EVIDENCE

1st Semester AY 2014-2015

Prof. V.A. Avena
PRE-MIDTERM EXAM EXERCISE
1.
VP Binays youngest daughter Joanna Marie Bianca Binay poster on her
Instagram account labeled JMBlicious several photos, one of which featured her
against a background structure.
At the current Senate Blue Ribbon Committee investigation into possible graft and
corruption, plunder and/or ill-gotten wealth involving VP Binay, the structure is
described by Senator Trillanes IV as the vacation house that forms part of the 350hectare private luxury farm owned by VP Binay in Rosario, Batangas comprising a
resort pool, two man-made lagoons, an exaggerated London Kew Garden-copycat, a
huge piggery, an aviary of exotic birds, a 1,000-cock breeding farm, and an
orchidarium with species imported from, among others, the USA and Australia. In
respect of the latter details, several eyewitnesses have come forward with
testimony, together with documents and photographs.
Resource person Anthony Tiu attests before the Senate that all the foregoing
amenities comprise the agri-tourism park owned by the company Sunchamp of
which he is the controlling shareholder and chief executive officer, that the
Instagram-featured structure is their clubhouse, and that he is not a dummy of the
VP.
When an account friend quries Bianca, where are you, Biancas reply was, at our
place in Batangas.
If an action were to be filed against VP Binay that would entail recovery of ill-gotten
wealth (whether by way of a civil case for recovery under the Civil Code or for
forfeiture under R.A. 1379, or for damages included in a criminal case for graft and
corruption under R.A. 3019 or for plunder under R.A. 7080 or under the RPC,
including the above-described properties, would the photograph, query and answer
be admissible in evidence against VP Binay?
2.
Tony Boy Ramos is a billionaire accused of stealing a multi-million Juan Luna
from the National Museum. In defense, Ramos lawyer will present evidence that will
picture to the court the immensity of the properties, deposits and cash-on-hand
comprising the wealth of Ramos. As City Prosecutor, would you have any ground for
objection?
3.
Thirty factory employees banded together to form a paluwagan scheme
whereby each contributed a uniform amount of money to a common pool which will
be invested to earn, with each having the right to draw a fixed amount on a fixed
calendar day. Mr. X suffered dementia one day and was committed to an asylum for
the mentally ill. When his heirs demanded to be substituted for Mr. X and to get his
monthly share from his 29 co-employees, the latter reimbursed the principal of Mr.
Xs original contribution only, declaring that his membership in the scheme had
ended. The heirs thus sued the 29 co-employees. Is there any rule that the heirs can

invoke to prevent any of the employees from testifying in their defense as well as in
support of their counterclaim for attorneys fees and expenses of litigation?
4.
P & D entered into a written contract, whereby P repaired the house of D.
After the construction, D died. P sued W, the wife of D as administratrix of Ds
estate.
During the trial, P wanted to testify regarding the 50,000.00 unpaid balance of D
on the contract as well as regarding the additional price of 50,000.00 that D had
agreed to pay for additional work.
Does W have any ground/s to object to Ps testimony?
5.
A, B, & C are the heirs of O, who owns 4 parcels of land. In the extra-judicial
partition, C misrepresented to A & B that O was no longer the owner of one parcel in
that O was not able to redeem it from the mortgagee-bank. Hence, A, B, & C divided
only 3 parcels.
It turns out that O had actually entrusted to a nephew, N, the redemption money
together with a letter instructing C to redeem the land. N had promptly delivered
the letter and money to C, but C falsified the papers to make it appear that it was
he, not O, who was redeeming it, such that the title was eventually issued in his
name.
Upon discovery of what C had done, A & B sued the heirs of C who, in the meantime
had died. Any objections to the testimony of A & B?
6.
in the prosecution of accused A for the rape of daughter C, there were only
two witnesses the latter and Cs sister S, both of whom testified on facts showing
carnal knowledge by A. The judge (a neighbor of A who has personally known As
family for a long time) took judicial notice of the fact that C was inflicted with Down
Syndrome (i.e. was a mongoloid), and used that fact as basis for applying an
additional aggravating circumstance in convicting A for rape. Any comment on any
evidentiary rule/s?
7.
in the statutory rape case of People v. Jalosjos, the defense tried to prove
(through a witness) that the date of birth in the birth certificate presented by the
prosecution was falsified. If you had been the prosecutor would you have objected
(on the basis of BER, for example)?
8.
in the case of People v. H for the negligent shooting death of S (the son of the
accused H & W), the prosecution presented W as its first witness to testify against
H. Admissible?
9.
if the victim in No. 8 above had been the adopted son of H and W, would your
answer change?
10.
Friends A and B quarreled and engaged in a fist fight, as a result of which B
broke his neck and died. The charge in the Information was homicide. At trial, the

prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that A isa a champion bantamweight boxer.

Admissible?
11.
During their confrontation at the Barangay, B conceded that his car could
have scratched the car of neighbor A. at the trial of A v. B for damages, however, B
objected to As testimony on the foregoing, arguing that Rule 128.2 says that rules
on evidence apply only to courts and trials and hearings. Rule.
12.
Former Makati Vice Mayor Ernesto Mercado testified before the Senate Blue
Ribbon Committee about details of the plunder racket led by VP Binay among
himself and other co-Makati officials such as the late Engr. Nelson Morales, Atty.
Renato Bondal, Nicolas Enciso, VP aides Gerry Limlingan, one Ate Ebeng, the Bids
and Awards Committee (BAC), the resident auditor, etc. by which they distributed
among themselves kickbacks from the government contractor Hilmarc Construction
in whose favor projects for the construction of Makati government buildings are
awarded though rigged procurement biddings.
Mr. X gave cumulative testimony as a member of the BAC. However, he immigrated
to Austrailia when his application as a state witness and to be accepted into the
Witness Protection Program was denied.
At the trial of People v. Binay, et al., the prosecution will present the Senate records
custodian to authenticate the transcript of the Senate hearing on the testimony of
Mr. X. Would the defense counsel have any basis to object?
13.
Dr. A sued X to recover payment of his medical fee. Dr. A testified that their
agreement was that X will pay 5000 if Xs blindness is cured and that X will only
pay 200 if he is not cured. When his turn came, X wanted to present evidence to
show that upon coming out of Dr. As office, he (X) had told Y that Dr. A said his (Dr.
As) fee will be 200 if his blindness is cured and if not, there will be no charge. Is
the latter evidence admissible?
14.
In the midst of their marital crisis, Mrs. W went to Dr. D for a confidential
psychiatric examination. When their relationship deteriorated further, husband Mr. H
instituted proceedings for annulment of their marriage by the Catholic Church,
presenting therein the medical report of the psychiatric exam (to which he was able
to gain access).
When their situation became hopeless, Mr. filed suit for declaration of nullity of
marriage. When Mr. H was about to testify on the report, Mrs. W onjected based on
privileged communication between physician and patient.
a) Rule.
b) Mrs. W invoked the privacy of communication and correspondence. Rule.
c) if H discovers that W had engaged a gun-for-hire, Mr. G, to kill him and that their
12-year0old son S had heard W telephone Mr. G and talk about the transaction, can
H compel S to testify against W?

15.
A sued B for payment of his 50,000.00 loan. At the 1 st pre-trial conference, B
offered to pay 25,000 just to by peace. A haggled. At the 2 nd pre-trial conference,
B admitted that he did owe the 50,000.00, but in consideration for seift amicable
settlement which would lessen their counsels and other litigation fees as well as in
view of his counterclaims, he still bargained to pay a lesser amount. A refused. In
his plaintiffs memorandum, A invokes Bs admission. If you were Bs counsel, will
you be able to raise any valid argument in your defense memorandum against this
point of A?
16.
State whether true or false: under Rule 130, apart from the exceptions
concerning agents/partners, co-conspirators, and privies, interlocking confessions
constitute the only other exception to the res inter alios acta rule.
17.

what is the rule of contra proferentum?