I.

(a) On his way home, a member of the Caloocan City police force witnesses bus robbery in Pasay
City and effects the arrest of the suspect. Can he bring the suspect to Caloocan City for booking since
that is where his station is? Explain briefly. (5%)
(b) In the course of serving a search warrant, the police finds an unlicensed firearm. Can the police
take the forearm even if it is not covered by the search warrant? If the warrant is subsequently
quashed, is the police required to return the forearm? Explain briefly. (5%)
II.
When is bail a matter of right and when is it a matter of discretion? (5%)
III.
Under Republic Act No. 8353, one may be charged with and found guilty of qualified rape if he
knew on or before the commission of the crime that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency
Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible
disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim.
Under Section 17 (a) of Republic Act No. 8504 the court may compel the accused to submit himself
to a blood test where blood samples would be extracted from his veins to determine whether he has
HIV.
(a) Are the rights of the accused to be presumed innocent of the crime charged, to privacy, and
against self-incrimination violated by such compulsory testing? Explain (5%)
(b) If the result of such test shows that he is HIV positive, and the prosecution offers such result in
evidence to prove the qualifying circumstance under the information for qualified rape, should the
court reject such result on the ground that it is the fruit of a poisonous tree? Explain. (5%)
IV.
Rodrigo is charged with possession of unlicensed firearms in an information filed in the Regional
Trial Court. It was alleged therein that Rodrigo was in possession of two unlicensed firearms: a .45
caliber and a .32 caliber.
Under Republic Act No. 8294, possession of an unlicensed .45 caliber gun is punishable by prision
mayor in its minimum period and a fine of P30, 000.00, while possession of an unlicensed .32 caliber
gun is punishable by prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than P15,
000.00.
As counsel of the accused, you intend to file a motion to quash the Information. What ground of
grounds should you invoke? Explain. (4%)
V.
Police operatives of the Western Police District, Philippine Regional Police, applied for a search
warrant in the Regional Trial Court for the search of the house of Antonio Tolyanes and the seizure
of an undetermined amount of shabu. The team arrived at the house of Tolyanes but failed to find
him there. Instead, the team found Harry Roki.
The team conducted a search in the house of Tolyanes in the presence of Harry Roki and barangay
officials and found ten (10) grams of shabu. Harry Roki was charged in court with illegal possession
of ten grams of shabu.
Before his arraignment, Harry Roki filed a motion to quash the search warrant on the following
grounds: (a) he was not the accused named in the search warrant and (b) the warrant does not
describe the article to be seized with sufficient particularity.
Resolve the motion with reasons. (5%)
VI.
For the multiple stab wounds sustained by the victim, Ernesto was charged with frustrated homicide
in the Regional Trial Court. Upon arraignment, he entered a plea of guilty to the said crime. Neither
the court nor the prosecution was aware that the victim had died two days earlier on account of his
stab wounds.
Because of his guilty plea, Ernesto was convicted of frustrated homicide and meted the
corresponding penalty. When the prosecution learned of the victim’s death, it filed within fifteen (15)
days therefrom a motion to amend the Information to upgrade the charge from frustrated homicide to
consummated homicide. Ernesto opposed the motion claiming that the admission of the amended
Information would place him in double jeopardy.
Resolve the motion with reasons. (4%)
VII.
Lucas Cabrera swindled Oscar Hidalgo in the amount of P10, 000.00 sometime in mid-2017. On the
strength of the sworn statement given by Oscar Hidalgo personally to SPO1 Cardo Dalisay sometime
in mid-2018, and without securing a warrant, the police officer arrested Lucas Cabrera. Forthwith,
the police officer filed with the City Prosecutor of Dipolog a complaint for estafa supported by
Oscar’s sworn statement and other documentary evidence. After due inquest, the prosecutor filed the
requisite information with the Regional Trial Court. No preliminary investigation was conducted
either before or after the filing of the information and the accused at no time asked for such an
investigation. However, before arraignment, the accused moved to quash the information on the
ground that the prosecutor suffered from a want of authority to file the information because of his
failure to conduct a preliminary investigation before filing the information, as required by the Rules
of Court.
Is the warrantless arrest of Lucas valid? Is he entitled to a preliminary investigation before the filing
if the information? Explain. (5%)
VIII.
At the scene of a heinous crime, police recovered a man’s shorts with blood stains and strands of
hair. Shortly afterwards, a warrant was issued and police arrested suspect, Valdimore. During his
detention, a medical technician extracted blood sample from his finger and cut a strand from his hair,
despite Valdimore’s objection.
During Valdimore’s trial for rape with murder, the prosecution sought to introduce DNA evidence
against Valdimore, based on forensic laboratory matching of the materials found at the crime scene
and Valdimore’s hair and blood samples. Valdimore’s counsel objected, claiming that DNA evidence
is inadmissible because the materials taken from Valdimore were in violation of his constitutional
right against self-incrimination as well as his right of privacy and personal integrity.
Should the DNA evidence be admitted or not? Relate this to our topic on Rights of Accused under
Rule 115. Reason briefly. (5%)
IX.
At the police insvestigation room, Daisy and Precious orally waived their right to counsel and to
remain silent. Then under oath, they freely answered questions asked by the police desk officer.
Thereafter they signed their sworn statements before the police captain, a lawyer. Daisy admitted her
part in the robbery, her possession of a pistol and her ownership of the packet of shabu found in her
pocket. Precious admitted her role in the robbery and her possession of a dagger. But they denied
being NPA hit women. In due course proper charges were filed by the City prosecutor against both
arrestees before the Regional Trial Court.
May the written statements signed and sworn to by Daisy and Precious be admitted by the trial court
as evidence for the prosecution? Reason. (5%)
X.
Before the arraignment for the crime of murder, the private complainant executed an Affidavit of
Desistance stating that she was not sure if the accused was the man who killed her husband. The
public prosecutor filed a Motion to Quash the information on the ground that with private
complainant’s desistance, he did not have evidence sufficient to convict the accused. On September
16, 2018, the court without further proceedings granted the motion and provisionally dismissed the
case. The accused gave his express consent to the provisional dismissal of the case. The offended
party was notified of the dismissal but she refused to give her consent.
Subsequently, the private complainant urged the public prosecutor to refile the murder charge
because the accused failed to pay the consideration which he had promised for the execution of the
Affidavit of Desistance. The public prosecutor obliged and refiled the murder charge against the
accused on September 18, 2018. The accused filed a Motion to Quash the Information on the ground
that the provisional dismissal of the case had already become permanent.
Was the provisional dismissal of the case proper? (3%)
Resolve the Motion to Quash. (3%)
XI.
After the requisite proceedings, the Provincial Prosecutor filed an Information for homicide against
Carlitos. The latter, however, timely filed a Petition for Review of the Resolution of the Provincial
Prosecutor with the Secretary of Justice who, in due time, issued a Resolution reversing the
resolution of the Provincial Prosecutor and directing him to withdraw the Information.
Before the Provincial Prosecutor could comply with the directive of the Secretary of Justice, the
court issued a warrant of arrest against Carlitos.
The Public Prosecutor filed a Motion to Quash the Warrant of Arrest and to Withdraw the
Information, attaching to it the Resolution of the Secretary of Justice. The court denied the motion.
Was there a legal basis for the court to deny the motion? (3%)
If you were the counsel for the accused, what remedies, if any, would you pursue? (3%)
XII.
Hubert and Franco were charged with homicide in one Information. Before they could be arraigned,
the prosecution moved to amend the Information to exclude Franco therefrom. Can the court grant
the motion to amend? Why? (2%)
On the facts above stated, suppose the prosecution, instead of filing a motion to amend, moved to
withdraw the Information altogether and its motion was granted. Can the prosecution re-file the
Information although this time for murder? Explain. (3%)
If an Information was filed in the RTC-Manila charging Hubert with homicide and he was arrested in
Quezon City, in what court or courts may he apply for bail? Explain. (3%)
Hubert was charged with theft of an article worth P15, 000.00. Upon being arraigned, he pleaded not
guilty to the offense charged. Thereafter, before trial commenced, he asked the court to allow him to
change his plea of not guilty to a plea of guilty but only to estafa involving P5, 000.00. Can the court
allow Hubert to change his plea? Why? (2%)
XIII.
Alfonso was charged with slight physical injuries in the MTC. He pleaded not guilty and went to
trial. After the prosecution had presented its evidence, the trial court set the continuation of the
hearing on another date. On the date scheduled for hearing, the prosecutor failed to appear,
whereupon the court, on motion of Alfonso, dismissed the case. A few minutes later, the prosecutor
arrived and opposed the dismissal of the case. The court reconsidered its order and directed Alfonso
to present his evidence. Before the next date of trial came, however, Alfonso moved that the last
order be set aside on the ground that the reinstatement of the case had placed him twice in jeopardy.
Acceding to this motion, the court again dismissed the case. The prosecutor then filed an Information
in the RTC charging Alfonso with direct assault based on the same facts alleged in the Information
for slight physical injuries but with the added allegation that Alfonso inflicted the injuries out of the
resentment for what the complainant had done in the performance of his duties as chairman of the
board of election inspectors. Alfonso moved to quash the second Information on the ground that its
filing had placed him in double jeopardy, How should Alfonso’s motion to quash be resolved? (4%)
In a prosecution for robbery against Bobby, the prosecutor moved for the postponement of the first
scheduled hearing on the ground that he had lost his records of the case. The court granted the motion
but, when the new date of trial arrived, the prosecutor, alleging that he could not locate his witnesses,
moved for the provisional dismissal of the case. If Bobby’s counsel does not object, may the court
grant the motion of the prosecutor? Why? (3%)
Lito was charged with murder, a capital offense. After arraignment, he applied for bail. The trial
court ordered the prosecution to present its evidence in full on the ground that only on the basis of
such presentation could it determine whether the evidence of Lito’s guilt was strong for purposes of
bail. Is the ruling correct? Why? (3%)
XIV.
Acting on a tip by an informant, police officers stopped a car being driven by Donald and ordered
him to open the trunk. The officers found a bag containing several kilos of cocaine. They seized the
car and the cocaine as evidence and placed Donald under arrest. Without advising him of his right to
remain silent and to have the assistance of an attorney, they questioned him regarding the cocaine. In
reply, Donald said, “I don’t know anything about it. It isn’t even my car.” Donald was charged with
illegal possession of cocaine, a prohibited drug. Upon motion of Donald, the court suppressed the use
of cocaine as evidence and dismissed the charges against him. Donald commenced proceedings
against the police for the recovery of his car. In his direct examination, Donald testified that he
owned the car but had registered in the name of a friend for convenience. On cross examination, the
attorney representing the police asked, “After your arrest, did you not tell the arresting officers that it
wasn’t your car?” If you were Donald’s attorney, would you object to the question? Why? (5%)
XV.
Delia sued Victor for personal injuries which she allegedly sustained when she was struck by a car
driven by Victor. May the court receive in evidence, over proper and timely objection by Delia, a
certified true copy of a judgment of acquittal in a criminal prosecution charging Victor with hit-and-
run driving in connection with Delia’s injuries? Why? (5%)
XVI.
Define the following terms:
Preliminary Investigation (2%)
Arrest (2%)
Bail (2%)
Arraignment (2%)
Motion to Quash (2%)
XVII.
Distinguish one from the other:
Criminal Procedure from Criminal Law (2%)
Complaint from Information (2%)
Preliminary Investigation from Inquest (2%)
Motion to Quash from Motion to Dismiss (2%)
Amendment from Substitution (2%)
XVIII.
Enumeration:
What are the elements of a Prejudicial Question? (5%)
Give the contents of a sufficient and valid Information. (5%)
Give the instances of a lawful warrantless arrest. (5%)
What are the conditions of all kinds of bail? (5%)
What are the grounds for Motion to Quash? (5%)
XIX.
When is bail a matter of right? Explain. (5%)
When is bail discretionary on the part of the court? Explain. (5%)
XX.
Explain the implications/effect of a plea of guilty to a lesser offense. (4%)
When is the proper time for withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty? (3%)
Explain the concept of “prison grey”. (3%)