Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

JURISTS BAR REVIEW CENTER™

2018 CRIMINAL LAW MOCK BAR EXAMINATION

4 August 2018 8 am to 12 noon

INSTRUCTIONS

1. This Questionnaire contains 6 pages. Check the number of pages and make sure it has the correct
number of pages and their proper numbers.

All the items have to be answered within four (4) hours. You may write on the Questionnaire for
notes relating to the questions.

Read each question very carefully and write your answers in your Bar Examination Notebook in the
same order the questions are posed. Write your answers only on the front of every sheet in your
Notebook. If not sufficient, then start with the back page of the first sheet and thereafter. In your
answers, use the numbering system in the questionnaire.

2. Answer the Essay questions legibly, clearly, and concisely. Start each number on a separate
page. An answer to a sub-question under the same number may be written continuously on the same
page and the immediately succeeding pages until completed.

Your answer should demonstrate your ability to analyze the facts, apply the pertinent laws and
jurisprudence, and arrive at a sound or logical conclusion. Always support your answer with the
pertinent laws, rules, jurisprudence, and the facts.

A mere "Yes" or "No" answer without any corresponding explanation or discussion will not be given
full credit. Thus, always briefly but fully explain your answers although the question does not
expressly ask for an explanation. Do not re-write or repeat the question in your Notebook.

3. Make sure you do not write your name or any extraneous note/s or distinctive marking/s on your
Notebook that can serve as an identifying mark/s (such as names that are not in the given questions,
prayers, or private notes to the Examiner). Writing, leaving, or making any distinguishing or identifying
mark in the exam Notebook is considered cheating and can disqualify you.

YOU CAN BRING HOME THE QUESTIONNARE

Pedro, a police officer on AWOL (absent without leave), was threatened by Juan, a defeated
presidential candidate in the national elections, that Pedro’s live-in partner would be killed if he does
not kill two men on board any motor vehicle with “DUH-30” sticker on its wind shield. Soon thereafter,
while scouring the city streets on board a motorcycle for five consecutive nights, Pedro finally saw one
which he had tailed. When the target car stopped on a red signal at an intersection, Pedro got off
from his motorbike, approached the car and with an automatic pistol, peppered the same with bullets.
As a result, sisters Petra and Pedrita, and their four-year old niece Jane were killed.

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. © 2018 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Copying, dissemination, storage, use, modification, uploading,
and downloading without the express written consent of Jurists Review Center Inc. is strictly prohibited and shall be subjected to criminal prosecution
and administrative charges, including the appropriate complaint with the Bar Confidant’s Office and IBP.

Page 1 of 6
Prosecuted for three (3) counts of Murder, Pedro was convicted thereof whereby the following
qualifying/aggravating circumstances alleged in the Information where appreciated against him,
namely: (a) abuse of superior strength, (b) treachery, (c) evident premeditation, (d) by means of motor
vehicle, (e) disregard of sex, (f) nighttime, and (g) abuse of public position.

Which of the following qualifying/aggravating circumstance(s) was/were erroneously


appreciated?

II

Pokwang and Ganda are friends residing in Pasay City. Pokwang lent P500,000 to Ganda
evidenced by a promissory note. Ganda failed to pay the note despite demand so Pokwang filed with
the Regional Trial Court an action for collection of P500,000 against Ganda. In her verified answer,
Ganda claimed that she never borrowed money from Pokwang which was a clear lie.

a) Is Ganda liable for perjury?

Pokwang was bumped by a car negligently driven by Guapo. Pokwang sued Guapo before
the Metropolitan Trial Court of Pasay City for P150,000 damages arising out of the incident. In his
verified answer, Guapo claimed that it was another person who was driving the car, which was a bare-
faced lie.

b) Is Guapo liable for perjury?

III

Agnes and Mary hatched a plan to kill spouses Sherman and Cweezy. On the appointed
date and time to execute their plan, Agnes and Mary, both armed with automatic rifles, positioned
themselves directly in front of that part of the house where they thought the spouses were situated.
The duo thereafter aimed their firearms at the portion and simultaneously fired the same. After
emptying their respective gun’s magazines and thinking that the spouses were killed as the house
was peppered with bullets, Agnes and Mary fled. Unknown to them however, no one was hurt as
Sherman and Cweezy were at some other place at that time.

1. Based on the foregoing narration, for what offense may Agnes and Mary be held
liable?
2. Does Agnes have any criminal liability if some of the bullets fired from her gun had
ricocheted after hitting the concrete wall of the house and consequently hit and killed Mary?

IV

Brando told Jimmy, Peter, and Joseph that he would give them P500,000.00 if they can kill
Warren. In view of the offer, Jimmy, Peter, and Joseph met with Brando to polish the intended crime.
The following day, the four accused went to Warren’s place, each carrying a baseball bat. Brando
stayed in his car to keep watch while his co-accused went upstair to the house. Fifteen minutes after,
the three accused went down with bloodstained bats. Brando brought them away from the place.

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. © 2018 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Copying, dissemination, storage, use, modification, uploading,
and downloading without the express written consent of Jurists Review Center Inc. is strictly prohibited and shall be subjected to criminal prosecution
and administrative charges, including the appropriate complaint with the Bar Confidant’s Office and IBP.

Page 2 of 6
When they reached the next town, he gave them P500,000.00 as he promised. They were all arrested
and charged of murder aggravated by a band. Is band attendant to the commission of the crime?

At the time of his death, Roy was a trial court judge. One week after his burial, Lea, a
columnist of a newspaper who was convicted of Libel by Roy, published an article wherein she wrote
that the judge had kept a mistress in the conjugal dwelling prior to and until his demise. Upon reading
the same, Roy’s widow, Ria, instituted s criminal complaint for Libel. Will the criminal complaint
prosper?

VI

Pedro had suspected Juan and John to have smashed and broken the headlights of his car.
When he saw them together a week later, Pedro, with intent to kill, shot Juan and John. Juan was hit
in the chest while John suffered a bullet wound on his left shoulder. When Pedro approached his
victims to finish them off, he suddenly felt a twinge of conscience that he walked away and left. Juan
and John survived, but according to the attending physician of the former, he would have died had he
not been medically attended right after the incident.

For what crime(s) may Pedro be held liable?

VII

Vilma rented Nora’s building for five years. Under the lease agreement, the parties agreed that
in case Vilma defaults in the payment of any rental, Nora shall have the right to rescind the lease
without any need of judicial action. It was also agreed that in case the lessee fails to pay for the
utilities and the rentals, the lessor shall have the option of cutting off the electric lines. Vilma defaulted
in paying her rentals for four months and in the payment of the electric bills for one month. Nora sent
his body guards to cut off the electric lines in the building without informing Vilma. A week has passed
and Vilma continued using the building without paying the unpaid rentals. This time, Nora told his
body guards to guard the building and disallow Vilma from entering the same. Vilma filed two cases of
grave coercion against Vilma, first for cutting off the electric lines to the building, and second for
posting his body guards so that Vilma could not enter the same. Are the charges meritorious?

VIII

Mario is a credit assistant of Magpapautang and Magpapabahay, Inc (M&M). He collected


amortization payments from Bros, an installment buyer of a house and lot owned by M&M. The
collection totalled P120,000.00. However, he did not remit the same to the company. He absented
without leave for two weeks. When Bros inquired from him if he had remitted his payment to M&M,
Mario told him that his accountability was fully settled with but the receipt is yet to be issued to him by
the company. M&M directed Mario to report back for work but he did not comply. When it was
discovered that he did not remit the payment, M&M and Bros both filed their respective criminal
complaints against him. He did not file any counter-affidavit in the complaint for Qualified Theft which
M&M filed and in the complaint for Estafa which Bros filed. Which of the criminal complaints filed by
M&M and Bros will prosper?

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. © 2018 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Copying, dissemination, storage, use, modification, uploading,
and downloading without the express written consent of Jurists Review Center Inc. is strictly prohibited and shall be subjected to criminal prosecution
and administrative charges, including the appropriate complaint with the Bar Confidant’s Office and IBP.

Page 3 of 6
IX

On her 4th birthday on 10 February 1994, Jane had witnessed her father Juan when the latter
strangled her mother Petra to death. She also saw him burying her mother’s corpse at their backyard.
Since then, Jane continued to live with her father until her marriage to John, a policeman, on 10
February 2013. On 10 February 2008 though, Jane had written and graphically described in her diary
the incident she witnessed 14 years earlier. However, Jane did not live to tell anyone of the incident
as she succumbed to colon cancer on 10 February 2014. It was only on 10 February 2017 when
John, while browsing over said diary, came across the detailed narration of the incident written therein
by Jane. By reason thereof, the skeletal remains of Petra were found. On 14 February 2017, a
criminal complaint for Parricide was instituted against Juan.

Based on the foregoing facts, has the offense prescribed?

Pedro was charged of prosecuted for Homicide, a crime punishable by reclusion temporal
under the Revised Penal Code. In convicting him as charged, the trial court judge appreciated the
privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense and the generic mitigating circumstance
of voluntary surrender in his favor sans any aggravating circumstance. As the trial court judge, to what
penalty of imprisonment, applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, may you validly sentence Pedro?
Explain your answer.

XI

Pikon, a law student of Lex Adonis Law School, was flunked in Taxation by his professor, Atty.
Petmalu. Infuriated by this, Pikon waited for Atty. Petmalu in the law school parking lot and punched
him on the face, inflicting upon Atty. Petmalu physical injuries which required ten days of treatment.
What crime or crimes did Pikon commit?

XII

Alberto and Divino quarrelled. After kicking Alberto in the buttocks, Divino ran to the jeepney
parking lot. Alberto looked for Divino in order to maim him. After more than an hour, he found Divino
hiding beside a jeepney. The jeepney started to move and as such, Divino ran with it until he was able
to cling on its side. When the jeepney passed by Alberto, he shot with a revolver Divino. Fortunately,
Divino was hit in the right shoulder only because the spare tire in the front left side of the jeepney
shielded his body. Alberto was later on charged and convicted with frustrated homicide. On appeal, he
claimed that he could not be convicted with the crime charged because the injuries sustained by
Divino confirmed that his intention was only to maim him. For what crime should Alberto be held
criminally liable?

XIII

Darla worked as the yaya of Josh, the 19-year-old special child of Cristeta. One day, while
Darla was accompanying Josh at the playground, Josh threw a tantrum. Bhimboy, Cristeta’s driver,

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. © 2018 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Copying, dissemination, storage, use, modification, uploading,
and downloading without the express written consent of Jurists Review Center Inc. is strictly prohibited and shall be subjected to criminal prosecution
and administrative charges, including the appropriate complaint with the Bar Confidant’s Office and IBP.

Page 4 of 6
offered to drive them to Jollibee to pacify Josh. However, instead of taking them to the nearest
Jollibee outlet, Bhimboy kept on driving and only stopped to allow two unknown men to board the
vehicle.

Distraught, Darla demanded that Bhimboy take them home immediately, warning them that
Cristeta will get angry. The unknown men however, insisted that Bhimboy take them to Nueva
Viscaya. When they reached their destination, Darla and Josh were taken and locked inside a room.
They were later rescued by the police. Bhimboy and the two men were immediately caught and
arrested. Charged with kidnapping, Bhimboy argued that he is not liable because he merely drove the
car and there was no agreement proved to kidnap the victims. Decide with reasons.

XIV

Lupito wrote a letter to Janice claiming that her son Nel was jailed because of the criminal
complaint for falsification filed against him. Lupito stated that the bail would cost P10,000 and that he
could immediately process it so that Nel would be released from jail. Janice sent him the amount
needed for the bail. It turned out that Janice’s son had never been in jail nor charged with any criminal
offense but detained at Lupito’s house for two days because his daughter would not allow him to
leave until he agreed to marry her. After getting the P10,000.00, Lupito told her daughter to let Lupito
go home as he has understanding already with his mother. Two days after Janice’s son arrived home,
she asked Lupito for proof that the money was paid for her son’s bail. Lupito showed her a court order
directing the boy’s release from jail on account of the cash bail posted in his behalf. Upon inquiry
made by Janice with the court it turned out that no such court order exists. For what crime or crimes
should Lupito be charged?

XV

A filed a case for Frustrated Murder against B. During trial, B died of ulceric cancer. Can the
court still rule on the civil aspect of the case in spite of the death of the accused prior to the
promulgation of the judgment? Would your answer be the same if B died while appealing his
conviction instead?

XVI

George and Tanya are two toddlers playing in an inflated playground in a local mall. A playful
George jumped from an elevated platform hitting Tanya in the process of his descent. George fell
awkward and sprained his arm. He blamed Tanya for his injury and shouted invectives to her. Kate,
who was keeping watch over her daughter, Tanya, saw what happened. She then approached George
and slapped him on the face.

Jean, George’s mother, saw the incident and filed a complaint for violation of RA 7610 or the
Child Abuse Law. The trial court found Kate guilty of the crime charged because mere laying of hands
on a child constitute the act of demeaning and degrading the dignity of a child, violative of RA 7610.
Was the trial court correct?

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. © 2018 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Copying, dissemination, storage, use, modification, uploading,
and downloading without the express written consent of Jurists Review Center Inc. is strictly prohibited and shall be subjected to criminal prosecution
and administrative charges, including the appropriate complaint with the Bar Confidant’s Office and IBP.

Page 5 of 6
XVII

PO2 Kaltog stopped Zing who was riding in a motorcycle. He asked Zing for his license. Zing
took out his driver’s license from his left pocket and handed the same to Kaltog. While Kaltog was
examining the license, he sensed that Zing was pulling out something from his back. Kaltog was
alerted. Upon seeing that Zing had pulled out a dark metal from his back, he shot Zing with his service
firearm. Zing was shot in the chest. When he realized that what the victim pulled out from behind was
just a black document cylinder, he brought him to the hospital. Kaltog was charged of Frustrated
Homicide on account of the incident. He interposed self-defense and performance of duty during trial.
He likewise claimed that he acted under a mistake of fact. Are the defenses meritorious?

XVIII

Peter was convicted by the trial court of Homicide. While detained at the National Penitentiary
during the pendency of his appeal with the Court of Appeals, he and his twin brother, Pedro, a convict
serving sentence thereat for a similar offense, were able to escape. The escape was made possible
after Peter bribed Juan, the prison guard on duty.

What crime(s), if any, did Peter, Pedro and Juan commit?

XIX

While driving his car and was approaching his residence one evening, Juan chanced upon
Pedro, a stranger, coming out of the gate and carrying a leather case. Juan pulled over and alighted
from the car to confront him believing that Pedro has just come from his (Juan’s) house and has
stolen said leather case containing his laptop. Before Juan could get near Pedro, the latter retreated
and started running. He then chased Pedro and at the same shouted at him to desist from fleeing with
it. Pedro however continued running and when Juan observed that the distance between them was
getting wider, he aimed and fired his gun at Pedro. He was hit in his right buttocks causing him to fall.
Having been immobilized, Juan approached Pedro to retrieve the leather case only to find out that the
same was not his and did not contain his laptop. When Juan arrived home, he likewise discovered
that all his personal belongings, including the said gadget, were intact. Prosecuted for Less Serious
Physical Injuries, may Juan successfully interpose defense of property rights?

-oOo-

Jurists Mock Bar Examinations in Criminal Law. © 2018 by Jurists Review Center Inc. Copying, dissemination, storage, use, modification, uploading,
and downloading without the express written consent of Jurists Review Center Inc. is strictly prohibited and shall be subjected to criminal prosecution
and administrative charges, including the appropriate complaint with the Bar Confidant’s Office and IBP.

Page 6 of 6