring witnesses to be placed under oath.
The rule requiring proof of corpus delicti in extrajudicial confessions.
If a new law is passed changing the requirements for the admissibility of electronic documents while a case is pending, can a party object to its application on the ground of vested rights?
Yes, because procedural laws cannot be retroactive if prejudicial.
No, because there is no vested right in the rules of evidence.
Yes, if the new rule makes it harder for him to prove his case.
No, unless the case is criminal and the new rule is substantive.
Evidence that is admissible for one purpose (e.g., to prove the weapon's deadly nature) but inadmissible for another (e.g., to prove the accused's propensity for violence) illustrates the principle of:
Curative Admissibility
Conditional Admissibility
Multiple Admissibility
Direct Admissibility
The defense introduces inadmissible hearsay evidence stating the accused was a "good man." The prosecution does not object. Later, the prosecution attempts to introduce hearsay evidence that the accused is a "violent man." Can the prosecution do this?
No, because hearsay is always inadmissible.
Yes, under the principle of Curative Admissibility (Fighting Fire with Fire).
Yes, because the defense opened the door to character evidence generally.
No, because the prosecution cannot attack the character of the accused first.
The "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" doctrine would EXCLUDE which of the following?
Evidence obtained by a private security guard through an illegal search.
Evidence found by police during a search incident to a lawful arrest.
Drugs found in a house searched based solely on a confession obtained through torture.
Evidence provided by a witness who voluntarily came forward.
Under the "Independent Source Doctrine," evidence obtained through an illegal search may still be admissible if:
The police acted in good faith.
Knowledge of the evidence was gained from a separate source unrelated to the illegal act.
The evidence would have been inevitably discovered.
The causal connection is too attenuated.
A judge takes judicial notice that the Philippines was a Spanish colony. This is classified as:
Discretionary judicial notice of public knowledge.
Mandatory judicial notice of political history.
Mandatory judicial notice of the Law of Nations.
Discretionary judicial notice of matters capable of unquestionable demonstration.
Which of the following matters requires a hearing before a court can take judicial notice of it during trial?
The official acts of the legislative department.
The propriety of taking judicial notice of a specific matter.
The measure of time.
The geographical divisions of the world.
In a civil case for collection of a sum of money, the defendant fails to specifically deny under oath the genuineness and due execution of the promissory note attached to the complaint. What is the consequence?
The plaintiff must still prove the due execution.
The document is inadmissible.
The genuineness and due execution are deemed admitted.
The defendant can still present evidence to forgery.
An accused pleads guilty to Homicide during arraignment but later withdraws the plea to plead not guilty. Is the earlier plea admissible against him?
Yes, as a judicial admission.
Yes, as an extrajudicial confession.
No, a withdrawn plea of guilty is not an admission.
No, unless it was made with the assistance of counsel.
Under the "Good Samaritan Law" exception to the offer of compromise rule, an offer to pay for medical expenses is:
Admissible as proof of civil liability.
Admissible as proof of criminal negligence.
Not admissible as proof of civil or criminal liability.
Admissible only to prove the extent of injury.
Which of the following admissions by a third party would be ADMISSIBLE against a party to the case?
An admission by a conspirator made after the conspiracy has ended.
An admission by a partner regarding a matter outside the partnership business.
An admission by a privy (previous owner) made while holding title to the property.
An admission by an employee not authorized to make statements.
A party's failure to reply to a letter of account sent to him may be considered an admission of the correctness of the account under the principle of:
Adoption by Silence.
Vicarious Admission.
Res Inter Alios Acta.
Verbal Act.
To prove the identity of a specific knife used in a crime which has no unique physical features, the prosecution must primarily rely on:
The testimony of the victim who saw a "shiny object."
Establishing the Chain of Custody.
The judge's ocular inspection.
The manufacturer's serial number.
Under the Rules on Electronic Evidence, a text message is considered:
Object evidence.
Documentary evidence (Ephemeral electronic communication).
Hearsay evidence.
Secondary evidence.
The "Gregorio Doctrine" in falsification cases states that:
The original document is not necessary if witnesses are available.
The judge must have the original document alleged to be falsified before him, with specific exceptions.
Photocopies are always admissible in falsification cases.
The best evidence rule does not apply to criminal cases.
Secondary evidence of the contents of a document is admissible when the original is in the custody of the adverse party AND:
The adverse party admits possession.
The adverse party fails to produce it after reasonable notice.
The court orders its production.
The document is a public record.
A photocopy of a marriage contract is presented in court. The opposing counsel does not object. Is the photocopy admissible?
No, because it violates the Best Evidence Rule.
No, because it is secondary evidence.
Yes, because the Best Evidence Rule can be waived if not raised..
Strictly based on notes: Secondary evidence is admissible if the original is unavailable or held by the opponent. If no objection, it is admitted.
Under the Parol Evidence Rule, when can a party introduce evidence of terms agreed to AFTER the execution of the written agreement?
Never, the written agreement is final.
Only if there is intrinsic ambiguity.
Always, as it falls under the exception for existence of other terms agreed to after execution.
Only if the agreement was oral.
Which type of ambiguity allows for Parol Evidence to explain the meaning?
Patent Ambiguity (clear on face but uncertain).
Intermediate Ambiguity (equivocal words).
No ambiguity is allowed to be explained.
Only mistakes.
A deaf-mute is offered as a witness. The defense objects on the ground of incompetency. The court should:
Sustain the objection as he cannot speak.
Overrule the objection if he can communicate via sign language and the interpretation can be verified.
Sustain the objection unless he can write.
Overrule the objection because physical defects never disqualify.
In a murder case, the prosecution calls the wife of the accused to testify that she saw him cleaning a gun the night of the crime. The accused objects. Ruling?
Allow the testimony because it is a criminal case.
Sustain the objection under the Marital Disqualification Rule.
Allow the testimony because it is not a confidential communication.
Sustain the objection under the Marital Privilege Rule.
A husband is charged with committing "Economic Abuse" against his wife under RA 9262. Can he invoke the Marital Disqualification Rule to prevent her from testifying?
Yes, because he is a party spouse.
Yes, because the marriage is subsisting.
No, because the crime is committed by one spouse against the other.
No, because it is a civil case.
The "Dead Man's Statute" would disqualify a plaintiff from testifying about:
A verbal loan agreement made with the deceased defendant before he died.
A written contract signed by the deceased.
Fraudulent transactions of the deceased.
Facts occurring after the death of the deceased.
Which of the following communications is NOT protected by the Lawyer-Client Privilege?
Confession of a past crime to the lawyer.
Advice given by the lawyer regarding the past crime.
Communication intended to aid in the commission of a future crime.
Information acquired by the lawyer's secretary in the course of employment.
A patient confesses to his physician that he committed a crime while seeking treatment for a gunshot wound. Is this privileged?
Yes, under the Physician-Patient Privilege.
No, the privilege applies only to civil cases, not criminal cases.
Yes, if the information was necessary for treatment.
No, because the physician is a public officer.
A child witness cannot be compelled to testify against his father in a qualified theft case against the father. This is based on:
Parental and Filial Privilege.
Marital Disqualification Rule.
Dead Man's Statute.
Res Inter Alios Acta.
A victim of a shooting shouts "Juan shot me!" just moments after the event while in extreme pain. This statement is admissible as:
Part of the Res Gestae (Spontaneous Statement).
Dying Declaration (if he didn't die).
Declaration Against Interest.
Verbal Act.
For a Dying Declaration to be admissible, which of the following is NOT required?
The declarant must die.
The statement concerns the cause of death.
The declarant was conscious of impending death.
The statement was made in writing.
A declaration against interest differs from an admission in that:
The declarant must be dead or unable to testify in a declaration against interest.
The declarant must be a party to the case in a declaration against interest.
An admission is always self-serving.
A declaration against interest must be made in court.
Entries in official records are admissible as prima facie evidence if:
The officer had personal knowledge of the facts.
The officer had sufficient knowledge acquired personally or through official information.
The officer is available to testify.
The entry was made after the transaction.
"Learned Treatises" are admissible if:
The author is dead.
The court takes judicial notice that the writer is recognized in his profession as an expert.
The treatise is published in a law journal.
The opposing party consents.
Under the "Residual Exception" to the hearsay rule, a statement may be admitted if:
It is more probative than any other evidence the proponent can procure.
It has equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness.
The proponent gives notice to the adverse party.
All of the above.
An expert witness opinion is admissible regarding:
Ballistics and fingerprints.
The final outcome of the case (guilt/innocence).
The credibility of another witness (generally).
Whether a party was negligent (legal conclusion).
In a rape case, the defense attempts to introduce evidence of the victim's "past sexual conduct" to prove consent. Is this admissible?
Yes, under character evidence rules.
No, generally inadmissible under the Rape Shield Rule.
The "Equipoise Rule" in criminal cases dictates that:
If evidence is equal, the court should call more witnesses.
If evidence is equal, the accused must be acquitted.
If evidence is equal, the prosecution wins.
If evidence is equal, a new trial is ordered.
Which presumption is "Conclusive"?
That a person is innocent of crime.
That official duty has been regularly performed.
The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord.
That a writing is truly dated.
A child born 190 days after the marriage is presumed:
Illegitimate.
Conceived during the marriage.
Legitimated.
Adopted.
In a case where two persons perish in the same calamity, and one is 10 years old and the other is 30 years old, who is presumed to have survived?
The 10 year old.
The 30 year old (Between 15 and 60, presumed survived over under 15).
They died at the same time.
No presumption applies.
When can a party impeach his own witness?
Never.
If the witness is an unwilling or hostile witness.
If the witness forgets the facts.
If the witness is a character witness.
To impeach a witness by "Prior Inconsistent Statement," the cross-examiner must first:
Offer the statement in evidence.
"Lay the predicate" (Confront the witness with the statement).
Call a rebutting witness.
Prove the statement is true.
A "Misleading Question" is objectionable because:
It suggests the answer.
It assumes a fact not yet testified to or contrary to what was testified.
It is asked by the calling party.
It is relevant.
If a witness reads a memorandum while testifying because he cannot recall the facts even after looking at it, but guarantees it was correct when written, this is:
Present Recollection Revived.
Past Recollection Recorded.
Hearsay.
Impeachment.
The "Massiah Rule" prohibits:
Deliberately eliciting incriminating statements from an indicted person without counsel.
Searching a house without a warrant.
Arresting a person without probable cause.
Using a confession obtained by a private person.
Which of the following is NOT a requisite for the admissibility of a private document?
Proof of due execution.
Proof of authenticity.
Notarization by a notary public.
Testimony of a subscribing witness or proof of handwriting.
In a criminal case, if the prosecution proves the accused had a "Modus Operandi" similar to the crime charged, this evidence is:
Inadmissible as character evidence.
Admissible to prove plan, system, or scheme.
Admissible only during sentencing.
Inadmissible hearsay.
An offer to compromise in a criminal negligence case (quasi-offense) is:
An implied admission of guilt.
Not an implied admission of guilt.
Admissible to prove civil liability only.
Grounds for dismissal.
Police officers listen to a phone conversation between the accused and his lawyer using a wiretap authorized by court order for a terror case. Is the conversation admissible?
Yes, because of the court order.
No, because it violates the Attorney-Client Privilege. (Privilege is absolute unless crime/fraud exception applies, but general eavesdropping on counsel is prohibited).
Yes, under the exception for future crimes.
No, unless the lawyer consents.
A wife sues her husband for Legal Separation. Can she testify about his physical abuse towards her?
No, Marital Disqualification Rule.
No, Marital Privilege Rule.
Yes, because it is a civil case by one against the other.
Yes, but only if he consents.
A witness testifies: "I heard the accused shout 'I killed him!'" The defense objects as Hearsay. Ruling?
Sustain, it is an out-of-court statement.
Overrule, it is an Independent Relevant Statement (or Admission by Party).
Sustain, no predicate laid.
Overrule, it is a Dying Declaration.
In a boundary dispute, the testimony of an 80-year-old resident regarding the reputation of the boundary line existing before the controversy is:
Hearsay and inadmissible.
Admissible as Common Reputation.
Admissible only if he was a surveyor.
Inadmissible opinion.
During cross-examination, the defense counsel asks the witness: "Isn't it true that you were convicted of Perjury in 2015?" The prosecution objects. Ruling?
Sustain, character evidence is inadmissible.
Overrule, proper impeachment by evidence of conviction of a crime.
Sustain, the conviction is too old.
Overrule, but only if the witness admits it.
A party calls a hostile witness. Can the party ask leading questions?
No, leading questions are never allowed on direct.
Yes, leading questions are allowed for unwilling/hostile witnesses.
Only on preliminary matters.
Only if the court gives special permission.
The prosecution offers a xerox copy of a ransom note. The defense objects. The prosecution proves the original was destroyed by the accused. Ruling?
Inadmissible, Best Evidence Rule.
Admissible, secondary evidence is allowed when original is destroyed.
Inadmissible, self-serving.
Admissible only if certified.
A lawyer is called to testify about the contents of a will he drafted for a deceased client. Is this privileged?
Yes, Lawyer-Client Privilege.
No, exception for document attested by the lawyer (if he is a witness to the will).
Yes, unless the heir consents.
No, because the client is dead.
Which evidence requires the "Daubert Test" for admissibility?
Eyewitness identification.
DNA Profiling (Scientific Tests).
Confessions.
Documentary evidence.
"Facts which are not in issue but which tend to establish the probability or improbability of the facts in issue" refers to:
Collateral Matters.
Direct Evidence.
Parol Evidence.
Judicial Notice.
In a forgery case, can the judge compare the signature on the document with a specimen signature written by the accused in open court?
No, he needs an expert.
Yes, comparison can be made by the court.
No, it violates self-incrimination.
Yes, but only if the prosecution agrees.
A witness testifies he saw the accused at the crime scene. The defense presents a witness who says the accused was with him in another city. This defense evidence is:
Positive evidence.
Negative evidence (Denial/Alibi).
Corroborative evidence.
Secondary evidence.
Can a court take judicial notice of a municipal ordinance?
Yes, mandatory.
No, generally requires proof unless in MTC..
Yes, discretionary.
No, never.
A prosecutor asks the accused (who is testifying): "Did you tell your lawyer you did it?" The defense objects. Ruling?
Sustain, Lawyer-Client Privilege.
Overrule, accused waived privilege by testifying.
Sustain, Hearsay.
Overrule, relevant to credibility.
Evidence that a victim was seen running away from the accused screaming "Don't kill me!" is admissible as:
Res Gestae (Verbal Act/Spontaneous Statement).
Dying Declaration.
Admission.
Parol Evidence.
Which constitutes "Original" evidence of a photograph?
The negative.
Any print therefrom.
Both the negative and any print.
Only the camera memory card.
When is an "Offer of Proof" (Tender of Excluded Evidence) made?
When evidence is admitted.
When evidence is excluded by the court.
During pre-trial.
After judgment.
A statement "I owe you P10,000" written on a napkin signed by the debtor is:
An Extrajudicial Admission.
A Judicial Admission.
Hearsay.
Parol Evidence.
In a rape case, the prosecution presents the torn clothes of the victim. This is:
Documentary evidence.
Object evidence.
Testimonial evidence.
Secondary evidence.
Proof of "Motive" is generally irrelevant EXCEPT:
When the crime is admitted.
When the identity of the accused is in doubt.
When there is direct evidence.
In civil cases.
Can a husband testify against his wife in a case where she is charged with poisoning his parents?
No, Marital Disqualification.
Yes, crime against direct ascendant of the spouse.
No, unless she consents.
Yes, but only if he was also poisoned.
The "Parol Evidence Rule" applies only to:
Parties to the written agreement and their successors.
Strangers to the contract.
Criminal cases.
Tort cases.
An "Ancient Document" (30 years old) requires:
No proof of authenticity if produced from proper custody and unblemished.
Expert testimony to authenticate the document.
Certification by the records custodian.
A subscribing witness to prove execution.
Which is an example of a "Conclusive Presumption"?
Innocence of the accused.
Official duty regularly performed.
Estoppel in Pais.
That a writing is truly dated.
If a witness refuses to answer a question because it is "Self-Degrading," can he be compelled to answer?
No, absolute right.
Yes, if it is to discredit him by impeaching his moral character (unless it incriminates him).
Yes, always.
No, unless the judge permits.
A criminal case for Slight Physical Injuries was filed in the RTC. After trial, the court convicted the accused of Less Serious Physical Injuries, which carries a penalty cognizable by the MTC. The accused challenges the jurisdiction of the RTC. Is the accused correct?
Yes, because the penalty imposed is outside the RTC's jurisdiction.
No, because jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the information, not the penalty imposed after trial.
Yes, because the RTC cannot impose a penalty lower than 6 years.
No, because the principle of adherence of jurisdiction does not apply.
Congress passes a law transferring jurisdiction over Estafa cases from the RTC to the MTC. The law is given retroactive effect. What happens to a pending Estafa case in the RTC where arraignment has not yet occurred?
The RTC retains jurisdiction under the principle of adherence of jurisdiction.
The RTC is divested of jurisdiction because the retroactive statute is an exception to the adherence of jurisdiction rule.
The case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The RTC and MTC have concurrent jurisdiction.
A soldier kills a civilian in a bar brawl while off-duty. Which court has jurisdiction?
Court Martial, because he is a soldier.
Regular Civil Court (RTC), because military courts generally have no jurisdiction over civilians (or crimes not service-connected involving civilians).
Sandiganbayan, if he is a high-ranking officer.
Commission on Human Rights.
The accused files a motion to quash based on the ground that the officer who filed the information had no authority. This objection essentially challenges:
Jurisdiction over the person.
Jurisdiction over the subject matter.
The validity of the information (which affects jurisdiction over the person/validity of proceedings).
The territorial jurisdiction.
If an information alleges Murder but the facts recited only constitute Homicide, and the evidence proves Murder, what crime can the accused be convicted of?
Murder, because it was proved.
Homicide, because the recital of facts controls over the designation, and he cannot be convicted of a higher offense than charged.
Neither, the information is void.
Homicide with aggravating circumstances.
A prosecutor refuses to file an information despite clear evidence of guilt because he believes the accused acted in self-defense (a matter of defense). The offended party files a petition for mandamus. Will it prosper?
Yes, because the prosecutor's duty is ministerial.
No, because the prosecutor has discretion and cannot be compelled by mandamus unless there is evident bias or grave abuse of discretion.
Yes, to prevent a failure of justice.
No, the remedy is to file the case directly in court.
An information for Robbery with Rape is filed without the complaint of the offended party. The accused moves to quash. Ruling?
Grant, because Rape is a private crime requiring the victim's complaint.
Deny, because Robbery with Rape is a public crime (complex) and does not require the private party's complaint.
Grant, because the rape aspect requires a sworn complaint.
Deny, provided the police filed the complaint.
X is charged with Estafa. The information alleges the date of commission as "on or about December 2023". X moves to quash for lack of specific date. Ruling?
Grant, time is a material ingredient of Estafa.
Deny, precise time is not essential in Estafa unless it is a material ingredient (e.g., Infanticide).
Grant, to allow X to prepare his alibi.
Deny, unless X can prove the date is crucial for prescription.
The prosecution moves to amend the information to allege conspiracy after the accused has pleaded not guilty. Is this a substantial amendment?
No, it is merely formal.
Yes, because it changes the theory of the defense and makes the accused liable for the acts of others.
Yes, but allowed with leave of court.
No, conspiracy is implied in all crimes.
A case for Frustrated Homicide is filed. The victim dies. The prosecution moves to substitute the information with Homicide. Is this allowed?
No, it violates double jeopardy.
Yes, substitution is proper when a mistake in charging the offense is made or a supervening event occurs, provided no judgment has been rendered.
No, amendment is the proper remedy.
Yes, but only before plea.
The accused is acquitted of Estafa because the court found that "the money was given as a loan, not in trust". Can the complainant still file a civil action for collection of sum of money?
No, the acquittal extinguishes civil liability.
Yes, because the civil liability is not based on the crime (ex delicto) but on contract, and the judgment declared the fact from which civil liability might arise (the debt) exists.
No, because of res judicata.
Yes, but only for moral damages.
In a BP 22 case, the offended party reserves the right to file a separate civil action. Is this allowed?
Yes, reservation is a right.
No, the criminal action for BP 22 shall be deemed to include the civil action, and reservation is not allowed.
Yes, provided it is done before the prosecution presents evidence.
No, unless the court grants permission.
The accused dies after arraignment during the pendency of his appeal. What happens to his civil liability?
It continues against his estate.
Civil liability arising from the crime (ex delicto) is extinguished, but independent civil liabilities may continue against the estate.
All civil liability is extinguished.
It is condoned.
A civil action for annulment of marriage is filed by the accused in a Bigamy case, claiming his consent in the second marriage was vitiated. Is this a prejudicial question?
No, because the civil case was filed after the criminal case.
Yes, because if the second marriage is annulled due to vitiated consent, it negates the voluntary commission of Bigamy.
No, because Bigamy is consummated upon marriage.
Yes, but only if the first marriage is the one being annulled.
Can the offended party intervene in the prosecution of a criminal case if he has instituted a separate civil action?
Yes, to protect his interest.
No, once a separate civil action is instituted (or reserved/waived), he has no more interest in the criminal aspect.
Yes, as a private prosecutor under the direction of the fiscal.
No, unless authorized by the DOJ.
An accused is arrested without a warrant for Murder. He asks for a preliminary investigation. What must he do?
File a motion for preliminary investigation within 10 days.
Sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the RPC.
Post bail immediately.
Request the inquest prosecutor to suspend proceedings.
If the investigating prosecutor finds no probable cause, he dismisses the complaint. The complainant appeals to the DOJ. What happens to the case?
The dismissal is final.
The DOJ may reverse the finding and direct the filing of an information or further investigation.
The case is archived pending new evidence.
Jurisdiction shifts to the court upon appeal to the DOJ.
Is the determination of probable cause by the prosecutor a judicial function?
Yes, because it involves weighing evidence.
No, it is an executive function.
Yes, because it binds the court.
No, it is a legislative function.
A judge issues a warrant of arrest relying solely on the prosecutor's certification of probable cause. Is the warrant valid?
Yes, the prosecutor is presumed regular.
No, the judge must personally evaluate the report and supporting documents to make an independent finding of probable cause.
Yes, if the accused does not object.
No, unless the prosecutor testifies.
The accused files a motion to quash based on insufficiency of evidence during the preliminary investigation stage (before information is filed). Is this proper?
Yes, to save time.
No, you cannot file a motion to quash before the information is filed in court; moreover, sufficiency of evidence is for the trial.
Yes, if the evidence is clearly weak.
No, he must file a demurrer to evidence.
Police officers see drugs through the window of a house. They enter and seize the drugs without a warrant. Is the seizure valid under Plain View?
Yes, the drugs were visible.
No, because there was no prior valid intrusion; the "plain view" must be from a lawful vantage point.
Yes, because it is a crime in progress.
No, unless they arrest the owner first.
An accused charged with a capital offense applies for bail. The prosecution fails to attend the hearing. Can the court grant bail immediately?
Yes, waiver by the prosecution.
No, the court must still conduct a hearing to determine if evidence of guilt is strong.
Yes, because bail is a right.
No, the court must wait for the prosecution indefinitely.
The judge denies bail because there is a high probability of flight. Is this a valid ground for denial in a non-capital offense?
Yes, flight risk is the main concern.
No, bail is a matter of right before conviction in non-capital offenses; flight risk only allows increasing the bond amount. (Note: In capital offenses/discretionary bail, flight risk is a ground. But for "matter of right" cases, it regulates amount, not grant).
Yes, if the accused is a recidivist.
No, unless the accused has escaped before.
A warrant of arrest was issued 20 days ago. The officer returns it unserved. Is the warrant still valid?
No, it expires after 10 days.
Yes, a warrant of arrest is valid until executed or lifted; the 10-day period is for the officer's report.
No, it must be renewed.
Yes, but only for 30 more days.
Can a person be arrested without a warrant for a crime committed "days ago" if the police identify him through CCTV?
Yes, Hot Pursuit.
No, "Hot Pursuit" requires immediacy and personal knowledge of facts that the person committed it; days later is not immediate.
Yes, Continuing Crime.
No, unless he confesses.
An accused testifies in his own defense but refuses to be cross-examined. What is the consequence?
He is cited for contempt.
His direct testimony will be stricken off the record/given no weight.
The prosecution can present rebuttal immediately.
He waives his right to silence.
The court appoints a counsel de oficio for the accused during arraignment. The accused objects, wanting his own lawyer who is absent. The court proceeds. Is this valid?
Yes, to avoid delay.
No, the right to counsel includes the right to choose one's own counsel; the court must grant reasonable time.
Yes, counsel de oficio is sufficient.
No, unless the accused is a lawyer.
A lawyer (fake) represents the accused during trial. The accused did not know he was not a lawyer. The accused is convicted. Remedy?
Appeal based on error of judgment.
New Trial, because the right to counsel (by a member of the bar) was violated.
Acquittal.
Disbarment of the fake lawyer.
Can the accused waive his right to be present at the promulgation of judgment?
Yes, always.
No, presence is mandatory for promulgation of conviction (for grave offenses), unless he was tried in absentia/fugitive.
Yes, if represented by counsel.
No, unless the judgment is acquittal.
The prosecution witnesses testify. The accused dies before the defense can cross-examine. Is the testimony admissible against the deceased's estate in a civil case?
Yes, it was given under oath.
No, because the right of confrontation/cross-examination was not exercised (unless waived, but death is not waiver). (Note: If opportunity was given and missed, admissible. If death prevented opportunity, inadmissible).
Yes, under the rule on former testimony.
No, hearsay.
The accused pleads guilty to a lesser offense after the prosecution has rested its case. The prosecutor consents. Is this allowed?
Yes, plea bargaining is allowed anytime.
No, plea to lesser offense is usually "before trial" or "after arraignment but before trial"; or "withdrawal of not guilty plea". If evidence is already presented, it might be too late or subject to court discretion. (Note: Rules allow "after arraignment but before trial". If prosecution rests, it's late, but practice sometimes allows if court approves. However, strict rule: "After arraignment BUT BEFORE TRIAL".)
Yes, if the victim consents.
No, unless the original charge is dismissed.
An information charges the accused with Murder. He files a Motion to Quash for "Lack of Jurisdiction over the person" because the arrest was illegal. He also includes "Duplicity of Offenses". Is the jurisdictional objection waived?
No, he raised it.
Yes, by including other grounds (entering appearance), he is deemed to have submitted to the court's jurisdiction.
No, illegal arrest voids jurisdiction.
Yes, but only if he pleads.
The court dismisses a case on a Motion to Quash because the facts charged do not constitute an offense. Can the prosecution refile a corrected information?
No, double jeopardy.
Yes, if the dismissal is based on this ground, the court usually orders amendment; if dismissed, refiling is not barred by jeopardy (first jeopardy didn't attach validly/dismissal not on merits/no valid information).
No, res judicata.
Yes, but only with the accused's consent.
X pleads guilty to Homicide. The court accepts the plea without conducting a searching inquiry. Is the conviction valid?
Yes, the plea is a judicial admission.
No, for capital/grave offenses, a searching inquiry is mandatory; failure makes the plea improvident.
Yes, if there is other evidence.
No, unless the prosecutor agrees.
The accused moves to quash on the ground of prescription. The judge denies it. Remedy?
Appeal the denial.
Go to trial and raise it as a defense (interlocutory order cannot be appealed).
Certiorari.
Mandamus.
The court dismisses a case sua sponte (on its own) for lack of jurisdiction (erroneously). The prosecution appeals. Is there double jeopardy?
No, because the court had no jurisdiction (in its view).
Yes, if the court actually HAD jurisdiction and dismissed it without the accused's request, the dismissal operates as acquittal. (Specific scenario in reviewer: "When the trial court has jurisdiction but mistakenly dismisses... and the dismissal was NOT at the request of the accused... dismissal is not appealable... double jeopardy").
No, because the dismissal was an error of law.
Yes, because the accused did not consent.
The accused files a Demurrer to Evidence. The court grants it. The prosecution appeals. Is there double jeopardy?
No, because the accused moved for it.
Yes, dismissal on demurrer is an acquittal on the merits.
No, because the prosecution was denied due process.
Yes, unless the dismissal was provisional.
Case 1: Theft. Dismissed provisionally with accused's consent. One year elapses. Can the case be revived?
Yes, provisional dismissal is not permanent.
No, for offenses punishable by >6 years, it becomes permanent after 2 years; for <=6 years (Theft usually), it becomes permanent after 1 year.
Yes, because consent was given.
No, double jeopardy sets in immediately.
Accused is charged with Acts of Lasciviousness. Acquitted. Prosecution files Rape based on the same acts. Double Jeopardy?
No, Rape is a different crime.
Yes, Acts of Lasciviousness is necessarily included in Rape (or Rape includes Acts of Lasc? If facts are same). Actually, if acquitted of the lesser, can he be charged with the greater? Yes, generally, unless the greater includes the lesser. Rape includes Acts of Lasc. Acquittal of the lesser (Acts) bars prosecution for the greater (Rape) if based on same facts. (Concept of "Necessarily Included").
No, supervening event.
Yes, but only if convicted.
Discharge of a state witness is denied by the court. Can his sworn statement be used against him?
Yes, as an extrajudicial confession.
No, it is inadmissible.
Yes, for impeachment.
No, unless he testifies.
A judge renders a "verbal judgment" in open court acquitting the accused. Is it valid?
Yes, effective immediately.
No, judgment must be written and signed.
Yes, if transcribed later.
No, unless the accused accepts it.
The accused fails to appear at promulgation of judgment (conviction). What is the effect on his remedies?
He can still appeal.
He loses his remedies (appeal, etc.) unless he surrenders and justifies absence within 15 days.
The judgment is void.
He waives his right to bail only.
The judgment imposes a penalty of "Reclusion Perpetua OR Fine of P100,000". Is this valid?
Yes, discretionary.
No, alternative penalties are not allowed; it must be definite.
Yes, if the law provides "fine or imprisonment".
No, fines cannot be alternative to imprisonment.
Can a judge validly promulgate a decision prepared by his predecessor?
No, he did not hear the witnesses.
Yes, provided he relies on the records.
No, due to lack of personal knowledge.
Yes, if the accused consents.
In a Reverse Trial (Self-Defense), who presents evidence first?
Prosecution.
Accused.
Court's discretion.
Victim.
Police apply for a search warrant in Makati for a crime committed in Pasay, citing "fear of leak". Is this allowed?
No, territorial jurisdiction rule.
Yes, for compelling reasons, application can be made within the judicial region.
No, unless Pasay judges are absent.
Yes, search warrants are enforceable anywhere.
A search warrant authorizes seizure of "shabu". Police also find a "gun" in plain view. Can they seize the gun?
No, not in warrant.
No, unless it is mala prohibita (unlicensed) AND the discovery was inadvertent.
Yes, plain view doctrine.
Yes, incidental to search.
A search warrant is served at night. The warrant is silent on the time of service. Is the search valid?
Yes, warrants are valid 24/7.
No, it must be served daytime unless the warrant asserts it can be served anytime (or urgency/nature of property requires).
Yes, if the owner consents.
No, night searches are prohibited.
A John Doe warrant describes the accused as "The person living in House No. 1". Valid?
No, John Doe warrants are void.
Yes, if the description is sufficient to identify the person (persona designata).
No, lack of name.
Yes, always.
Police execute a search warrant 11 days after issuance. Valid?
Yes, reasonable time.
No, search warrant validity is 10 days.
Yes, if the delay was justified.
No, unless renewed.
Prosecution rests. Defense files Demurrer to Evidence without leave of court. Denied. Can the defense present evidence?
Yes, right to be heard.
No, filing without leave constitutes waiver of right to present evidence.
Yes, in the interest of justice.
No, judgment is automatic.
Accused is charged with Murder. He claims the killing was accidental (exempting). Is this a reverse trial situation?
Yes, invoking an exempting circumstance (like self-defense/accident which admits the act) shifts the burden? Wait. Accident denies intent (element). Self-defense admits the act. Usually, admission of the killing + justification/exemption = Reverse Trial.
No, accident is a denial of intent.
Yes, but prosecution goes first.
No, only self-defense causes reverse trial.
A search warrant is issued for "stolen tire". Police search a drawer. Valid?
Yes, thorough search.
No, the scope of search is limited to where the object could reasonably be. A tire cannot fit in a drawer.
Yes, plain view.
No, warrant expired.
Information charges Theft. Evidence proves Estafa. Can the court convict for Estafa?
Yes, same penalty.
No, Estafa is not necessarily included in Theft (different elements: possession vs custody/trust).
Yes, rule of variance.
No, unless amended.
A judge finds no probable cause to issue a warrant of arrest. What should he do?
Dismiss the case immediately.
Require the prosecutor to submit additional evidence.
Order the arrest anyway.
Call for a hearing.
Accused jumps bail. Can the trial proceed in absentia?
No, right to be present.
Yes, if he was arraigned, notified, and failure is unjustifiable.
Yes, but judgment cannot be promulgated.
No, archival.
Prosecutor files a motion to withdraw information. Judge grants it without independent assessment. Status?
Valid exercise of discretion.
Void, the judge must make an independent assessment.
Valid, prosecutor has control.
Voidable.
Can a private prosecutor appeal an acquittal?
Yes, fully.
No, only the civil aspect.
Yes, with Solicitor General's conformity.
Accused is convicted. He applies for probation. Can he still appeal?
Yes, concurrent remedies.
No, application for probation waives the right to appeal.
Yes, if probation is denied.
No, unless the penalty is fine.
Accused appeals. Appellate court increases the penalty. Double Jeopardy?
Yes.
No, appeal throws the whole case open for review.
Yes, reformatio in peius.
No, only if the prosecution appealed.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court acquits but awards civil damages. Valid?
No, acquittal extinguishes civil liability.
Yes, if the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt (not non-existence of the fact).
No, unless reserved.
Yes, always.
A police officer arrests a person for a crime committed 3 days ago based on a witness description. Valid warrantless arrest?
Yes, hot pursuit.
No, lack of personal knowledge and immediacy.
Yes, continuing crime.
No, unless the suspect confesses.
Can a search warrant be issued for "Evidence of the commission of the offense"?
Yes.
No, must describe the specific property (Subject, Proceeds, Instrument). "Evidence" is too broad; the items must be described. If it lists "documents, computers, etc.", it's valid, but "Evidence" generally is not.
Yes, if relevant.
No, unless probable cause exists.
Pre-trial order is not signed by the accused. Can the admissions therein be used against him?
Yes, signed by counsel.
No, strict requirement for accused's signature.
Yes, oral stipulations valid.
No, unless ratified.
Accused is discharged as state witness but later refuses to testify. Effect?
He remains acquitted.
He can be prosecuted again.
He is cited for contempt only.
The case is dismissed.
Can the Ombudsman conduct a preliminary investigation for a crime committed by a low-ranking public officer?
No, only for high-ranking.
Yes, the Ombudsman has primary jurisdiction over cases cognizable by Sandiganbayan and concurrent over others involving public officers.
No, only the Fiscal.
Yes, if ordered by the President.
Motion to Quash granted on ground of "Facts do not constitute an offense". Can the prosecution refile?
No, double jeopardy.
Yes, if the defect is curable by amendment or new information (unless jeopardy attached or extinguished). "Facts do not constitute" usually allows refiling or amendment.
No, res judicata.
Yes, but need new evidence.
Is the "Right to a Preliminary Investigation" a constitutional right?
Yes, Bill of Rights.
No, it is a statutory right.
Yes, due process.
No, procedural only.
A person is charged with "Illegal Possession of Opium Pipe". He was previously convicted of "Smoking Opium". Double Jeopardy?
No, distinct crimes.
Yes, possession of the pipe is absorbed or necessary for smoking.
No, special laws.
Yes, if same date.
Can the court order a "Mental Examination" of the accused before arraignment?
No, presumption of sanity.
Yes, if the accused appears to be of unsound mind (suspension of arraignment).
No, only during trial.
Yes, if the prosecutor requests.
Does the "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" doctrine apply to evidence found via an invalid search warrant?
No.
Yes, the evidence is inadmissible.
Yes, but only for the main evidence.
No, good faith exception.
Can a person post bail by "Recognizance" for a heavy felony?
No, never.
Yes, if allowed by law or court discretion (e.g., indigency, custody of lawyer or responsible person).
No, cash only.
Yes, if the victim agrees.
What is the effect of "Technical Malversation" on the prescriptive period?
None.
Since it is under the RPC, prescription follows the RPC rules.
"Independent Assessment" by the judge for warrant of arrest means:
Conducting a hearing.
Reviewing the affidavits or resolution personally, not just relying on the prosecutor's certification.
Interviewing the witnesses.
Re-investigating.
If the accused escapes after arraignment, can the trial proceed?
No.
Yes, trial in absentia.
Yes, but judgment cannot be rendered.
No, case archived.
