1.

The following shall be admissible in evidence even without presentation of

evidence as they are considered judicial notice. Which one is not a proper
subject of judicial notice?
a. California Laws on Succession as personally known by the
judge(Sec. 1, Rule 127)
b. Republic Act 9048, as amended by RA 10172
c. Municipal Ordinances within the jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Court of
Nueva Ecija
d. Tawi-tawi as part of Mindanao

2. Which of the following admissions made by a party in the course of the judicial
proceeding is a judicial admission?
a. Admission in a pleading signed by the accused which is intended to be
filed by his counsel
b. Admission in a pleading on a separate and/or different case between
the same parties
c. Admission made by the counsel of the accused in open court(Sec.
4, Rule 127)
d. Admission contained a complaint which is superseded by an amended
complaint

3. Which of the following is admissible as evidence without further proof of due

execution and genuineness?
a. Certificate of Confirmation
b. Receipts for Payment under a Contract of Lease
c. Official Records in the US Embassy(Sec. 1, Rule 127)
d. School Records

4. Sally was charged with the crime of Theft. In her Answer, she alleged that she
is only fourteen (14) years old; hence, she should not be held criminally liable.
However, no sufficient evidence was presented to prove her minority. Can the
court take judicial notice of the minority of the accused?
a. Yes, the age of the victim is already alleged in the complaint.
b. No, minority is a special qualifying circumstance which must be
duly proven by competent evidence.(Sec. 2, Rule 127)
c. Yes, the child admitted in open court that she is fourteen (14) years
old.
d. No, the age of a person is not of public knowledge.

5. Mercy filed a complaint for Estafa against Emily. It was alleged therein that
Emily sold a gold necklace to her with pretense that it is genuine when in truth
and in fact, it is fake. In her Answer, Emily stated that indeed, the gold
necklace is fake and she only needed the money for the hospitalization of her
mother. However, despite the fact that the Answer was signed by the Emily
 and her counsel, it was not filed. Assuming that Mercy acquired a copy of the
Answer, may the court consider Emilys statement as Judicial Admission?
a. No, admission in a document drafted for purposes of filing a
pleading but never filed is not a judicial admission.(Sec. 4, Rule
127)
b. Yes, the Answer is already signed by the accused.
c. No, judicial admission must be made in open court.
d. Yes, the Answer is already signed by the accuseds counsel.
6. Leading question is a question which suggests to the witness the answer
which the examining party desires. When is a leading question not allowed?

a. In direct examinations
b. In cross examinations
c. On preliminary matters
d. When the witness is a hostile witness
Answer: A.

7. Statement 1: The impeachment of a party is to be done by the party against

whom the witness is called.

Statement 2: A witness cannot be impeached by evidence of particular

wrongful acts except evidence of his final conviction of an offense as
disclosed by his examination or the record of the judgment.

a. Both statements are correct.

b. Both statements are incorrect.
c. First statement is correct; second statement is incorrect.
d. First statement is incorrect; second statement is correct.
Answer: A.
8. Statement 1: There are two ways of proving the due execution and
genuineness of a private instrument. One way is to rely on the personal
knowledge of a witness. And the second is to require that the document be
executed in the presence of the witness.
9. Russel was charged with the crime of Forgery. During the trial of the case,
Russel was called to the witness stand to testify. The opposing counsel asked
Russel to write and sign on a piece of paper to prove that he was indeed that
forged the signature of the private party on the latters checks. May Russels
counsel object on the ground that such act would violate her right against self-
incrimination?
a. Yes, as an accused is granted by the Constitution of his right
against self-incrimination.(Sec. 36, Rule 130)
b. No, as an accused cannot be granted the right of self-incrimination in
case he is called to testify on his behalf.
 c. No, as the act of writing and signing is an integral part of the opposing
counsels cross examination of the witness.
d. No, the right of self-incrimination is waived as he took the witness
stand.

10. Chloe was presented as a witness in a case. During her direct examination, it
was observed that she quickly answers even before the question is over
preventing the adverse counsel from reacting and objecting to the
propounded questions. What should the adverse counsel do, if any?
a. The adverse counsel cannot do anything as he is deemed to have
waived his right to interpose an objection.
b. The adverse counsel cannot object since as a rule, objection to a
question propounded in the course of oral examination of a witness
shall be made as soon as the grounds thereof shall be reasonably
apparent.
11. The general rule provides that evidence not formally offered shall not be
considered. Which of the following is an exemption?
a. Evidence which are already marked and identified during trial but were
lost and/or destroyed by reason of a fortuitous event
b. In case of judgment of the pleading
c. Documentary evidence in a Petition for Recognition of a Foreign
Judgment
d. Evidence in an Land Registration Cases

12. Maxine was called as witness in trial of a case, wherein she be subjected to
direct testimony. Immediately thereafter, without any formal offer of her
testimony, Atty. Arroyo started asking her questions. In what circumstance
may the court still consider her testimony?
a. Atty. Arroyo formally offered her testimony as evidence after
conducting the direct examination.
b. In case the opposing counsel cross-examines the Maxine on her
testimony during the direct examination.
c. Maxine is presented as an expert witness.
d. There is no objection made by the opposing counsel.(Sec. 36,
Rule 130)

13. Artemio was charged with the crime of Rape. During the preliminary
conference, his mother approached Patty, the victims mother and offered
P500,000.00 in order to settle the case. However, such offer was not
accepted. During the trial of the case, the prosecution presented as evidence
the offer made by Arturos mother as proof of his admission of guilt with the
crime charged. Is the offer made by Artemios mother admissible in evidence?
a. No, the offer was made by the accuseds mother and not by the
accused himself.
 b. Yes, the offer to settle even though made by the accuseds mother
is admissible as it is considered as an implied admission of
guilt.(Peo v Salvador, GR No. 136-870-72, 2003)
c. No, the offer of compromise must be made in open court.
d. Yes, offer of compromise is always considered as evidence against the
offeror.

14. The most basic reason for the adoption of the Judicial Affidavit Rule is to
decongest the courts of cases and to reduce delays in the disposition of
cases. Which of the following statements is not true?

a. The judicial affidavit shall take place of the direct testimonies of witnesses.
b. The judicial affidavit of a witness must be offered after the presentation of
the partys testimonial evidence.
c. The rule shall apply to all actions, proceedings, or incidents requiring the
reception of evidence.
d. The Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to criminal cases except where the
maximum of the imposable penalty exceeds six years.
Answer: B.

15. As a rule, a witness has an obligation to answer questions, although his

answer may tend to establish a claim against him. However, there are
questions which he is not bound to answer. Which of the following is not
among the exceptions?

a. Questions which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense.

b. Frivolous questions which will tend to degrade his personality.
c. Questions which are pertinent to the issue.
d. Questions which will tend to degrade his reputation.
Answer: C.