LAST MINUTE TIPS FOR MIDTERMS

PRACTICE COURT 2​
JUDGE GREGORIO PIMENTEL JR.

1) Note all kinds of Objections on the stages of examination of witnesses, their

meanings & purposes

GENERALLY,
1.​ If the nature of testimony is IRRELEVANT - not the issue or matter alleged to be
controverted
2.​ If the witness is INCOMPETENT to answer-
●​ not within the personal knowledge of the purported witness OR
●​ the witness lack the qualification to be a witness
●​ If competency is objected to, the court must conduct preliminary examination
of the witness
OTHER OBJECTIONS
3.​ If witness is DISQUALIFIED-
●​ Convicted of Falsification- that such is subject of the case
●​ Convicted of a crime involving Moral Turpitude
4.​ Parole Evidence Rule
5.​ Res inter alios acta- evidence pertains to a 3Ps admission
6.​ Hearsay- a question regarding exhibits that have not been identified or whose
foundation has not been properly laid may be objected to on the ground of
hearsay. This is because the exhibit has not yet been authenticated or verified by a
competent witness, and any reference to its contents would be considered hearsay.
7.​ Leading Questions:
A leading question is one that suggests to the witness the answer that the examining party desires.
This type of question is generally not allowed during direct examination, as it may influence the
witness's testimony. However, there are specific exceptions where leading questions are permitted.

Under Section 10, Rule 132 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, leading questions are not allowed
except in the following instances:

When Leading Question is allowed:

1.​ On cross-examination;
2.​ On preliminary matters;
3.​ When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness
who is:
○​ Ignorant,
○​ A child of tender years,
○​ Of feeble mind, or
○​ A deaf-mute;
4.​ Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
5.​ Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent
of a public or private corporation, or of a partnership or association which is an
adverse party
8.​ Misleading Questions are not allowed.
They are of two kinds:
1. A question which assumes a fact not yet testified to by a witness or still unproven or by
putting words into the mouth of the witness

2. A question premised on a fact which is contrary to that testified to or proven or those

which distort or do not accurately state the true facts.
●​ This is akin to twisting the words of the witness
9.​ If witness is offerred as an EXPERT WITNESS- expertise was NOT established

Use at your own risk- GU | 1

Marking of a document is NOT offer.

2. Questions about an EXPERT WITNESS

Who is an Expert witness?

One who has the subject upon which he gives his opinion a matter of particular
study, practice or observation and he must have particular and special knowledge,
on the subject.

The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,

experience, training, or education, which he/she shown to possess, may be
received in evidence (Section 52, Rule 130)
• The weight of the testimony of the expert witness is not conclusive, but
merely advisory.

How to present an expert witness

1.​ Introduce and qualify the witness;

○​ Establish expertise- thru nature of occupation/practice of profession,
educational attainment,
2.​ Let him give his factual testimony, if he has knowledge of the facts;
3.​ Begin the hypothetical question by asking him to assume certain facts as true;

What are hypothetical questions?​

These questions are designed to present a set of assumed facts to the
expert, allowing them to provide their opinion based on their
expertise. This approach is particularly useful in eliciting expert testimony
because it frames the context in which the expert's specialized knowledge
is applied.

4.​ Conclude the question, by first asking the expert if he has an opinion on a
certain point
5.​ Assuming that these facts are true and secondly, asking him, after he has
answered affirmatively, to give his opinion on the point;
6.​ After he has stated his opinion, ask him to give his reasons.

How to CROSS an Expert Witness

1. Challenge the Expert's Qualifications- Establish whether the expert witness

possesses the necessary qualifications, such as education, training, and experience, to
testify on the subject matter. If the qualifications are insufficient, the credibility of the
testimony can be undermined.

2. Highlight Inconsistencies or Weaknesses in Testimony- Point out contradictions

or inconsistencies in the expert's statements.

3. Test the Basis of the Expert's Opinion- Question the data, methods, or assumptions
used by the expert to form their opinion.

4. Expose Bias or Lack of Impartiality- Probe into the expert's relationship with the
party presenting them, financial interests, or any other factors that may indicate bias.

Use at your own risk- GU | 2

 5. Undermine the Necessity of the Expert Testimony- Argue that the expert's
testimony is not indispensable to the case, if other credible evidence is available

6. Question the Expert's Familiarity with the Case- Determine whether the expert has
sufficient knowledge of the specific facts of the case. If the expert's opinion is based on
incomplete or inaccurate information, it can weaken their testimony.

3. Questions on admissibility of evidence

When is an evidence admissible?

A.​ GR: Evidence is admissible when:

1.​ RELEVANCE- Evidence must have a direct relation to the fact in
issue.(Sec 4, R128)
2.​ COMPETENCE- must NOT be EXCLUDED by the Constitution, Law,
or the Rules on Evidence (Sec 3, R128)

EXC: Where evidence although irrelevant and incompetent may still be admitted by
the court:
1.​ Even if evidence is admissible, its probative value or weight is subject to
judicial evaluation.
2.​ Failure of the party to object upon formal offer, deemed admitted

How do you prove lost or destroyed documents? (Sec. 5, Rule 130)

• When the original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the
offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability is without bad
faith on his part, may prove its contents:
1. By a copy
2. By a recital of its contents in some authentic document
3.​ By the testimony of the witnesses
The order stated must be followed.

4. Stages of examination of a witness- Purpose, Scope, and Effects

Order of examination of witness

A.​ direct examination by the proponent
B.​ close examination by the opponent
C.​ re-direct examination by the proponent and
D.​ recross examination by the opponent
a.​ Take note: Under the amended rule, that during direct examination, before
asking the question, he has to make a formal offer of testimony by reciting
facts to be testified to.

DEFINITION PURPOSE EFFECT

A.​ Direct Examination Examination-in-chief of a To establish the witness’ Failure to present- not offered-
by the Proponent witness ​ testimony in support of the excluded/ not considered by the
​ presenting party’s case court in rendering its judgment
By a party presenting him/her
(Sec 5, Rule 132)
on the facts relevant to the GR. only Direct Questions​
issue (Sec. 5, Rule 132) EXC: When leading question is
allowed

Use at your own risk- GU | 3

 When Leading Question is
allowed:

1.​ On preliminary matters;

2.​ When there is difficulty in
getting direct and
intelligible answers from
a witness who is: Ignorant,
A child of tender years,Of
feeble mind, or A
deaf-mute;
B.​ Of an unwilling or hostile
witness; or
C.​ Of a witness who is an
adverse party or an
officer, director, or
managing agent of a
public or private
corporation, or of a
partnership or
association which is an
adverse party

D.​ Cross-Examination The witness may be 1.​ To test the witness’ Effect of denial
by the opponent cross-examined by the accuracy, truthfulness and
adverse party on any freedom from interest or If failure to cross examine
relevant matter with bias, or the reverse; was due to the unavailability
(Sec 6, RUle
2.​ To elicit all important facts
132) sufficient fullness and of the witness, and NO fault
bearing upon the issue
freedom (Sec. 6, Rule (Sec. 6, Rule 132) of the party seeking to cross
132) examine- the testimony given
on direct may be stricken off
(Herrera) ​
Section 10, reiterates that ​
leading questions are If incomplete/unable to finish,
permissible during due to causes attributable to
cross-examination. This rule party offering the witness, the
is consistent with the principle uncompleted testimony is
that cross-examination aims to rendered incompetent
challenge the testimony
(Ortigas v Lufthansa German
provided during direct
examination and to elicit facts Airlines)​
that may not have been
disclosed.

E.​ Re-Direct The witness may be To explain OR supplement May restore the witness’s
Examination re-examined by the party his/her answers given during credibility or clarify
By the proponent calling him/her the cross examination ambiguities

(Sec 7, RUle ●​ Questions on

132) matters not dealt
with during the
cross-examination
may be allowed by
the court in its
discretion (Section 7,
Rule 132)

F.​ Re-cross Recross examination of May further challenge the

examination the witness by the adverse witness’s testimony or
By the opponent party on matters stated in credibility
his/her re-direct and on
(Sec 8, Rule 132) other matters allowed by
the court in its discretion

Use at your own risk- GU | 4

Recalling the After examination by both To identify material points
witness sides has been concluded, NOT COVERED during
the witness cannot be cross
(Sec. 9, Rule 132) recalled without leave of
court​ To describe vital documents
​ that WERE NOT
Judge P: You may PRESENTED to the witness​
manifest in open court, ​
asking for leave to recall Cross-examination was
the witness. Always conducted in so inept a
discretionary upon the manner as to result in
Judge whether to allow virtual absence thereof.
that the witness be
recalled.

5. Rules on Maxims in criminal cases, and know the meaning of each, and
purposes

RES INTER ACTA ALIOS (Section 28, Rule 130)

It states that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of
another. This principle ensures that a person is not bound or affected by the actions or
statements of others unless specific exceptions apply.

Exceptions:

1.​ Admission by a co-partner or agent: Acts or declarations of a partner or

agent within the scope of their authority may be admissible against the party
they represent.
2.​ Admission by a conspirator: Acts or declarations of a conspirator related to
the conspiracy and made during its existence may be admissible against
co-conspirators, provided the conspiracy is independently established.
3.​ Admission by privies: Admissions by persons in privity with the party, such
as successors-in-interest, may also be admissible.

EQUIPOISE RULE
applies when the evidence presented in a case is evenly balanced, meaning it is capable
of two or more interpretations—one consistent with the innocence of the accused and the
other with their guilt. In such situations, the constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the
scales in favor of the accused.
●​ This rule ensures that no conviction is made unless the prosecution's evidence
meets the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
●​ When inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations,
the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty, and the accused must be
acquitted.
●​ This principle underscores the prosecution's burden to establish guilt beyond
reasonable doubt and protects the constitutional right to be presumed innocent.​

Use at your own risk- GU | 5

RES IPSA LOQUITOR

a Latin phrase that translates to "the thing speaks for itself."

It is a rule of evidence applied in negligence cases, allowing an inference or presumption

of negligence based on the mere occurrence of an injury or accident, without requiring
direct proof of the defendant's negligence. For the doctrine to apply, the following elements
must generally be present:

1.​ The accident is of a kind that ordinarily does not occur in the absence of
someone's negligence.
2.​ The instrumentality or agency that caused the injury was under the exclusive
control of the defendant.
3.​ The possibility of contributory negligence by the plaintiff is eliminated.

The doctrine is grounded in common knowledge and human experience, which suggest that
certain types of accidents do not happen if proper care is exercised. It shifts the burden of
explanation to the defendant, who must provide evidence to rebut the presumption of
negligence.​

6. Know the meaning of Preliminary Investigation and Inquest

-Will be asked regarding the Old rule vs New Rules DOJ No. 15
OLD RULE​ NEW RULE​
RULE 112 Rules of Court NPS DOJ No. 15

DEFINITION

Preliminary Preliminary Investigation is a

Investigation Preliminary investigation is ​ summary proceeding
an inquiry or proceeding ​
​
​ to determine whether a person
to determine whether there is sufficient indicted in court after ascertaining,
ground to engender a well-founded belief based on the evidence provided and
that a crime has been committed and the after case build-up has been
respondent is probably guilty thereof, and conducted, ​
should be held for trial. (R112.S1) ​
that there is prima facie evidence with
reasonable certainty for the
respondent’s conviction and that
he/she should be held for trial.

SCOPE/ When required

4-2-1​ 6y+1D​
Except as provided in section 7 of this Rule, a The conduct of a preliminary
preliminary investigation is required to be investigation proceeding shall be
conducted before the filing of a complaint or required for crimes or offenses where
information for an offense where the penalty the penalty prescribed by law is atleast
prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, six (6) years and one (1) day without
two (2) months and one (1) day without regard to fine (Section 3)
regard to the fine. (R112.S1)

Use at your own risk- GU | 6

 Quantum of Proof required

Prima facie evidence with reasonable

Probable Cause certainty of conviction(Section 3)​
​
When such evidence sufficient to “engender a When the prosecutor is convinced that
well-founded belief” as to the: the entire evidence presented by the
parties is (a)admissible, (b)creditable,
●​ commission of a crime, and and (c ) capable of being preserved and
●​ fact of the commission of a crime, presented to​
●​ And respondent’s probable guilt
thereof. ●​ Establish all the elements of
the crime or offense
●​ As well as the identity of the
person or persons
responsible. (Section 5)

When a prima facie case is established

by the evidence-at-hand, including but
Here, Hearsay evidence is admissible not limited to testimonial evidence,
documentary evidence, and real
evidence; and such evidence, on its own
and if left uncontroverted, shall be
sufficient to establish all the elements
of a crime or offense charges, and
consequently warrant a conviction
beyond reasonable doubt (Section 5)​
​

Inquest Is an informal and summary investigation It is an informal and summary

Proceeding conducted by a public prosecutor in investigation conducted by the ​
criminal cases involving persons arrested Prosecutor, or other officers
(Same definition) allowed by law, in cases involving
and detained without the benefit of a
persons arrested and detained
warrant of arrest issued by the court without the benefit of a warrant of
arrest issued by the court

for the purpose of determining whether for purpose of determining whether

said persons should remain under custody said persons should remain under
and correspondingly be charged in court custody and correspondingly be
charged in court. (Section 12)
(citing Sec. 1, DOJ Circ. No. 61)

Notes on Discussion:​
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION UNDER DOJ NO 15
Salient Features:
1.​ Virtual preliminary investigation- to use online conferences as an alternative means. It's the conduct of
preliminary investigation through video conferencing using the appropriate ICT.
2.​ 6Y+1D: Crimes or offenses covered by new rule are those where the penalty prescribed by law is at
least six years, and one day without regard to fine.
3.​ Quantum of Evidence: has been elevated to prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction
beyond reasonable doubt.
4.​ Motion for Suspension of Proceedings by reason of a Prejudicial question may be allowed, if all the
conditions therefrom and their existing rules are present.
5.​ No Motion for Bail of Particulars shall be filed in lieu of a counter affidavit.
6.​ No Motion or Request for Extension of time shall be allowed except when the interest of justice demands.
●​ Any extension of time granted to submit a responsive pleading on meritorious grounds shall not
extend 10 days. Kung sakali mag-grant yung extension, wag lalapas ng 10 days.
7.​ No motion for inhibition shall be allowed or shall be granted unless based on just valid and compelling
reasons pursuant to prevailing laws, rules, or policies.

Use at your own risk- GU | 7

 8.​ Affidavit of desistance may be allowed only if not prohibited under applicable laws, rules, and existing
policies.
●​ So affidavit of desistance sa fiskalia pa lang, yung complainant magdi-desistance na para eh
dismiss yung [Link] allowed anymore
9.​ The personal appearance of a respondent during preliminary investigation may be dispensed with provided
that his counter affidavit was subscribed and sworn to before any prosecutor or any government official
authorized to administer oath or in their absence a notary public.
●​ The government na-authorized to administer the oath. In their absence, o hindi yung notary public.
However, sa notary public, ano yun yung usually allowed sa judicial [Link] as a general rule,
before the investigating fiscal.
10.​A Motion to Dismiss in lieu of a counter affidavit shall not be allowed except when it is verified by the
respondent and contains his defenses, in which case it shall be treated as a counter affidavit.
○​ A motion to dismiss in lieu of a counter affidavit. Except kung yung kanyang motion is verified by the
respondent at saka mayroong content, mayroong nakasaan doon ang mga defenses niya. So,
allowed na and the fiscal will treat it as a counter affidavit in that condition.
○​ And even there is the process of e-filing and e-service of pleadings, whichever is applicable.
Documents that are e-filed and e-served beyond office hours are then filed and served on the same
day.

CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

refers to the stage where law enforcement officers initiate questioning AFTER a person has
been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of their freedom of action in a significant
way.

●​ It begins when the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an unsolved

crime and focuses on a particular suspect.
○​ when a suspect is taken into custody and subjected to questioning that tends to
elicit incriminating statements.
○​ A Police line-up is NOT part of custodial investigation.
●​ During this stage, the police carry out interrogations aimed at eliciting incriminating
statements.
●​ Any person under custodial investigation must be informed of their rights, including
the right to remain silent and the right to competent and independent counsel, preferably
of their own choice. If the person cannot afford counsel, one must be provided. Any
confession or admission obtained in violation of these rights is inadmissible as evidence.

​
ARRAIGNMENT​
is a formal stage in criminal proceedings where the accused is informed of the charges
against them. Under Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, arraignment is
conducted as follows:

1.​ The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint or information was
filed or assigned for trial.
2.​ The arraignment must be made in open court by the judge or clerk, who:
○​ Furnishes the accused with a copy of the complaint or information.
○​ Reads the charges in a language or dialect known to the accused.
○​ Asks the accused whether they plead guilty or not guilty.
3.​ The accused must be present and personally enter their plea. If the accused refuses
to plead or makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty is entered for them

Jurisprudence emphasizes that arraignment is a critical stage in criminal proceedings, ensuring

the accused's constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation. It is not a mere formality but an indispensable requirement of due process. The
purpose of arraignment is to:

1.​ Notify the accused of the charges against them.

Use at your own risk- GU | 8

 2.​ Apprise them of the potential consequences, such as loss of liberty or life, depending on
the nature of the crime

7. Impeachment of witness
●​ Cross- how to destroy the testimony of a witness
●​ To impeach a witness means to discredit the witness’ testimony. It is a
fundamental right on cross-examination. Since the witness’ credibility is always in
issue, it is never beyond the permissible scope of cross-examination.

A.​ Adverse party’s Witness [Link] contradictory evidence;​

b. By evidence that his/her general reputation

for truth, honesty or integrity is bad;​

c. By evidence that he/she has made at other

times statements inconsistent with his present testimony

But NOT by evidence of particular wrongful acts, ​

EXCEPT that it may be shown by the examination of the
witness, or the record of the judgment, that he/she has
been convicted of an offense. [Sec. 11, Rule 132]

B.​ By evidence of a. By evidence that he/she has been

conviction of the crime convicted by final judgment of a crime:
i. Punishable by a penalty in excess of one year; or
ii. Involving moral turpitude, regardless of penalty

HOWEVER, evidence of conviction is not admissible if the

conviction has been subject of an amnesty or annulment
of the conviction.
[Sec. 12, Rule 132]

C.​ His own Witness GR: Party may not impeach his own witness
EXCEPT with respect to
a. An unwilling or hostile witness; or
b. A witness who is an adverse party OR an
officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is an
adverse party

When witness considered unwilling or hostile

Only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of
his/her
a. adverse interest
b. unjustified reluctance to testify, or
c. having misled the party into calling him/her
to the witness stand

How impeached: The unwilling or hostile witness so

declared, or the witness who is an adverse party, may be
impeached by the party presenting him/her in all respects

Use at your own risk- GU | 9

 as if he/she had been called by the adverse party,
except
by evidence of his bad character.

He/she may also be impeached and cross-examined

by the adverse party, but such cross- examination must
only be on the subject matter of his examination-in-chief.
[Sec. 13, Rule 132]

D.​ Evidence of How the witness is impeached by evidence of

Inconsistent Statements inconsistent statements
a. The statements must be related to him/her, with the
circumstances of the times and places and the persons
present, and
b. He/she must be asked whether he/she made such
statements, and if so, allowed to explain them.
c. If the statements be in writing, they must be shown to the
witness before any question is put to him/her concerning
them [Sec. 14, Rule 132]

8. As the presiding judge, what rights and authority may you exercise in the
course of the trial
As a presiding judge, what rights and authority may/can you exercise in the course of a trial?
• Judges are the master of the proceedings, hence, are better skilled and capable in controlling
the examination of the witnesses which includes the admissibility or inadmissibility of the
evidence on proper grounds. As a manner of respect, utmost courtesy should be given to the
court by accepting court rulings.

9. What ruling will the Judge make if confronted with incidents, motions, during
the trial. If you were the judge, how will you rule?
• As a judge, I must identify the legal and factual issues.

The factual issues will be resolved based on facts and evidence presented by the parties.
The legal issues will be resolved based on the applicable law and jurisprudences of the case.
The resolution of the problem must be based on facts and applicable laws on the case.

10. As the lawyer of the case, what course of action will you take to benefit your
client?

11. As a lawyer, what is the attitude/behavior would you show to the court on​
adverse ruling on your motions?

• When a judge has made a ruling adverse to the objection, the counsel must not seek to
circumvent the effect of that ruling.

Use at your own risk- GU | 10

Judges are the master of the proceedings, hence, are better skilled and capable in controlling
the examination of the witnesses which includes the admissibility or inadmissibility of the
evidence on proper grounds.

As a manner of respect, utmost courtesy should be given to the court by accepting court rulings.

12. Presentation of witnesses and their exclusions

When a witness may be excluded:

• A witness who is not testifying but present in court is not allowed because the witness who is
just there to watch the case and is not in turn to testify may concoct stories with other parties or
change statements.

The rule on exclusion is not applicable when

1.​ the witness is an expert or the witness is the complainant or the accused himself.
2.​ this rule does not apply in civil cases.
The court cannot prevent the accused or the complainant to be present in court because their
presence is important to conduct fair trial.

13. Review codal provisions-

14 Review the lecture

SAMPLEX
8. As a lawyer in a case, how will you rehabilitate your impeached witness?

Answer: To rehabilitate an impeached witness, you may present evidence of the witness's good
character for truthfulness, but only if their character has been attacked. Additionally, you can
clarify or explain the inconsistencies in their testimony during re-direct examination.

Section 14, Rule 132, evidence of a witness's good character is admissible only after their
character has been impeached. Furthermore, Section 13 requires that the witness be given an
opportunity to explain any inconsistent statements.

Rehabilitation aims to restore the credibility of the witness by addressing the grounds of
impeachment, such as inconsistent statements, through proper explanation or by presenting
evidence of their good character for truthfulness.

9. The trial judge has the right to question the witnesses with a view of satisfying
his mind on any material point. Have the parties the right to object to questions
propounded by the judge?

Yes, the parties have the right to object to questions propounded by the trial judge if
they believe such questions are improper or prejudicial. While the trial judge has the
authority to ask clarificatory questions to ascertain the truth and ensure a fair trial, this
authority is not absolute and must be exercised judiciously.

Use at your own risk- GU | 11

Under the Revised Rules on Evidence, objections to questions during the oral
examination of a witness must be made as soon as the grounds for the objection
become reasonably apparent. Rule 132, Section 36, which states: "Objection to a
question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness shall be
made as soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably apparent."

Jurisprudence emphasized that parties are free to manifest their objections to questions
posed by the trial judge

●​ if they believe such questions exceed allowable parameters.

●​ while judges may ask clarificatory questions, this right should be sparingly and
judiciously used to avoid any appearance of partiality.

Thus, while the trial judge has the right to question witnesses, the parties retain the right
to object to such questions if they believe the questions are improper, prejudicial, or
exceed the bounds of judicial discretion.

10. Ordinarily, a lawyer after he has made an objection becomes hesitant to

expressly withdraw the same even after realizing that it may overruled. Is it good
practice to allow the objection to stand and accepts the courts’ adverse ruling
thereon? What is its advantage, if any?

○​ Generally, it is not advisable to withdraw an objection once it has been made,

even if the lawyer anticipates an adverse ruling. Allowing the objection to stand
preserves the issue for appeal. If the objection is withdrawn, the lawyer
effectively waives the right to challenge the admissibility of the evidence later on.
2.​ Advantages of Allowing the Objection to Stand:​

○​ Preservation of the Issue for Appeal: By allowing the objection to stand, the
lawyer ensures that the issue is properly recorded in the trial court's proceedings.
This is crucial because appellate courts generally do not entertain issues that
were not raised during the trial.
○​ Even if the objection is overruled, it may still serve to highlight the lawyer's
vigilance in protecting the client's rights and may influence the court's perception
of the case.
○​ Opportunity to Rebut: If the objection is overruled, the lawyer can prepare to
rebut the evidence or mitigate its impact during cross-examination or argument.
3.​ Relevant Rules and Jurisprudence:​

○​ Under Section 36, Rule 132 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, objections to
evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer is made. If the
objection is overruled, the lawyer may take an exception to the ruling, which is
necessary to preserve the issue for appeal. (Revised Rules on Evidence (1989))
○​ In Lopez v. Valdez, G.R. No. 9113 (1915), the Supreme Court emphasized the
importance of obtaining a ruling on objections during the trial. The Court noted
that a prompt ruling allows the party to take an exception and prepare to meet the
situation presented by the ruling. (Lopez v. Valdez, G.R. No. 9113 (1915))

Rule: Objections must be made immediately, and rulings on objections must be recorded to
preserve the issue for appeal. (Revised Rules on Evidence (1989))

Use at your own risk- GU | 12

Analysis: Allowing the objection to stand ensures that the issue is preserved for appeal.
Withdrawing the objection waives the right to challenge the evidence later. Even if the objection
is overruled, the lawyer can still mitigate the impact of the evidence through other means.

11. Give the instances when the rules on the exclusion of the other witnesses
who are not yet testifying but present in court not applicable?

The rules on the exclusion of witnesses who are not yet testifying but are present in court are
generally applied to ensure that witnesses do not hear the testimony of others, which could
influence their own testimony. However, there are instances when these rules may not be
applicable or are not strictly enforced. Based on the provided search results, the following
instances are relevant:

1.​ Witnesses Not Excluded by the Court: Under Revised Rules on Evidence (1989),
specifically Section 15, the exclusion and separation of witnesses are at the discretion of
the judge. If the judge does not order the exclusion of witnesses, they may remain in the
courtroom.​

2.​ Failure to Request Exclusion: In People of the Philippines v. Palacio, G.R. No.
L-13933 (1960), the Supreme Court ruled that the defense should have requested the
exclusion of witnesses under Section 14, Rule 115 of the Rules of Court. If no such
request is made, the presence of witnesses in the courtroom does not disqualify them
from testifying.​

3.​ Witnesses Not Listed in the Information: In the same case (J4), the Court allowed
witnesses not listed in the information to testify, even if they were present in the
courtroom and heard the testimony of others.​

These instances highlight that the application of the exclusion rule depends on judicial discretion
and procedural compliance.

12. What is preliminary investigation? Give its purpose.

OLD RULE​ NEW RULE​

RULE 112 Rules of Court NPS DOJ No. 15

DEFINITION

Preliminary Preliminary Investigation is a

Investigation Preliminary investigation is ​ summary proceeding
an inquiry or proceeding ​
to determine whether a person
​ indicted in court after ascertaining,
to determine whether there is sufficient based on the evidence provided and
ground to engender a well-founded belief after case build-up has been
that a crime has been committed and the conducted, ​
respondent is probably guilty thereof, and ​
that there is prima facie evidence with

Use at your own risk- GU | 13

 should be held for trial. (R112.S1) reasonable certainty for the
respondent’s conviction and that
he/she should be held for trial.

SCOPE/ When required

4-2-1​ 6y+1D​
Except as provided in section 7 of this Rule, a The conduct of a preliminary
preliminary investigation is required to be investigation proceeding shall be
conducted before the filing of a complaint or required for crimes or offenses where
information for an offense where the penalty the penalty prescribed by law is atleast
prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, six (6) years and one (1) day without
two (2) months and one (1) day without regard to fine (Section 3)
regard to the fine. (R112.S1)

Quantum of Proof required

Prima facie evidence with reasonable

Probable Cause certainty of conviction(Section 3)​
​
When such evidence sufficient to “engender a When the prosecutor is convinced that
well-founded belief” as to the: the entire evidence presented by the
parties is (a)admissible, (b)creditable,
●​ commission of a crime, and and (c ) capable of being preserved and
●​ fact of the commission of a crime, presented to​
●​ And respondent’s probable guilt
thereof. ●​ Establish all the elements of
the crime or offense
●​ As well as the identity of the
person or persons
responsible. (Section 5)

When a prima facie case is established

by the evidence-at-hand, including but
Here, Hearsay evidence is admissible not limited to testimonial evidence,
documentary evidence, and real
evidence; and such evidence, on its own
and if left uncontroverted, shall be
sufficient to establish all the elements
of a crime or offense charges, and
consequently warrant a conviction
beyond reasonable doubt (Section 5)​
​

13. What is arraignment?

ARRAIGNMENT

●​ Acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused​

is a formal stage in criminal proceedings where the accused is informed of the
charges against them. Under Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,
arraignment is conducted as follows:
4.​ JURISDICTION: The accused must be arraigned before the court where the complaint or
information was filed or assigned for trial.

Use at your own risk- GU | 14

 5.​ The arraignment must be made in open court by the judge or clerk, who:
○​ Furnishes the accused with a copy of the complaint or information.
○​ Reads the charges in a language or dialect known to the accused.
○​ PLEA: Asks the accused whether they plead guilty or not guilty.
6.​ The accused must be present and personally enter their plea. If the accused refuses
to plead or makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty is entered for them

Jurisprudence emphasizes that arraignment is a critical stage in criminal proceedings, ensuring

the accused's constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation. It is not a mere formality but an indispensable requirement of due process. The
purpose of arraignment is to:

3.​ Notify the accused of the charges against them.

4.​ Apprise them of the potential consequences, such as loss of liberty or life, depending on
the nature of the crime

14. How do you attack in cross-examination the testimony of an expert witness?

1. Challenge the Expert's Qualifications- Establish whether the expert witness

possesses the necessary qualifications, such as education, training, and experience, to
testify on the subject matter. If the qualifications are insufficient, the credibility of the
testimony can be undermined.

2. Highlight Inconsistencies or Weaknesses in Testimony- Point out contradictions

or inconsistencies in the expert's statements.

3. Test the Basis of the Expert's Opinion- Question the data, methods, or assumptions
used by the expert to form their opinion.

4. Expose Bias or Lack of Impartiality- Probe into the expert's relationship with the
party presenting them, financial interests, or any other factors that may indicate bias.

5. Undermine the Necessity of the Expert Testimony- Argue that the expert's
testimony is not indispensable to the case, if other credible evidence is available

6. Question the Expert's Familiarity with the Case- Determine whether the expert has
sufficient knowledge of the specific facts of the case. If the expert's opinion is based on
incomplete or inaccurate information, it can weaken their testimony.

15. What is "Direct Examination"? What is its other name and its primary
purpose? Are leading questions allowed in direct examination? Give exceptions,
if any.

DEFINITION PURPOSE EFFECT

G.​ Direct Examination-in-chief To establish the Failure to present- not

Examination by of a witness ​ witness’ testimony in offered- deemed
the Proponent ​ support of the excluded or will not
By a party presenting presenting party’s considered by the
him/her on the facts case court in rendering its
(Sec 5, Rule relevant to the issue judgment
132) (Sec. 5, Rule 132)

Use at your own risk- GU | 15

 GR. only Direct
Questions​
EXC: When leading
question is allowed​
​
​
​

16. What attitude should a lawyer have when his objection is overruled?

• When a judge has made a ruling adverse to the objection, the counsel must not seek to
circumvent the effect of that ruling.

Judges are the master of the proceedings, hence, are better skilled and capable in controlling
the examination of the witnesses which includes the admissibility or inadmissibility of the
evidence on proper grounds.

As a manner of respect, utmost courtesy should be given to the court by accepting court rulings.

17. How is the original writing which has been lost or destroyed proved and
becomes admissible?
How do you prove lost or destroyed documents? (Sec. 5, Rule 130)
• When the original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the
offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability is without bad
faith on his part, may prove its contents:
1. By a copy
2. By a recital of its contents in some authentic document
4.​ By the testimony of the witnesses
The order stated must be followed.

18. Give two (2) instances where evidences although irrelevant immaterial or
incompetent may still be admitted by the court?

When is an evidence admissible?

B.​ GR: Evidence is admissible when:

3.​ RELEVANCE- Evidence must have a direct relation to the fact in
issue.(Sec 4, R128)
4.​ COMPETENCE- must NOT be EXCLUDED by the Constitution, Law,
or the Rules on Evidence (Sec 3, R128)

EXC: Where evidence although irrelevant and incompetent may still be admitted by
the court:

Use at your own risk- GU | 16

 1.​ Even if evidence is admissible, its probative value or weight is subject to
judicial evaluation.
2.​ Failure of the party to object upon formal offer, deemed admitted

19. Leading question, is allowed in cross-examination?

Yes. Allowed
10.​ Leading Questions:
A leading question is one that suggests to the witness the answer that the examining party desires.
This type of question is generally not allowed during direct examination, as it may influence the
witness's testimony. However, there are specific exceptions where leading questions are permitted.

Under Section 10, Rule 132 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, leading questions are not allowed
except in the following instances:

When Leading Question is allowed:

3.​ On cross-examination;
4.​ On preliminary matters;
5.​ When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is:
○​ Ignorant,
○​ A child of tender years,
○​ Of feeble mind, or
○​ A deaf-mute;
6.​ Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
7.​ Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of
a public or private corporation, or of a partnership or association which is an
adverse party
11.​ Misleading Questions are not allowed.
They are of two kinds:
1. A question which assumes a fact not yet testified to by a witness or still unproven or by
putting words into the mouth of the witness

2. A question premised on a fact which is contrary to that testified to or proven or those

which distort or do not accurately state the true facts.
●​ This is akin to twisting the words of the witness

20. Expert witness what is the reason for its admission?

How to present an expert witness

7.​ Introduce and qualify the witness;

○​ Establish expertise- thru nature of occupation/practice of profession,
educational attainment,
8.​ Let him give his factual testimony, if he has knowledge of the facts;
9.​ Begin the hypothetical question by asking him to assume certain facts as true;

What are hypothetical questions?​

These questions are designed to present a set of assumed facts to the
expert, allowing them to provide their opinion based on their
expertise. This approach is particularly useful in eliciting expert testimony
because it frames the context in which the expert's specialized knowledge
is applied.

Use at your own risk- GU | 17

 10.​Conclude the question, by first asking the expert if he has an opinion on a
certain point
11.​Assuming that these facts are true and secondly, asking him, after he has
answered affirmatively, to give his opinion on the point;
12.​After he has stated his opinion, ask him to give his reasons.

8. As the presiding judge, what rights and authority may you exercise in the
course of the trial
As a presiding judge, what rights and authority may/can you exercise in the course of a trial?
• Judges are the master of the proceedings, hence, are better skilled and capable in controlling
the examination of the witnesses which includes the admissibility or inadmissibility of the
evidence on proper grounds. As a manner of respect, utmost courtesy should be given to the
court by accepting court rulings.

9. What ruling will the Judge make if confronted with incidents, motions, during
the trial. If you were the judge, how will you rule?
• As a judge, I must identify the legal and factual issues.

The factual issues will be resolved based on facts and evidence presented by the parties.
The legal issues will be resolved based on the applicable law and jurisprudences of the case.
The resolution of the problem must be based on facts and applicable laws on the case.

Use at your own risk- GU | 18