Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 56 views

    2017 BAR Q&A Evidence

    Uploaded by

    Ralph Jaramillo
    Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter is admissible as a dying declaration, as it relates to the cause of Venancio's death. However, Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter of Vicente is not admissible as a dying declaration, as it does not relate to the cause of Venancio's death but rather the death of another person. In an attempt to impeach a prosecution witness, the defense called the witness's childhood friend to testify about the witness's reputation for aggressiveness and violence. However, this line of questioning would not be proper impeachment, as reputation evidence must only be about a witness's character for truthfulness.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    2017 BAR Q&A Evidence

    Uploaded by

    Ralph Jaramillo
    56 views1 page
    Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter is admissible as a dying declaration, as it relates to the cause of Venancio's death. However, Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter of Vicente is not admissible as a dying declaration, as it does not relate to the cause of Venancio's death but rather the death of another person. In an attempt to impeach a prosecution witness, the defense called the witness's childhood friend to testify about the witness's reputation for aggressiveness and violence. However, this line of questioning would not be proper impeachment, as reputation evidence must only be about a witness's character for truthfulness.

    Original Description:

    2017 BAR Q&A Evidence

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter is admissible as a dying declaration, as it relates to the cause of Venancio's death. However, Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter of Vicente is not admissible as a dying declaration, as it does not relate to the cause of Venancio's death but rather the death of another person. In an attempt to impeach a prosecution witness, the defense called the witness's childhood friend to testify about the witness's reputation for aggressiveness and violence. However, this line of questioning would not be proper impeachment, as reputation evidence must only be about a witness's character for truthfulness.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    56 views1 page

    2017 BAR Q&A Evidence

    Uploaded by

    Ralph Jaramillo
    Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter is admissible as a dying declaration, as it relates to the cause of Venancio's death. However, Venancio's statement identifying Arnulfo as the shooter of Vicente is not admissible as a dying declaration, as it does not relate to the cause of Venancio's death but rather the death of another person. In an attempt to impeach a prosecution witness, the defense called the witness's childhood friend to testify about the witness's reputation for aggressiveness and violence. However, this line of questioning would not be proper impeachment, as reputation evidence must only be about a witness's character for truthfulness.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Ill.

    Under the Rules on Evidence, a dying


    declaration is admissible as an exception to the
    Answer the following briefly: hearsay rule provided that such declaration relates to
    the cause of the declarant’s death.
    (a) What elements should concur for
    circumstantial evidence to be sufficient for conviction? Venancio’s statement that it was Arnulfo who
    shot him is admissible as a dying declaration. The
    same related to Venancio’s own demise. It may be
    (d) What is a tender of excluded evidence? inferred that Venancio had consciousness of his
    impending death since he suffered gunshot wounds to
    SUGGESTED ANSWER: his chest which would necessarily be mortal wounds.
    (a)
    However, Venancio’s statement that it was
    The following elements should concur for Arnulfo who shot Vicente is not admissible as a dying
    circumstantial evidence to be sufficient for conviction: declaration since it did not relate to the cause of the
    declarant’s death but to the death of another person.
    a) There is more than one circumstance.

    b) The facts from which the inferences are XV.


    derived are proven.
    In an attempt to discredit and impeach a
    c) The combination of all the circumstances is Prosecution witness in a homicide case, the defense
    such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable counsel called to the stand a person who had been the
    doubt. [S4 R133] boyhood friend and next-door neighbor of the
    Prosecution witness for 30 years. One question that
    (d) the defense counsel asked of the impeaching witness
    was: "Can you tell this Honorable Court about the
    Tender of excluded evidence is the remedy of a general reputation of the prosecution witness in your
    party when the evidence he has offered is excluded by community for aggressiveness and
    the court. violent tendencies?"

    If documentary or object evidence is excluded Would you, as the trial prosecutor, interpose
    by the court, the offeror may have the same attached your objection to the question of the defense counsel?
    to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded Explain your answer.
    is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name
    and other personal circumstances of the witness and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
    the substance of the proposed testimony. (S40 R132).
    Yes, I as the trial prosecutor, would interpose
    XIV. my objection to defense counsel’s question on the
    ground of improper impeachment.
    Immediately before he died of gunshot wounds
    to his chest, Venancio told the attending physician, in a Under the Law on Evidence, an adverse party’s
    very feeble voice, that it was Arnulfo, his co-worker, witness may be properly impeached by reputation
    who had shot him. Venancio added that it was also evidence provided that it is to the effect that the
    Arnulfo who had shot Vicente, the man whose cadaver witness’s general reputation for honesty, truth, or
    was lying on the bed beside him. integrity was bad. [S11 R132] The reputation must only
    be on character for truthfulness or untruthfulness.
    In the prosecution of Arnulfo for the criminal [Cordial v. People, 166 SCRA 17]
    killing of Venancio and Vicente, are all the statements
    of Venancio admissible as dying declarations? Explain Here the evidence is not on the Prosecution
    your answer. witness’s general reputation for honesty, truth, or
    integrity but on his aggressive and violent tendencies.
    SUGGESTED ANSWER: The evidence had nothing to do with the witness’s
    character for truthfulness or untruthfulness. Hence the
    No, not all the statements of Venancio are impeachment was improper
    admissible as dying declarations.

    You might also like