Manuel L.

Quezon University
SCHOOL OF LAW

Multiple Choice
Questions in Evidence

SUBMITTED TO:
Atty. Christian Villasis
PROFESSORIAL LECTURER

SUBMITTED BY:
CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 1

 1.) The following shall be the effect of failure of submission of judicial affidavits
and exhibits on time except:

a.) The party who fails to submit the required judicial affidavits and
exhibits on time shall be deemed to have waived their submission.

b.) The judicial affidavits and exhibits submitted late shall be

accepted and admitted by court but shall require first the
filing of a notice and certification for the allowance of such
in court.

c.) The judicial affidavits and exhibit in effect could not be offered in
evidence.

d.)If the waiver extends to the required affidavits of all the witnesses
of a party because all of the judicial affidavits were not filed and
served, then said party is deemed to have not presented his
evidence-in-chief for his case.

2.) The following describes a leading question except:

a.) A leading question is one that is framed in such a way that the
question indicates to the witness the answer desired by the party
asking said question.

b.) Leading questions are not appropriate in the direct and re-
direct examinations particularly when the witness is asked
to testify about the major cause of action or defense.

c.) Leading questions are allowed in cross and re-cross examinations.

In fact, leading questions are the types of questions that should be
employed in cross examinations.

d.) Under the rule on the examination of a child witness, the court may
allow leading questions in all stages of examination of a child under
the condition that the same will further the interest of justice.

3.) Under the Rules of Court, a witness may be impeached through the following
manners except:

a.) By clear and convincing evidence.

b.) By contradictory evidence.

c.) By evidence that his reputation for truth, honesty and integrity is
bad.

d.) By evidence that he has made at other times inconsistent

statements with his present testimony.

4.) In general, parol evidence rule is designed to give certainty to written

transactions, preserve the reliability and protect the sanctity of written
agreements. For said rule to apply there must be a writing. All but one of the
following rules is correct:

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 2

 a.) All writings shall trigger the application of the parol evidence rule.
b.) Parol evidence shall apply to written as well as to oral agreements
made between parties.

c.) The writing that embodies the agreement of the parties shall be in a
particular form.

d.) Parol evidence rule applies to wills.

5.) A judicial admission requires no proof, however all of the following the
elements must be considered except:

a.) The judicial admission must be made by a party to the case.

b.) The admission to be judicial must be made in the course of the

proceedings in the same case.

c.) A particular form of judicial admission is required by the

courts and material to the case.

d.) The stipulations of the facts at the pre-trial of the case constitute
judicial admissions.

6.) All but one of the following erroneously describes preponderance of evidence.

a.) It is the evidence that is more convincing and credible than the one
offered by the adverse party.

b.) It means greater or superior weight of evidence.

c.) It requires that in order to establish a fact, the evidence

should constitute that amount of relevant evidence that a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion.

d.) It means that the evidence a s whole adduced by one side is

superior to that of the other.

7.) Among the significant example of a disputable presumption under the Rules
of Court is the presumption that official duty has been regularly performed.
All but one of the following shall not be applicable to this presumption.

a.) Credence is given to prosecution witnesses, who are police officers,

for they are presumed to have performed their duties in regular
manner.

b.) The exception to the preceding statement is when there is evidence

to the contrary suggesting ill motive on the part of police officers or
deviation from the regular performance of their duties.

c.) Frame up and extortion without clear and convincing evidence to

support the same is not deemed to sufficient to rebut the
presumption that their official duty has been regularly performed.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 3

 d.) The presumption of regularity in the performance of official
duties will stand if the plaintiff failed to present clear and
convincing evidence that the police officers did not properly
perform their duty or that they were inspired by improper
motive.

8.) As between a private and public document, which of the following is

admissible in evidence without further proof of due execution or
genuineness?

a.) Documents acknowledged before a Notary Public in Hawaii

b.) Certificate of baptism obtained from the records officer the parish
church.

c.) Official record of the Philippine Embassy in Dubai, United

Arab Emirates certified by the Vice- Consul with official seal.

d.) A clear and well-kept acknowledgment receipt dated July 13, 1985
signed by the creditor, showing payment of a loan, found among
the preserved file of the debtor.

9.) The following matters are proper subjects of judicial notice except?

a.) An administrative regulation or order pending effectivity.

b.)Quezon City is located in the Natioinal Capital Region.

c.) Municipal ordinances in force the municipalities where the MCTC

sits.

d.)Video conferencing or teleconferencing such as the use of Skype is

now a way of conducting business transactions.

10.) In which of the following cases is the testimony in a case involving a

deceased barred by the Survivorship Disqualification Rule or Dead Man
Statute?

a.) The testimony of a mere witness who is neither a party to the case
nor is in privity with the latter.

b.) The testimony of an oppositor in a land registration case filed by

the decedents heirs.

c.) The testimony is offered to prove a claim less than what is

established under a written document signed by the decedent.

d.) Testimony against the heirs of the deceased defendant who

are substituted for the latter.

11.) In a criminal case of murder by stabbing, the factum pobans is?

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 4

 a.) The act of stabbing.

b.) The liability of the accused to causing death to his victim.

c.) The knife used.

d.) The fact that the accused fled.

12.) The declaration of a dying person may be admissible in evidence for

several purposes such as being offered as a dying declaration, a statement
part of res gestae and or a dying declaration against interest. In such case, it
is considered as an example of?

a.) Curative admissibility

b.) Circumstantial evidence

c.) Multiple admissibility

d.) Corroborative evidence

13.) Juan testifies that the gun marked as Exhibit A was the same weapon
used in shooting Kulas. The findings of the crime laboratory yielded that the
same gun bears the fingerprints of the accused Kanor. The result of the
findings of the laboratory is an example of?

a.) Conclusive evidence

b.) Positive evidence

c.) Corroborative evidence

d.) Newly discovered evidence

14.) Which among the following is not a disputable presumption?

a.) That a court or judge acting as such solely in the Philippines,

was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction.

b.) That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter.

c.) That private transactions have been fair and regular

d.) That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient

consideration.

15.) Judicial notice can either be mandatory or discretionary. All but one of
the following is an example of a discretionary judicial notice.

a.) The matter is of common knowledge.

b.) The matter is capable of unquestionable demonstration.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 5

 c.) The matter involves the laws of nation.

d.) The matter must be settled beyond reasonable doubt.

16.) Object evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court. They
can be categorized as follows except one:

a.) Unique objects or objects that have readily identifiable marks.

b.) Tangible and unique objects which appeals indirectly to the

senses of the court.

c.) Objects that are made unique.

d.)Objects with no identifying marks and cannot be marked.

17.) Judge Solo was on the verge of deciding whether or not he will allow
the parties in a case lodged before his sala to view the crime scene. Before
his act of allowing the parties to visit and inspect the scene all but one of the
following must be observed.

a.) The inspection must be made strictly only in the presence of

the parties.

b.)A prior notice regarding the viewing should be furnished to all parties
concerned.

c.) There must be previous knowledge of all the parties.

d.)The viewing however is discretionary on the part of the judge, either to

grant or refuse such.

18.) The following pertains the concept of the chain of custody rule
embodied in Section 21 of the Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002 except:

a.) The purpose of the chain of custody rule is to preserve the integrity
and evidentiary value of the seized items.

b.) The links in the chain of custody are the people who actually handled
or had custody of the seized items.

c.) The fact of an unauthorized possession of illegal drugs shall be

sufficient to create moral certainty that would sustain the
finding of guilt.

d.) The identity of the prohibited drug essentially should be established

beyond reasonable doubt.

19.) In all but one of the following instances, the rule on DNA evidence
shall apply:

a.) Criminal actions

b.) Administrative proceedings

c.) Civil actions

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 6

 d.)Special proceedings

20.) The Rules of Court provides that a documentary evidence to be

admissible must comply with the following requirements except:

a.) The document must be relevant.

b.) The document must be authenticated.

c.) The document must be authenticated only by an expert

witness.

d.) The document must be formally offered in evidence.

21.) When the subject of the inquiry is the contents of a document, the best
evidence admissible is the original document itself. This however is not an
absolute rule. All but one of the following are the exceptions to the best
evidence rule.

a.) When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or
is recorded in a public office.

b.) When the original is in the custody or under the control of the
party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter
produce it after reasonable notice.

c.) When the original has been lost, or destroyed or cannot be produced in
court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror.

d.)When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents

which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the
fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of
the whole.

22.) Section 42 of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court defines verbal act as?

a.) Statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue

and giving it legal significance.

b.) A statement that concerns a startling event, made by the declarant when
the declarant is still under stress from the startling event.

c.) A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the

declarant perceived the event or condition, or immediately thereafter,
except when made under circumstances indicating a lack of
trustworthiness.

d.) An act made by a person in response to a startling or shocking event or

condition. It is an unplanned reaction to a "startling event".

23.) The party producing the document as genuine but which bears
alteration after its execution has the duty to account for any alterations found

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 7

 in a document purported to be genuine. For such purpose, he may show any
of the following except:

a.) That the alteration was made with the consent of the parties affected
by it.

b.) That the alteration was properly or innocently made.

c.) That the alteration was made by another with his concurrence.

d.) That the alteration did not in any way changed the meaning or
language of the instrument.

24.) Atty. Reshyl asked the court for her to be allowed in presenting and
offering secondary evidence. Under the Rules of Court Atty. Reshyls evidence
may be admitted only by laying the basis for its production. Specifically,
laying such basis requires all of the following except?

a.) Atty. Reshyl, being the offeror must prove the execution and existence
of the original document.

b.) She must show the cause of its unavailability.

c.) Atty. Reshyl must show that the unavailability was not due to her bad
faith.

d.) She must present witnesses that such original document has
been lost, destroyed or otherwise cannot be produced in court.

25.) In the actual case of Estrada vs Desierto, 356 SCRA 108, the Court held
that the alleged admissions made by President Estrada when his options
dwindled when the Armed Forces of the Philippines withdrew its support from
him as President and Commander-in-Chief and his act of not objecting to the
suggestions that he should consider a dignified exit or resignation is a clear
example and manifestation of what kind of admission?

a.) Admission by silence.

b.) Adoptive admission

c.) Extrajudicial admission

d.) Admission against interest.

26.) A motion to strike out an answer in case a witness answers the
question before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its
objection to the same and such objection is found to be meritorious is allowed
and may be availed in the following instances except?

a.) When the answer is premature

b.) When the answer is unresponsive

c.) When the witness becomes unavailable for direct examination

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 8

 d.) When the witness; answers are irrelevant, incompetent or otherwise
improper.

27.) In a suit for a collection of sum of money, Bam was allowed to

introduce evidence that Sarah did not pay her debt as shown by her refusal
to pay her indebtedness to Hazel, Sharon and Anne. Sarah however, may
introduce evidence that she paid her debts to Jun, Cha and Kennard. The act
of Sarah is considered under the law as?

a.) Multiple admissibility

b.) Corroborative admissibility

c.) Conditional admissibility

d.) Curative admissibility

28.) The Offer of Proof Rule or the tender of excluded evidence rule
provides for the following except?

a.) Where the evidence involved is documentary or object evidence, the

tender is made by having the document or object attached to or made
part of the record.

b.) If the evidence excluded is testimonial, the offeror may state for the
record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and
the substance of the proposed testimony.

c.) The tender is meant to be a mere manifestation to the court in

mere general terms.

d.) The offer must make reference to the details of the excluded testimony
or excluded document.

29.) Considering the qualifications required of a would-be witness, who

among the following is INCOMPETENT to testify?

a.) A mental retardate.

b.) A person who is deaf and dumb.

c.) A person under the influence of drugs when the event he is asked to
testify on took place

d.) A person convicted of perjury who will testify as an attesting

witness to a will.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 9

 30.) During trial, plaintiff offered evidence that appeared irrelevant at that
time but he said he was eventually going to relate to the issue in the case by
some future evidence. The defendant objected. Should the trial court reject
the evidence in question on ground of irrelevance?

a.) No, it should admit it conditionally until its relevance is shown.

b.) No, it should reserve its ruling until the relevance is shown.

c.) Yes, since irrelevant evidence is not admissible.

d.) Yes, since the plaintiff could anyway subsequently present the
evidence anew.

31.) Which of the following admissions made by a party in the course of

judicial proceedings is considered as a judicial admission?

a.) Admissions made in a complaint superseded by an amended

complaint.

b.) Admissions made in a pleading signed by the party and his counsel
intended to be filed.

c.) Admission made by counsel in open court.

d.) An admission made in a pleading in another case between the same

parties.

32.) In a suit to enforce a foreign judgment what defenses may be raised?

a.) That extrinsic fraud afflicted the judgment.

b.) That the judgment is contrary to Philippine procedural rules.

c.) None, the judgment being entitled to full faith and credit as a matter of
general comity among nations

d.) That the foreign court erred in the appreciation of the evidence.

33.) April charged her husband, Jed, with bigamy for a prior subsisting
marriage with Mel. Capril presented Josh and James, neighbors of Jed and Mel
in Puerto Princesa City, to prove, first, that Jed and Mel cohabited there and,
second, that they established a reputation as husband and wife. Can April
prove the bigamy by such evidence?

a.) No, the circumstantial evidence cannot overcome the lack of direct
evidence in any criminal case.

b.) Yes, the circumstantial evidence is enough to support a conviction for

bigamy.

c.) No, at least one direct evidence and two circumstantial evidence are
required to support a conviction for bigamy.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 10

 d.) No, the circumstantial evidence is not enough to support a
conviction for bigamy.

34.) For the testimony or deposition at a former proceeding as

contemplated in Section 47 of the Rules of Court to apply, the following
except one must be satisfied.

a.) The witness id dead or unable to testify.

b.) The former case involved the same subject as that in the
present case, with the same cause of action.

c.) The issue being testified to by the witness in the former trial is the
same issue involved in the present case.

d.)The adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in

the former case.

35.) All but one of the following pertains to the disqualification of witness by
privileged communication in an attorney-client relationship.

a.) The privilege is extended to communications made for the purpose of

securing the services of counsel even if the counsel later refuses the
professional relationship.

b.) The privilege shall apply only in the course of actual

professional employment.

c.) The communication may be oral or written but is deemed to extend to

other forms of conduct like physical demonstration as long as they are
intended to be confidential.

d.)It is commonly acknowledged that the privilege does not extend to

communications where the clients purpose is the furtherance of a
future intended crime or fraud.

36.) Corpus delicti refers to all but one of the following:

a.) To the fact of the commission of the crime charged.

b.) To the ransom money in a crime of kidnapping with ransom.

c.) To the body or the substance of a crime.

d.)To material substance of a crime

37.) Onyok witnessed the killing of Benny by Joaquin. A subpoena was
served to Onyok but because of the fear for his life, he refuses to testify in
court. Can the court punish Onyok for contempt?

a.) Yes, since litigants need help in presenting their cases.

b.) No, since no person can be compelled to be a witness against another.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 11

 c.) Yes, since public interest in justice requires his testimony.

d.) No, since Ramon has a valid reason for not testifying.

38.) In all but one of the following instances, the quantum of evidence was
WRONGLY applied?

a.) To rebut the presumptive validity of a notarial document,

substantial evidence.

b.)In Writ of Amparo cases, substantial evidence.

c.) To overcome a disputable presumption, clear and convincing evidence.

d.)To satisfy the burden of proof in civil cases, preponderance of evidence.

39.) To prove payment of a debt, Celine testified that she heard Rezel say,
as the latter was handing over money to Marivic that it was in payment of
debt. Is Celines testimony admissible in evidence?

a.) Yes, since Rezels statement and action, subject of Celines

testimony, constitutes a verbal act.

b.) No, since Celines testimony of what Ambo said and did is hearsay.

c.) Yes, since what Rezel said and did is an independently relevant
statement.

d.) No, since what Rezel said and did was not in response to a startling
occurrence.

40.) In a civil action for specific performance, the presentation of the

original Deed of Sale as an evidence of the terms of the agreement between
the parties is considered as?

a.) Positive evidence

b.) Competent evidence

c.) Credible evidence

d.) Direct evidence

41.) Lola Flora testified that Cardo, charged with robbery, has committed
bag-snatching and theft five times on the same barangay in the last eight
months. Can the court admit the testimony of Lola Flora as evidence against
Cardo?

a.) No, since evidence of guilt of a past crime is not evidence of

guilt of a present crime.

b.) Yes, as evidence of his past propensity for committing robbery.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 12

 c.) No, since there is no showing that Ben witnessed the past three
robberies.

d.) Yes, as evidence of a pattern of criminal behavior proving his guilt of

the present offense.

42.) In a murder case, Ras testified that she saw Sam hacked Tom several
times causing the latters demise. The testimony of Ras is an example of?

a.) Rebuttal evidence

b.) Circumstantial evidence

c.) Positive evidence

d.) Prima facie evidence

43.) The burden of proof or the onus probandi refers to the duty of a party
to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or
defense by the amount of evidence required by law. In an administrative
proceeding, the burden of proof lies with the:

a.) Complainant who must be able to show such by preponderance of

evidence.

b.) Party who alleges the fact.

c.) One who filed the action who must be able to show this by
substantial evidence.

d.) Employer who must be able to show that acts against him was made
for a valid and just cause.

44.) Reign testified that a week after the robbery Arkyn, one of the accused,
told her that Elo was one of those who committed the crime with her. Is
Reigns testimony regarding what Arkyn told her admissible in evidence
against Elo?

a.) No, since Arkyn did not make the statement during the
conspiracy

b.) Yes, since the statement is part of the res gestae.

c.) No, since it is hearsay.

d.) Yes, since it constitutes admission against a co-conspirator.

45.) Which of the following CANNOT be disputably presumed under the
rules of evidence?

a.) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord at
the time of commencement of the relation of landlord and
tenant between.

b.) That a person is innocent of a crime or wrong.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 13

 c.) That the thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with
things of that nature.

d.) That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced.

46.) The Rules of Court provides that character evidence is admissible in all
but one of the following instances

a.) When it is evidence of the good character of a witness even prior to

impeachment.

b.) In criminal cases, the accused may prove his good moral
character if pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense
charged.

c.) In criminal cases, the bad moral character of the offended party may
not be proved.

d.)In criminal cases, the prosecution may prove the bad moral character
of the accused to prove his criminal predisposition.

47.) According to Section 3, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, all of the
following are the rights and obligations of a witness except?

a.) Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue.

b.) To be protected from irrelevant, improper or insulting questions, and from

harsh or insulting demeanor.

c.) Not to be detained except when the judge requires.

d.) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it
to be the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would
be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final
conviction for an offense.

48.) Niezel a partner in the Kalayaan Ltd., after the partnership is dissolved
and liquidated, admits before a police investigator that she and her partners
were engaged in smuggling of highly dutiable imported cigarettes while the
partnership was operating a buy and sell business. The admission made by
Niezel is an example of?

a.) Adoptive admission

b.) Admission by an agent or partner

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 14

 c.) Admission by a conspirator

d.) Admission by privies

49.) Which of the following is NOT REQUIRED of a declaration against

interest as an exception to the hearsay rule?

a.) At the time he made said declaration he was unaware that the same
was contrary to his aforesaid interest.

b.) The declarant had no motive to falsify and believed such declaration to
be true.

c.) The declarant is dead or unable to testify.

d.) The declaration relates to a fact against the interest of the declarant.

50.) The following are the effects and consequences of an order allowing
new trial except?

a.) The evidence taken upon the subsequent trial, if material and
competent, shall remain in use.

b.) The court shall vacate the judgment as well as the entire proceedings had
in the case.

c.) The courts decision shall be held in suspension until the defendant could
show at the reopening of trial that it has to be abandoned.

d.) The court shall maintain the part of its judgment that is unaffected and
void the rest.

CAYEN CERVANCIA CABIGUEN, MLQU SCHOOL OF LAW Page 15