Prelim Evidence
Prelim Evidence
Prelim Evidence
Name:________________________________ Date:_____________________________
Admission Slip No.___________________ Score:____________________________
A. Preponderance of Evidence
B. Substantial Evidence
C. Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
D. None of the above
A. Promulgation of Judgement
B. Preliminary Conference/Pre-Trial
C. Initial Trial
D. Confiscatory Trial
5. The rules of evidence in the Rules of Court are guided by the principle of
uniformity, which means that...
A. It is the fact to be proved; the fact which is in issue and to which the
evidence is directed
B. It is the probative or evidentiary fact tending to prove the fact in issue
C. It is the fact to be establish by circumstantial evidence in order to prove
a certain case may either be criminal or civil
D. It is the general rule that a case must be proved by the evidentiary
weight of evidence to give justice to all
8. These are evidence which if believed, proves the existence of fact in issue without
inference or presumption.
A. Circumstantial Evidence
B. Direct Evidence
C. Object Evidence
D. Documentary Evidence
9. These are evidence that indirectly proves a fact in issue through an inference which
the fact finder draws from the evidence established.
A. Circumstantial Evidence
B. Object Evidence
C. Direct Evidence
D. Documentary Evidence
10. What do we mean by the “Doctrine of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”?
II. Essay. Answer the question concisely and briefly. Give the Legal Basis of your answer.
2|Page
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
4. Police Inspector James Santos was the Chief of Police of the Municipality of Maayusin
who always look after the welfare of its constituents with regards to peace and order.
One afternoon an information was received by their station that a certain Pedro
Calunsag was shown to possess firearms and in one occasion he made several gun
firings which had threatened his neighbours. Acting on the said information P/Insp.
Santos applied for a search warrant against Pedro Calunsag at his residence at
Barangay Malinaw, Municipality of Maayusin. He applied for the search warrant last
August 8, 2018 and served the same on August 18, 2018 at the residence of Pedro
Calunsag. Several calibers of firearms were recovered and a pack of alleged “shabu”.
4.2. Is the search valid? (5 points) If not what makes the search invalid and how
will the evidence be considered?
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
5. Janice owner of a lending company, offers its services to the public by lending money.
Peter a foreigner applied a loan at Janice lending. He obtained an amount of Thirty
Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) payable within six (6) months. After six months from the
date Peter loaned, he was not able to repay the loan for he went back abroad. Janice
filed a case for Collection of Money against Peter. As defense, Peter used the defense of
Alibi that he never obtained a loan from Janice. Janice then presented a evidence the
Promissory Note from her company duly signed by Peter.
5.1. May the case prosper? What is the value of the promissory note Janice
presented as evidence? (5 points)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
3|Page
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
6. In the case of People vs. Laranaga, 463 SCRA 652, what does the Supreme Court says
regarding the defense of Alibi? (5 points)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
7. Al was accused of raping Lourdes. Only Lourdes testified on how the crime was
perpetrated. On the other hand, the defense presented Al's wife, son, and daughter to
testify that Al was with them when the alleged crime took place. The prosecution
interposed timely objection to the testimonies on the ground of obvious bias due to the
witness close relationship with the accused. Will the fact that the version of the
defense is corroborated by three witnesses suffice to acquit Al? Why?
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
9. Republic Act No. 4200 otherwise known as the Anti-Wire Tapping Law,
specifically prohibits or makes it unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all
the parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or
by using any other device commonly known as a Dictaphone or dictagraph or
detectaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described.
Pedro a janitor of ABC Company one early morning, curious of the
conversation between his manager over the telephone, picked up the extension
phone of the other office and record the conversation which turned out a
conversation between the manager of their rival company and heard of the plan of
betraying their company. Can the recorded conversation be admissible as evidence
in court against the manager of ABC Company? (5 points)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
10.What is the purpose of Republic Act No. 4200 otherwise known as the Anti-Wire
Tapping Law?
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________.
4|Page
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: