Write the word "True" if the statement is true or "False" if the statement is false.

Each question is worth

three (3) points.

1 Vanessa was charged before the RTC of Puerto Princesa City with cyberlibel as defined and
penalized under Section 4(c)(4) of R.A. No. 10175 for maligning Maggi. An Information was filed
against her without the benefit of a preliminary investigation, thus, when she was asked for her
plea during arraignment, she refused to plead and moved for a preliminary investigation. The trial
court denied the motion and entered a "not guilty" plea for Vanessa. It then required the
prosecution to present evidence against Vanessa and the prosecution completed the presentation
of evidence. Vanessa refused to present evidence and the trial court submitted the case for
decision. In the meantime, the Court of Appeals resolved the Petition for Certiorari filed by
Vanessa and reversed the ruling of the trial court ordering the dismissal of the case against
Vanessa. The Court of Appeals was correct.

2. Olegna organized a chess tournament at the barangay hall of Barangay Maypulot with a top
prize of P100,000.00 and consolation prize for the last placer of P10,000.00. Enticed by the juicy
prizes and the promotion of the tournament, the entire barangay began to play chess. On the first
day of the registration of participants, about Five Thousand chess players came to the barangay
hall and milled around it waiting for the opening of the gate. At the set time, the gate opened and
the chess players rushed in. Because of the narrow opening, some of them were pushed to the
columns of the gate causing them to bump their heads with such force that they fell to the ground
unconscious and then got stomped on by the rushing mass. About sixty nine (69) players suffered
serious injuries with cracked skull and ribs. With the barangay election looming on the horizon
and thinking of getting political mileage, the incumbent barangay chairman ordered the barangay
police and tanods to get the sworn statements of the injured players, which the latter did. The
barangay chairman then sent these sworn statements with an endorsement letter to the Office of
the City Prosecution for preliminary investigation. Olegna sought the dismissal of the charges
against him contending that no formal complaint had been filed by any of the injured players or
any government agency authorized to file a complaint for preliminary investigation. Olegna is
correct.

3. Olegna organized a chess tournament at the barangay hall of Barangay Maypulot with a top
prize of P100,000.00 and consolation prize for the last placer of P10,000.00. Enticed by the juicy
prizes and the promotion of the tournament, the entire barangay began to play chess. On the first
day of the registration of participants, about Five Thousand chess players came to the barangay
hall and milled around it waiting for the opening of the gate. At the set time, the gate opened and
the chess players rushed in. Because of the narrow opening, some of them were pushed to the
columns of the gate and bumped their heads with such force that they fell unconscious to the
ground and got stomped on by the rushing mass. About sixty nine (69) players suffered serious
injuries with cracked skull and ribs. With the barangay election looming on the horizon and
thinking of getting political mileage, the incumbent barangay chairman ordered the barangay
police and tanods to get the sworn statements of the injured players, which the latter did. The
barangay chairman then sent these sworn statements with an endorsement letter to the Office of
the City Prosecution for preliminary investigation and furnished Olegna who was his bitter rival to
Tatiana during their teen years. Upon receiving the documents, Olegna immediately filed his
Counter-Affidavit. The Office of the City Prosecution then issued a Resolution and filed an
Information for Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Multiple Physical Injuries against
Olegna. Olegna was arraigned and then the trial ensued. In the meantime, Olegna entered law
school in 2023 and during the mid-term of the second semester when he took up Criminal
Procedure, he moved for a reinvestigation. The court denied the motion on the ground that a
regular preliminary investigation had been actually conducted and under the Revised Guidelines
for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases, such motion is prohibited. Olegna is correct.

4. While traveling on the road from Puerto Princesa City to Brooke's Point Palawan , Rob
sideswiped a taho vendor approaching the area of the Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm. Fearful of
being charged in court, he hastily left the taho vendor whose only apparent damage was some
bruises and the loss of his merchandise laid strewn all over that part of the road. Unknown to
Rob, a resident at the area, Liezl, was nearby and she heard the loud thud created by the Ferrari
of Rob hitting the taho metal containers and, a few seconds later, the smooth resonant sound of
a V8 engine of a car leaving the area. She rushed to the source of the sound and found the taho
vendor still sitting on the side of the road. After thirty (30) minutes a police car of the City Police
arrived and interviewed the taho vendor and Liezl. The police car, a Bugatti La Voiture Noire with
16 cylinders, gave chase. At Sofronio Espanola, Palawan, the police officers caught up with Rob
and arrested him. The warrantless arrest was valid.

5. While traveling on the road from Brooke's Point, Palawan to Puerto Princesa City, Rob
sideswiped a taho vendor approaching the area of the Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm. Fearful of
being charged in court, he hastily left the taho vendor whose only apparent damage was some
bruises and the loss of his merchandise laid strewn all over that part of the road. Unknown to
Rob, a resident at the area, Liezl, was nearby and she heard the loud thud created by the Ferrari
of Rob hitting the taho metal containers and, a few seconds later, the smooth resonant sound of
a V8 engine of a car leaving the area. She rushed to the source of the sound and found the taho
vendor still sitting on the side of the road. After thirty (30) minutes a police car of the City Police
arrived and interviewed the taho vendor and Liezl. The police car, a Bugatti La Voiture Noire with
16 cylinders, gave chase. At Cloud Coffee, the police officers saw the parked Ferrari of
Rob. They approached Rob and inquired whether or not he got involved in a road mishap. Rob
protested vehemently in a loud voice, even waving his hands and arms to deny the incident. In
so doing, he caused his short jacket to be raised a little bit revealing the butt of a 9mm pistol
tucked in his waist. The police officers confiscated the firearm and asked for Rob's permit to carry
the firearm. For failure to show a permit to carry the firearm, the police officers arrested Rob
without a warrant for illegal possession of firearm . The warrantless arrest was justified under
paragraph (b) Section 5 of Rule 113.

6. On May 1, 2023 at 3:00 a.m., Rob while traveling in a Lamborghini from Brooke's Point,
Palawan to Puerto Princesa City stopped by the Cloud Coffee. He met at the parking lot his friend
Matthew. Rob handed Matthew something and then they both entered the coffee shop to buy
some coffee. It so happened that police officers were inside the coffee shop taking coffee and
they saw Rob hand over something to Matthew. They approached Rob and Matthew and inquired
what was given by Rob to Matthew. Rob and Matthew refused to answer. Receiving no answer,
the police officers arrested Rob and Matthew for Violation of R.A. No. 9165 and then proceeded
to search their persons. They found in Matthew's possession a sachet of shabu and in Rob's
possession three (3) sachets of shabu. Rob asked for a preliminary investigation and posted
bail. Subsequently, an Information for Violation of Section 11 Article II of R.A. No. 9165 was filed
against both of them. Rob and Matthew got arraigned and the trial commenced. The prosecution
during the hearing of the case tried to introduce the three (3) sachets of shabu as evidence against
Rob. Rob objected to their admissibility but the prosecution argued that Rob already waived the
inadmissibility thereof by not questioning his warrantless arrest and by posting bail. The
prosecution was correct.

7. When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of the civil liability shall be
deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party waives the civil action,
reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action
and the said civil action is not necessarily that arising from the offense charged

8. Lilian agreed with Conrado for the construction of her house in the amount of P10M. Conrado
subcontracted the construction of the house to Sofronio for the amount of P5M. Sofronio was not
able to finish construction of the house. She demanded from Conrado the return of the portion
of the P10M corresponding to the unfinished portion of the house. When Conrado failed in this,
she filed a criminal action for estafa against Conrado with RTC Branch 1. The said court
dismissed the criminal action and the civil aspect thereof. She filed an appeal to the Court of
Appeals on the civil aspect. Lilian also filed a Complaint for Specific Performance against
Conrado and Sofronio with RTC Branch 2. Conrado moved to dismiss the civil case and the
appeal on the ground that these involved the same issue, i.e. the civil liability. RTC Branch 2
dismissed the Complaint. The CA likewise dismissed the appeal on the civil aspect of the criminal
case for estafa. The dismissals were correct.

9. Marciana, after fulfilling her obligation of paying to Corporation XXX, a subdivision developer,
the consideration for a 500 square meter lot in XAX Subdivision and failure of the said subdivision
developer to deliver the certificate of title over the lot, filed an action for Specific Performance with
the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB). The defense of XXX Corporation was
that the agent who transacted with Marciana was no longer authorized to act in its behalf. One
day after, she filed a criminal action for estafa against the members of the Board of Directors of
the XXX Corporation with the Office of the City Prosecution of Puerto Princesa. The members of
the Board of Directors of XXX Corporation filed a Motion to Suspend Proceedings in the Office of
the City Prosecution on the ground that the issue of the legitimacy of the acts of the agent of XXX
Corporation when the transaction occurred would determine their guilt. Marciana countered that
the case in the HLURB was not a civil case required in a prejudicial question. Marciana was
correct.
10. Emmanuel at the age of 16 married his teacher in History in high school, Mercedes, in 2020
at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2023, Emmanuel met in college Teresa and they got
married. When Mercedes came to know about this, she filed a criminal action for bigamy.
Emmanuel interposed the defense of the nullity of the first and second marriage. The trial court
convicted Emmanuel. On appeal to the Court of Appeals, the trial court's ruling was affirmed
explaining that a judicial declaration of nullity of the prior marriage to Mercedes should have been
obtained before Emmanuel contracted the second marriage to Teresa. The Court of Appeals was
correct.

11. An Information is filed against Baldomero for the felony of espionage in that he allegedly
entered Basa Air Base for the purpose of obtaining information on the F-22 fighter jets of the
government. The Air Base Commander who has filed the criminal action reserves the right to file
a separate civil action before the presentation of evidence of the prosecution. The reservation is
correct.

12. While a preliminary investigation differs from an inquest in that the latter is a summary
proceeding while the former is not, they are similar in that their purpose is to determine whether
or not the person detained should remain under custody and then charged in court.

13. Marco Polo was arrested without a Warrant of Arrest on May 1, 2023 in a buy-bust operation
under R.A. No. 9165. He signed a Waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal
Code, as amended, in the presence of a Public Attorney of the PAO and requested fro the conduct
of preliminary investigation. On May 17, 2023 without being charged in court through an
Information, Marco Polo filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus with the RTC. The RTC denied the
petition. The RTC was correct.

14. Marco Polo was arrested without a Warrant of Arrest on May 1, 2023 in a buy-bust operation
under R.A. No. 9165. During the inquest, the investigating prosecutor in a Resolution dismissed
the case against Marco Polo but due to the automatic review by the Secretary of Justice of a
resolutions pertaining to R.A. No. 9165, the release of Marco Polo was not included in the
Resolution. The investigating prosecutor was correct.

15. Though the Secretary of Justice does not exercise quasi-judicial functions, he may be the
subject of a Petition for Certiorari in the same way that he may be the subject of a Petition for
Prohibition though he does not exercise ministerial functions.

16. Enrique, Paul and Jose Bayani are charged with having conspired to commit the crime of
cyberlibel as defined and penalized in Section 4(c)(4) of R.A. No. 10175 by posting in their
respective FB accounts that Catriona is the girlfriend of Angelo, a happily married man. During
the preliminary investigation, Paul and Jose Bayani file their Counter-Affidavits while Enrique
seeks an extension and requests for copies of the Counter-Affidavits of Paul and Jose
Bayani. The investigating prosecutor denies the request. The investigating prosecutor is correct.

17. A bomb exploded at the Musical Concert of a famous rapper !FALL resulting in the death of
the said rapper. Andrew, Boniface, and Crispulo were immediately arrested without warrant who
upon the ensuing search were found in possession of a detailed map of the venue and photos of
rapper !FALL. Andrew executed a sworn statement stating that the photos and the map were
provided by F and that F ordered him to plant the bomb near rapper !FALL. Boniface executed a
sworn statement stating that he received money from F for the purchase of the materials for the
assembly of the bomb. Thus, F was charged in the Office of the City Prosecutor. In a Resolution
approved by the City Prosecutor, the investigating prosecutor found probable cause against F
and recommended the filing of an Information against him. On appeal, the Secretary of Justice
affirmed the finding of probable cause against F ruling that probable cause requires less proof
than necessary for conviction. F filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals contending
that the confessions of Andrew and Boniface could not be the bases for determination of probable
cause against him on account of the principle of res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet. The
Secretary of Justice was wrong in finding probable cause against F based on the sworn
statements of Andrew and Boniface.

18. Criminal procedure refers to the network of laws and rules which governs the procedural
administration of justice while criminal law refers to the definition of offenses, the penalties
applicable for such offenses and the general principles of liability.

19. For a court to acquire jurisdiction over a particular criminal action, it must have jurisdiction
over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the territory and jurisdiction over the person of the
accused. In all cases, the absence of or irregularity in either one of these will render any judgment
in the criminal action void and invalid.

20. A was charged with the felony of Falsification of Public Document under Article 172 paragraph
1 in relation to Article 171 paragraph 6 of the Revised Penal Code before the Regional Trial Court
of Puerto Princesa City. A did not present evidence in his defense. The RTC rendered a Decision
convicting A. On appeal, A raised the issue of jurisdiction. The appeal of A will be granted.

21. B was charged on May 20, 2023 in the RTC of Puerto Princesa City with the felony of theft of
a cellphone in the amount of P20,000.00 he had committed on January 1, 2017. B moved for the
dismissal of the case for lack of jurisdiction under the provisions of R.A. No. 10951 that was
enacted on August 29, 2017. The prosecution opposed the motion because under the Revised
Penal Code in effect at the time of the commission of the felony, the prescribed penalty
was prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods. The RTC denied the motion. The RTC
was correct.
22. In 2020, Judge A promulgated the Decision in a criminal case of Judge P after the retirement
of the latter. Judge P heard and tried the case against V and imposed a light
sentence. Unsatisfied, V appealed to the Court of Appeals but it was dismissed and, worse, the
Court of Appeals filed a heavier penalty. V went up to the Supreme Court arguing that the
sentence rendered by Judge P was null and void on the ground that he already retired prior to the
promulgation of the Decision. V is correct.

23. C and D were charged with murder in the Office of the Provincial Prosecution. D filed her
Counter-affidavit. C did not participate in the preliminary investigation and hid in Timbuktu. The
Office of the Provincial Prosecution filed an Information against C and D with the RTC of Coron
which issued Warrants of Arrest against both of C and D. C filed a motion for judicial
determination of probable cause with a request to defer the enforcement of the Warrant of Arrest
against her. Denied. She filed a Motion for Reconsideration which the RTC of Coron treated as
a Motion to Dismiss for lack of probable cause. The RTC of Coron granted the motion and
dismissed the case against C. The prosecution filed a Motion for Reconsideration alleging that C
had no personality to seek any relief from the RTC of Coron. The RTC of Coron denied the motion
ruling that by filing different pleadings, C submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the court. The
RTC of Coron was wrong.

24. C and D were invited to the police station in connection with the death of X. Only D went to
the police station where he was promptly detained. An Information was filed against C and D. D
was acquitted on reasonable ground. C was later arrested and he executed an affidavit pointing
out E as the perpetrator of the death of X. Hence a criminal complaint was filed against E with
the Office of the Prosecutor which filed an Information against E. The judge issued a Warrant of
Arrest against E. E filed a Motion to Quash the Warrant of Arrest. Even though meritorious, the
judge denied the motion on the ground that the court did not acquire jurisdiction over the person
of E. The judge was wrong.

25. It is not always the case that the Municipal Trial Courts have jurisdiction over offenses with a
prescribed penalty of imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years.

26. The prosecution for violations of B.P. Bilang 22 is governed by the Rules on Summary
Procedure in criminal cases.

27. V, the Vice Mayor of the Municipality of Sampol with a salary grade (SG) of 26 is charged with
violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 in the Sandiganbayan. V moves for the dismissal of the
case for lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged arguing that the Sandiganbayan exercises
jurisdiction over cases involving offenses committed by officials of the local government units only
if such officials occupy positions with SG 27 or higher. V is correct.
28. R is the student regent in the Board of Regents of the Palawan State University. She is
charged with estafa under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code in the
Sandiganbayan. She files a Motion to Dismiss contending that she does not fall under the
jurisdiction of the Sandigbayan because she is not actually receiving salary from the Palawan
State University, hene, there is no way that she is receiving salary with SG 27 or higher. There
is merit in her motion.

29. A preliminary investigation is part of the trial of a case.

30. In order to conduct a preliminary investigation of the murder of a prominent and well-loved
politician, the Secretary of Justice created a panel of prosecutors. The said panel dismissed the
case. The husband of the murdered politician through a motion sought the presentation of
additional evidence but the same was denied by the panel. Three (3) days after, the Secretary in
the interest of service and due process created a second panel of a separate set of prosecutors
to conduct a reinvestigation of the case. The respondent in the preliminary investigation
questioned the formation of the second panel and filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition to
restrain the second panel from its investigation. Thereafter, the second panel issued a Resolution
finding probable cause and recommended the filing of an Information against the
respondent. The RTC in which the Information was filed issued a Warrant of Arrest against the
respondent. The Court of Appeals ruled that the creation of the second panel was null and
void. The Court of Appeals was correct.

31. Honorio filed a case of violation of B.P. Bilang 22 against Gaspar. After arraignment of
Gaspar, Honorio manifested that he would be reserving the right to file a separate civil action
against Gaspar to which the court acceded. The court correctly granted the reservation.