Republic of the Philippines

Bulacan State University   

City of Malolos, Bulacan

COLLEGE OF LAW

FINAL EXAMINATION
REMEDIAL LAW II
August 12, 2021, 6:00PM to 9:00 PM
(2ND Semester, 2021-2022)
Dr. Gideon D.V. Mortel
 

INSTRUCTIONS

THIS FINAL EXAMINATION CONSISTS OF FOUR (4) PAGES. READ EACH QUESTION
VERY CAREFULLY. ANSWER LEGIBLY, CLEARLY, AND CONCISELY. DO NOT
REPEAT THE QUESTION. A MERE "YES" OR "NO" ANSWER WITHOUT ANY
CORRESPONDING DISCUSSION WILL NOT BE GIVEN ANY CREDIT. YOUR
ANSWERS SHOULD DEMONSTRATE YOUR ABILITY TO ANALYZE THE FACTS,
APPLY THE PERTINENT LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE, AND ARRIVE AT SOUND
AND LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS. THE ANSWER SHALL BE SENT TO ME AT: 18 C.A.
Raymond St., BFRV, Las Pinas City.

GOOD LUCK!

1. You are the defense counsel of Angela Bituin who has been charged under RA 3019
(Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) before the Sandiganbayan. While Angela has
posted bail, she has yet to be arraigned. Angela revealed to you that she has not been
investigated for any offense and that it was only when police officers showed up at her
residence with a warrant of arrest that she learned of the pending case against her. She
wonders why she has been charged before the Sandiganbayan when she is not in
government service.

A. What “before-trial” remedy would you invoke in Angela’s behalf to address the
fact that she had not been investigated at all, and how would you avail of this
remedy? (5%)

I will invoke Angela’s right to a preliminary investigation by filing a motion to

remand the case to the investigating prosecutor for the conduct of a preliminary
investigation. Under the Rules of Court, if preliminary investigation is not conducted, it
should be invoked by the accused before he/she makes a plea otherwise such right is
deemed waived.

I will likewise study the information and file a motion to quash if there is no
allegation that Angela acted as a co-principal, an accomplice, or an accessory to an
office-related crime committed by a public official.

2. X was arrested, en flagrante, for robbing a bank. After an investigation, he was brought
before the office of the prosecutor for inquest, but unfortunately no inquest prosecutor
was available.
 A. May the bank directly file the complaint with the proper court? Explain. (5%)

Yes, the bank may directly file the complaint with the proper court. Under the
Rules of Criminal Procedure, in case of an inquest after a warrantless arrest and
there is absence or unavailability of the inquest prosecutor, the complaint may be
filed by the offended party directly with the proper court.

B. If in the affirmative, what document or evidence should be filed? (5%)

The document that should be filed is the affidavit of the offended party or the
arresting officer or person.

3. On his way to the PNP Academy in Silang, Cavite on board a public transport bus as a
passenger, Police Inspector Masigasig of the Valenzuela Police witnessed an on-going
armed robbery while the bus was traversing Makati. His alertness and training enabled
him to foil the robbery and to subdue the malefactor. He disarmed the felon and while
frisking him, discovered another handgun tucked in his waist. He seized both handguns
and the malefactor was later charged with the separate crimes of robbery and illegal
possession of firearm.

A. Where should Police Inspector Masigasig bring the felon for criminal processing? To
Silang, Cavite where he is bound; to Makati where the bus actually was when the
felonies took place; or back to Valenzuela where he is stationed? (5%)

Police Inspector Masigasig should bring the felon to Makati for criminal
processing.

Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, in case of a warrantless arrest, the person
arrested shall forthwith be delivered to the nearest police station or jail. Hence,
Police Inspector Masigasig should bring the felon to the nearest police station or
jail which is in Makati for criminal processing.

B. Which court has jurisdiction over the criminal cases? Should the felon execute
affidavit in the police station, will it be allowed to be presented as evidence in the
hearing? Explain. (5%)

The court which has jurisdiction over the criminal cases is the court of any place
where the vehicle or bus passed including the place of departure and arrival.

The penalty for armed robbery and illegal possession of firearms exceed 6 years
of imprisonment and the bus passed through Makati and arrived in Silang, Cavite.
Hence, the RTC of either Makati or Silang would have jurisdiction over the
criminal cases.

If the felon executes an affidavit in the police station, it will be allowed to be

presented as evidence during the hearing only if he is accompanied by a lawyer when
he was executing the same.
4. A was charged with a non-bailable offense. At the time when the warrant of arrest was
issued, he was confined in the hospital and could not obtain a valid clearance to leave the
hospital. He filed a petition for bail saying therein that he be considered as having placed
himself under the jurisdiction of the court.

A. May the court entertain his petition? Why or why not? (5%)

5. A was charged before the Sandiganbayan with a crime of plunder, a non-bailable offense,
where the court had already issued a warrant for his arrest. Without A being arrested, his
lawyer filed a Motion to Quash Arrest Warrant and to Fix Bail, arguing that the
allegations in the information did not charge the crime of plunder but a crime of
malversation, a bailable offense. The court denied the motion on the ground that it had
not yet acquired jurisdiction over the person of the accused and that the accused should
be under the custody of the court since the crime charged was non-bailable. The
accused’s lawyer counter- argued that the court can rule on the motion even if the
accused was at-large because it had jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case.
According to said lawyer, there was no need for the accused to be under the custody of
the court because what was filed was a Motion to Quash Arrest and to Fix Bail, not a
Petition for Bail.

A. If you are the Sandiganbayan, how will you rule on the motion? (5%)

B. If the Sandiganbayan denies the motion, what judicial remedy should the accused
undertake? (5%)

6. In one other case, an indigent mother seeks assistance for her 14-year old son who has
been arrested and detained for malicious mischief. Would an application for bail be the
appropriate remedy or is there another remedy available? Justify your chosen remedy and
outline the appropriate steps to take. (5%)

An application for bail

7. A was charged with murder in the lower court. His Petition for Bail was denied after a
summary hearing on the ground that the prosecution had established a strong evidence of
guilt. No Motion for Reconsideration was filed from the denial of the Petition for Bail.
During the reception of the evidence of the accused, the accused reiterated his petition for
bail on the ground that the witnesses so far presented by the accused had shown that no
qualifying aggravating circumstance attended the killing. The court denied the petition on
the grounds that it had already ruled that: (i) the evidence of guilt is strong; (ii) the
resolution for the Petition for Bail is solely based on the evidence presented by the
prosecution; and (iii) no Motion for Reconsideration was filed from the denial of the
Petition for Bail.

A. If you are the Judge, how will you resolve the incident? (5%)

B. Suppose the accused is convicted of the crime of homicide and the accused filed a
Notice of Appeal, is he entitled to bail? (5%)

8. Maria was accused of libel. While Maria was on the witness stand, the prosecution asked
her to write her name and to sign on a piece of paper, apparently to prove that she
authored the libelous material. Maria objected as writing and signing her name would
violate her right against self-incrimination.
 A. Was Maria’s objection proper? (5%)

B. If the prosecutor opposed the objection by raising that it should be denied as the
witness can be cross examined just like any other witness and her sample signature
may be taken to verify her alleged authorship of the libelous statements, would it be
appropriate for the Court to deny the objection of Maria? Explain. (5%)

9. The Ombudsman, after conducting the requisite preliminary investigation, found

probable cause to charge Gov. Matigas in conspiracy with Carpintero, a private
individual, for violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act, as amended). Before the information could be filed with the
Sandiganbayan, Gov. Matigas was killed in an ambush. This, notwithstanding, an
information was filed against Gov. Matigas and Carpintero. At the Sandiganbayan,
Carpintero through counsel, filed a Motion to Quash the Information, on the ground of
lack of jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, arguing that with the death of Gov. Matigas,
there is no public officer charged in the information.

A. Is the motion to quash legally tenable? (5%)

10. At the Public Attorney's Office station in Taguig where you are assigned, your work
requires you to act as public defender at the local Regional Trial Court and to handle
cases involving indigents.

A. In one criminal action for qualified theft where you are the defense attorney, you
learned that the woman accused has been in detention for six months, yet she has not
been to a courtroom nor seen a judge. What remedy would you undertake to address
the situation and what forum would you use to invoke this relief? (5%)

11. P failed to appear at the promulgation of judgment without justifiable cause. The
judgment convicted P for slight physical injuries. Judgment may therefore be
promulgated in this manner:

a) By the reading of the judgment in the presence of only the judge.

b) By the clerk of court in the presence of P's counsel.

c) By the clerk of court in the presence of a representative of P.

d) By entering the judgment into the criminal docket of the court.

A. Which of the foregoing is the correct answer? (2.5%)

B. Would your answer be the same should the case falls on the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan. Explain. (2.5%)

12. Ludong, Balatong, and Labong were charged with murder. After trial, the court
announced that the case was considered submitted for decision. Subsequently, the Clerk
of Court issued the notices of promulgation of judgment which were duly received. On
promulgation day, Ludong and his lawyer appeared. The lawyers of Balatong and Labong
appeared but without their clients and failed to satisfactorily explain their absence when
queried by the court. Thus, the judge ordered the Clerk of Court to proceed with the
reading of the judgment convicting all the accused. With respect to Balatong and Labong,
the judge ordered that the judgment be entered in the criminal docket and copies be
 furnished their lawyers. The lawyers of Ludong, Balatong, and Labong filed within the
reglementary period a Joint Motion for Reconsideration. The court favorably granted the
motion of Ludong downgrading his conviction from murder to homicide but denied the
motion as regards Balatong and Labong.

A. Was the court correct in taking cognizance of the Joint Motion for
Reconsideration? (2.5%)

B. Can Balatong and Labong appeal their conviction in case Ludong accepts his
conviction for homicide? (2.5%)

13. Accused was charged with the crime of robbery with homicide. No eye witness was
presented at the trial but only circumstantial evidence was presented one of which was
the victim’s bloodstained pair of short pants recovered from the accused. Likewise, an
object belonging to the victim was also found in the house of the accused. On the basis of
those evidence, accused was convicted. Is the conviction proper? Why? (5%)

14. For the purpose of presenting document as evidence, what are the kinds of documents?
(5%)

15. X was beaten up by Y to death, but before he died, he was brought by his grandmother to
the hospital, limp and bloodied. The grandmother had a hysterical outburst at the
emergency room that Y was the one who beat X. What is the evidentiary value of such
outburst, if there be any? (5%)