EASY QUESTIONS (1–20)

1. During a barangay fiesta, a fight breaks out. Juan stabs Pedro, causing serious injuries. A police officer
arrests Juan without a warrant. Is this allowed?

A. Yes, if Juan was caught in the act of stabbing Pedro

B. No, all arrests must have a warrant

C. Yes, if Pedro gives consent

D. No, unless approved by the mayor

Answer: A. Yes, if Juan was caught in the act of stabbing Pedro

Explanation: A warrantless arrest is valid if the person is caught in flagrante delicto (Rule 113, Sec. 5).

B is wrong because not all arrests require a warrant.

C is wrong because the victim’s consent is not needed.

D is wrong because the mayor has no authority to approve arrests.

2. A complaint for slight physical injuries was filed directly with the court. Is this proper?

A. Yes, if the court accepts it

B. No, it must go through the prosecutor

C. No, it must first undergo barangay conciliation

D. Yes, since physical injury is a public crime

Answer: C. No, it must first undergo barangay conciliation

Explanation: Minor offenses between residents of the same barangay must undergo barangay
conciliation first (Lupong Tagapamayapa).

Why it applies to Slight Physical Injuries:

Slight physical injuries is:

A private crime, often between persons residing in the same barangay.

Punished by less than 1 year, which is within the threshold for mandatory barangay conciliation.

A is wrong; the court will dismiss it.

B is wrong; not all cases must go through the prosecutor.

D is wrong; it’s not considered a public crime exempt from conciliation.

3. Who has the authority to determine probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest?

A. Barangay captain

B. Police investigator

C. Prosecutor

D. Judge

Answer: D. Judge

Explanation: Only the judge can issue a warrant of arrest upon personal determination of probable
cause (Rule 112, Sec. 6).

A and B do not have that authority.

C conducts preliminary investigation but cannot issue warrants.

4. A prosecutor finds probable cause after preliminary investigation. What is the next step?

A. Issue a warrant

B. File an information with the court

C. Conduct arraignment

D. Proceed to trial

Answer: B. File an information with the court

Explanation: After finding probable cause, the prosecutor files the information (Rule 110, Sec. 4).

A is wrong; only a judge can issue a warrant.

C and D are court functions, not the prosecutor’s.

5. When should an accused be arraigned?

A. Immediately after arrest

B. Within 15 days from receipt of records by the court

C. Within 3 days from filing of complaint

D. Any time before judgment

Answer: B. Within 15 days from receipt of records by the court

Explanation: Arraignment must be held within 15 days from the court's receipt of the case (Rule 116,
Sec. 1).

A is too early.

C is not the rule.

D is incorrect; trial cannot proceed without arraignment.

6. The judge finds no probable cause after reviewing the information. What should the judge do?

A. Order the police to arrest anyway

B. Proceed to arraignment

C. Dismiss the case

D. Ask the prosecutor to explain further

Answer: C. Dismiss the case

Explanation: The judge must dismiss the case if there is no probable cause (Rule 112, Sec. 6).

A is illegal.

B is premature.

D is discretionary but not required.

7. Which pleading initiates a criminal case in court?

A. Complaint

B. Subpoena

C. Motion

D. Information
Answer: D. Information

Explanation: A criminal case in court is initiated by filing an information by the prosecutor (Rule 110,
Sec. 4).

A is for preliminary investigation.

B and C are not initiatory pleadings.

8. Who prosecutes criminal actions in court?

A. Private complainant

B. Judge

C. Public prosecutor

D. Arresting officer

Answer: C. Public prosecutor

Explanation: Only the public prosecutor prosecutes criminal cases (Rule 110, Sec. 5).

A may assist in certain cases.

B must be impartial.

D cannot prosecute.

9. In what court should a criminal case for estafa involving ₱1 million be filed?

A. Barangay

B. Municipal Trial Court

C. Regional Trial Court

D. Supreme Court

Answer: C. Regional Trial Court

Explanation: Estafa over ₱400,000 falls under the RTC’s jurisdiction (BP 129, as amended).

A has no criminal jurisdiction.

B handles lower amounts.

D is not a trial court.

10. Which of the following is NOT a mode of instituting criminal actions?

A. Complaint filed by offended party

B. Information filed by prosecutor

C. Warrant of arrest

D. Complaint filed by law enforcement officer

Answer: C. Warrant of arrest

Explanation: A warrant is not a mode of instituting action; it's part of the arrest process.

A, B, and D are valid initiatory steps.

11. When is plea bargaining NOT allowed?

A. In crimes involving minors

B. In crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua

C. In traffic violations

D. In drug cases under Section 12

Answer: B. In crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua

Explanation: Plea bargaining is not allowed in crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment (Rule 116, Sec. 2).

A may be allowed with court approval.

12. What is the maximum number of days to conduct trial under the "Speedy Trial Act"?

A. 30

B. 60

C. 90

D. 180
Answer: C. 90

Explanation: Trial must commence within 30 days from arraignment and finish within 90 days (RA 8493).

A, B, and D are incorrect durations.

13. The accused filed a motion to quash based on lack of jurisdiction. The court agreed. What happens
next?

A. Case is dismissed without prejudice

B. Case proceeds to trial

C. Accused is acquitted

D. Case is archived

Answer: A. Case is dismissed without prejudice

Explanation: Dismissals due to lack of jurisdiction are without prejudice (Rule 117, Sec. 5).

B is wrong; trial can’t proceed.

C is incorrect; there’s no trial yet.

D is not proper here.

14. What is the purpose of a preliminary investigation?

A. Determine guilt

B. Determine probable cause

C. Arrest the accused

D. Punish the offender

Answer: B. Determine probable cause

Explanation: Preliminary investigation aims to determine probable cause (Rule 112, Sec. 1).

A and D are done by courts.

C is not its function.

15. Who may file a complaint for offenses requiring preliminary investigation?

A. Any police officer

B. Only the judge

C. The offended party or peace officer

D. The barangay tanod

Answer: C. The offended party or peace officer

Explanation: Rule 110, Sec. 3 allows either the offended party or peace officer.

A and D are not proper unless authorized.

B does not file complaints

16. The accused pleads guilty during arraignment. What must the court do?

A. Immediately convict the accused

B. Proceed to sentencing

C. Require presentation of evidence

D. Order a plea bargain

Answer: C. Require presentation of evidence

Explanation: For serious offenses, the court must still require the prosecution to present evidence (Rule
116, Sec. 3).

A and B violate due process.

D is not automatic.

17. Who determines the sufficiency of the information filed?

A. Judge

B. Police

C. Clerk of court

D. Private complainant
Answer: A. Judge

Explanation: The judge reviews the information to ensure it states all essential elements (Rule 110, Sec.
9).

B, C, and D do not perform this function.

18. Which motion is prohibited after arraignment?

A. Motion to quash

B. Motion for bail

C. Motion to suspend proceedings

D. Motion for reinvestigation

Answer: A. Motion to quash

Explanation: A motion to quash must be filed before arraignment (Rule 117, Sec. 1).

B, C, and D may still be allowed.

19. A judge issued a warrant without personally examining the witnesses. Is this valid?

A. Yes, if the prosecutor recommends it

B. No, personal examination is required

C. Yes, if the police endorse it

D. No, unless the defense agrees

Answer: B. No, personal examination is required

Explanation: The judge must personally examine the complainant and witnesses (Rule 112, Sec. 6).

A and C are insufficient.

D is irrelevant.

20. Which of the following can be a ground for a motion to quash?

A. Complaint is too long

B. Information is not signed by prosecutor

C. Case is filed in wrong province

D. The accused is nervous

Answer: B. Information is not signed by prosecutor

Explanation: An unsigned information is invalid (Rule 117, Sec. 3).

A and D are frivolous.

C is venue, which is separate but may be valid only in certain cases.

MODERATE (21–70)

21. A criminal complaint for estafa was filed with the prosecutor’s office. During preliminary
investigation, the respondent refused to submit a counter-affidavit and instead requested for a full-
blown hearing. What is the effect of such refusal?

A. The complaint shall be automatically dismissed.

B. The prosecutor shall resolve the case based on the evidence on record.

C. The prosecutor is required to subpoena the respondent again.

D. The case must be endorsed to the court.

Answer: B. The prosecutor shall resolve the case based on the evidence on record.

Explanation: Under Rule 112, if the respondent does not submit a counter-affidavit, the prosecutor will
resolve the case based on the evidence submitted by the complainant. (A) is wrong as the complaint is
not dismissed solely due to lack of counter-affidavit. (C) is incorrect; the prosecutor is not required to
subpoena again. (D) is premature as resolution must first be made.

22. A judge issued a warrant of arrest after a preliminary investigation conducted by the prosecutor.
However, the judge did not personally evaluate the evidence. Is the warrant valid?

A. Yes, the prosecutor's finding is enough.

B. Yes, as long as the complaint is verified.

C. No, the judge must personally determine probable cause.

D. No, unless the accused fails to post bail.

Answer: C. No, the judge must personally determine probable cause.

Explanation: Under Rule 112 and jurisprudence (People vs. Yadao), the judge must independently
determine probable cause before issuing a warrant. (A) and (B) are incorrect as reliance on the
prosecutor's finding alone is not enough. (D) is irrelevant to the validity of the warrant.

23. An accused was arrested without a warrant during a drug buy-bust operation. He claims the arrest
was illegal and files a motion to quash. When must this motion be filed?

A. Before plea

B. After plea

C. Any time during trial

D. Only after arraignment

Answer: A. Before plea

Explanation: Rule 117 requires motions to quash based on illegal arrest to be raised before arraignment
and plea. (B) and (C) are too late. (D) is incorrect because it must be before arraignment.

24. A criminal case was filed in the RTC, but the information did not include the time of commission of
the offense. Is the information valid?

A. Yes, if time is not a material ingredient.

B. No, time must always be stated.

C. No, it violates the right to due process.

D. Yes, as long as the accused was arrested.

Answer: A. Yes, if time is not a material ingredient.

Explanation: Under Rule 110, time need not be stated with exactness unless it is a material ingredient of
the offense. (B) and (C) are incorrect because exact time is not always essential. (D) is irrelevant to the
sufficiency of the information.
25. During trial, the prosecution filed a motion to amend the information to correct a typographical
error in the date of the crime. The defense objected. What should the court do?

A. Deny the amendment because the trial has started.

B. Allow the amendment as it is formal.

C. Refer the motion to the Supreme Court.

D. Dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.

Answer: B. Allow the amendment as it is formal.

Explanation: Rule 110 allows formal amendments even after plea, provided it does not prejudice the
rights of the accused. Typographical errors are formal. (A) is incorrect because the timing doesn't bar
formal amendments. (C) and (D) are both inapplicable.

26. A person is charged with slight physical injuries. The trial proceeds, and evidence shows the injury
was actually serious. Can the court convict for serious physical injuries?

A. Yes, based on evidence presented.

B. No, the charge limits the conviction.

C. Yes, if the victim consents.

D. No, unless new information is filed.

Answer: D. No, unless new information is filed.

Explanation: Conviction must be based on the charge. If evidence proves a graver offense, the proper
procedure is to file an amended or new information. (A) is wrong as it violates due process. (B) is
partially correct but incomplete. (C) is not a legal basis.

27. An accused is charged with theft but raises self-defense. Is this a valid defense?

A. Yes, if there is imminent threat.

B. No, because theft is not a crime against persons.

C. Yes, self-defense is always available.

D. No, unless it involves force.

Answer: B. No, because theft is not a crime against persons.

Explanation: Self-defense under Article 11 of the RPC is applicable only in crimes against persons. Theft
does not involve aggression toward the accused. (A), (C), and (D) are incorrect applications of self-
defense.

28. An information was filed without a certification of preliminary investigation. The accused moves to
quash. What is the proper ruling?

A. Grant the motion because the certification is mandatory.

B. Deny the motion because it's not a ground for quashal.

C. Grant the motion and dismiss the case.

D. Dismiss and refer the case back to the prosecutor.

Answer: B. Deny the motion because it's not a ground for quashal.

Explanation: Lack of certification is not among the grounds under Rule 117 for quashal. It may be a
procedural defect but not fatal. (A) and (C) are incorrect. (D) is also not proper without a proper motion
for reinvestigation.

29. An accused was convicted in a summary proceeding without being allowed to present evidence. He
appeals. What is the proper remedy?

A. File a petition for certiorari.

B. Appeal to the RTC.

C. File a motion for reconsideration.

D. Request a reinvestigation.

Answer: B. Appeal to the RTC.

Explanation: In summary procedures, appeal lies with the RTC. (A) is only for grave abuse of discretion.
(C) may be done, but appeal is the proper mode. (D) is for preliminary investigation, not conviction.

30. A search warrant was issued for illegal firearms. The police seized drugs. Are the drugs admissible?

A. Yes, under the plain view doctrine.

B. No, because they were not described in the warrant.

C. Yes, because drugs are always contraband.

D. No, unless a new warrant is obtained.

Answer: A. Yes, under the plain view doctrine.

Explanation: Evidence not listed in the warrant but found in plain view during a legal search is
admissible. (B) and (D) ignore the plain view rule. (C) is misleading; admissibility still depends on how the
evidence was found.

31. A judge issued a warrantless arrest order over the phone to a police officer during an ongoing
robbery. The officer arrested the suspect. Is the arrest valid?

A. Yes, because there was an ongoing crime.

B. No, judges cannot order warrantless arrests.

C. Yes, judges may issue oral arrest orders.

D. No, all arrests need written authority.

Answer: B. No, judges cannot order warrantless arrests.

Explanation: Only peace officers may arrest without warrant under Rule 113, Section 5. Judges are not
allowed to direct such arrests, especially orally. (A) is invalid because the judge is not the arresting party.
(C) and (D) are also incorrect as no judicial intervention is allowed in warrantless arrests.

32. A complaint-affidavit was filed for qualified theft. During preliminary investigation, the respondent
argued that there was no probable cause. The prosecutor dismissed the case. Can the complainant
appeal?
A. Yes, by petition for review to DOJ.

B. No, the decision is final.

C. Yes, directly to the Supreme Court.

D. No, because dismissal is interlocutory.

Answer: A. Yes, by petition for review to DOJ.

Explanation: Under DOJ rules, the complainant may file a petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor with the Secretary of Justice. (B) and (D) are incorrect. (C) bypasses the hierarchy of courts.

33. During trial for homicide, the prosecution moved to amend the information to include treachery.
Can this be allowed?

A. Yes, if no prejudice to the accused.

B. No, it changes the nature of the offense.

C. Yes, if the trial has not ended.

D. No, aggravating circumstances cannot be added.

Answer: B. No, it changes the nature of the offense.

Explanation: Adding treachery changes the charge from homicide to murder. This is a substantial
amendment which is not allowed after plea. (A) and (C) apply only to formal amendments. (D) is too
broad.

34. The defense claims the case should be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged.
When must this be raised?

A. Before plea

B. Any time during trial

C. During arraignment
D. After judgment

Answer: A. Before plea

Explanation: Lack of jurisdiction over the offense must be raised in a motion to quash before plea (Rule
117). (B) and (D) are too late. (C) is vague; it must be a formal motion prior to entering a plea.

35. In a case for serious physical injuries, the offended party and the accused executed an amicable
settlement. What is the effect?

A. The case is automatically dismissed.

B. The court may approve the settlement and dismiss the case.

C. The case proceeds since it’s a public offense.

D. The prosecution must endorse the settlement.

Answer: C. The case proceeds since it’s a public offense.

Explanation: Serious physical injuries is a public offense and cannot be compromised (Rule 111). (A) and
(B) are only applicable to private crimes. (D) is incorrect since prosecution cannot validate a prohibited
compromise.

36. A warrant of arrest was served on a Sunday. The accused moved to quash it due to improper service.
Is the motion valid?

A. Yes, arrests cannot be made on Sundays.

B. No, there’s no rule prohibiting Sunday arrests.

C. Yes, because court processes are not served on weekends.

D. No, unless the arrest was violent.

Answer: B. No, there’s no rule prohibiting Sunday arrests.

Explanation: Arrests may be made any time, including weekends, unless otherwise restricted by the
court (Rule 113). (A) and (C) are incorrect; service of warrants is not limited by day. (D) is irrelevant.
37. An accused filed a motion to quash after arraignment. What is the consequence?

A. The motion will be denied for being late.

B. The court must suspend proceedings.

C. The motion can still be granted if meritorious.

D. It will be treated as a demurrer.

Answer: A. The motion will be denied for being late.

Explanation: Motions to quash must be filed before plea (Rule 117). Filing it after arraignment is
improper. (C) is only true for some exceptions like double jeopardy. (B) and (D) are incorrect.

38. During arraignment, the court allowed the accused to waive reading of the information. Is this
proper?

A. Yes, if the accused has counsel.

B. No, the information must always be read.

C. Yes, if the accused pleads guilty.

D. No, unless approved by the prosecutor.

Answer: B. No, the information must always be read.

Explanation: Rule 116 mandates that the information be read in open court to ensure full
understanding. (A) and (C) are incorrect because reading is not waivable. (D) is not a requirement for
arraignment.

39. An accused charged with robbery filed a motion for bill of particulars. When is this allowed?

A. Before plea

B. After trial

C. Before judgment
D. After appeal

Answer: A. Before plea

Explanation: A bill of particulars clarifies vague allegations and must be requested before entering a plea
(Rule 116, Sec. 9). (B), (C), and (D) are too late.

40. The RTC issued a subpoena duces tecum to a witness in a criminal case. The witness refused to
comply. What is the proper remedy?

A. File a contempt charge.

B. File for preliminary investigation.

C. File a demurrer to evidence.

D. File a motion to dismiss.

Answer: A. File a contempt charge.

Explanation: A person disobeying a subpoena may be punished for contempt (Rule 23 applies
suppletorily). (B) is not applicable. (C) and (D) address trial outcomes, not witness compliance.

41. The private complainant failed to appear in a criminal case for slight physical injuries during
arraignment. What is the consequence?

A. The case will be archived.

B. The court will proceed without complainant.

C. The case may be dismissed.

D. The case will be submitted for resolution.

Answer: C. The case may be dismissed.

Explanation: In summary procedure cases, non-appearance of the private complainant can lead to
dismissal under Rule 119 and relevant circulars. (A) is done only in certain cases. (B) and (D) are not
automatic.
42. A judge conducted arraignment even though the accused had no counsel. The accused pleaded
guilty. Is the plea valid?

A. Yes, since the plea was voluntary.

B. No, counsel must be present.

C. Yes, if the judge explained the charge.

D. No, unless approved by the prosecution.

Answer: B. No, counsel must be present.

Explanation: Under Rule 116 and constitutional guarantees, arraignment without counsel is void. (A) and
(C) ignore the right to counsel. (D) is not relevant in this scenario.

43. A criminal information contains multiple offenses. The defense files a motion to quash. What is the
proper court action?

A. Dismiss the information.

B. Order amendment to cure the defect.

C. Proceed with trial.

D. Archive the case.

Answer: B. Order amendment to cure the defect.

Explanation: Rule 110 prohibits duplicity, but the court usually orders the prosecutor to amend rather
than dismiss outright. (A) is too harsh. (C) violates procedural rules. (D) is inapplicable.

44. A prosecution witness recanted on the stand, saying he was coerced to sign the affidavit. What
should the court do?

A. Automatically acquit the accused.

B. Evaluate the testimony and other evidence.

C. Strike out the testimony.

D. Refer the matter to the Ombudsman.

Answer: B. Evaluate the testimony and other evidence.

Explanation: Recantations are viewed with caution. The court assesses all evidence (People v. Ubiña). (A)
is not automatic. (C) and (D) do not address the proper procedure.

45. The accused filed a demurrer to evidence without leave of court and it was denied. What is the
result?

A. He may still present evidence.

B. He has waived his right to present evidence.

C. He must appeal immediately.

D. The case must be dismissed.

Answer: B. He has waived his right to present evidence.

Explanation: A demurrer without leave, if denied, waives the right to adduce defense evidence (Rule
119). (A) is incorrect. (C) and (D) are premature or inapplicable.

46. During trial, the prosecution failed to present a material witness despite several resets. The accused
moved to dismiss. What is the proper action?

A. Grant the motion and acquit the accused.

B. Dismiss the case provisionally.

C. Deny the motion and continue trial.

D. Order the prosecution to rest its case.

Answer: D. Order the prosecution to rest its case.

Explanation: The court may order the prosecution to rest if it unjustifiably fails to present evidence. The
accused can then file a demurrer. (A) and (B) are premature. (C) ignores due process and court control
over trial.
47. In a case for estafa, the accused was arrested and detained for 10 days without being charged. What
constitutional right was violated?

A. Right against unreasonable searches

B. Right to bail

C. Right to be informed of the nature of accusation

D. Right to speedy disposition of cases

Answer: D. Right to speedy disposition of cases

Explanation: Detention without charges beyond the reglementary period violates the right to speedy
disposition under Rule 114. (A) and (B) are unrelated. (C) applies only when formally charged.

48. A barangay settlement was reached in a case for slight physical injuries, but the accused was still
charged. Can he be convicted?

A. Yes, settlement does not bar prosecution.

B. No, barangay settlement is final.

C. Yes, if approved by the prosecutor.

D. No, private crimes require settlement first.

Answer: A. Yes, settlement does not bar prosecution.

Explanation: Public offenses like slight physical injuries may proceed despite barangay conciliation,
unless expressly allowed under Rule 111. (B) and (D) misapply rules. (C) does not affect court
jurisdiction.

49. The accused refused to enter a plea during arraignment. What must the court do?

A. Enter a plea of not guilty.

B. Order re-arraignment.
C. Dismiss the case.

D. Defer arraignment.

Answer: A. Enter a plea of not guilty.

Explanation: Rule 116, Sec. 1(e) provides that if the accused refuses to plead, the court shall enter a plea
of not guilty. (B), (C), and (D) are unnecessary and not supported by rules.

50. In a criminal case, the accused did not raise double jeopardy in his motion to quash. Can he raise it
later?

A. No, it is waived.

B. Yes, it may be raised any time.

C. Yes, but only before arraignment.

D. No, unless with leave of court.

Answer: B. Yes, it may be raised any time.

Explanation: Double jeopardy, being a constitutional right, may be raised even on appeal or motu
proprio by the court. (A) and (C) are incorrect. (D) does not apply to this kind of objection.

51. A complaint-affidavit was filed before the prosecutor’s office but without the necessary sworn
statements. What is the effect?

A. It is considered as evidence.

B. It can proceed if the complainant is present.

C. It is not a valid complaint.

D. It is deemed an anonymous tip.

Answer: C. It is not a valid complaint.

Explanation: A complaint must be in writing and sworn (Rule 110). Without oath or affidavit, it lacks legal
effect. (A), (B), and (D) misconstrue the formal requirements.
52. A witness refused to answer cross-examination questions. What is the effect?

A. His testimony is stricken off the record.

B. He may be compelled through contempt.

C. His testimony stands as-is.

D. He must be replaced by another witness.

Answer: A. His testimony is stricken off the record.

Explanation: Cross-examination is a constitutional right. Refusal means the direct testimony is

inadmissible (Sec. 13, Rule 132). (B) may follow, but the testimony is already flawed. (C) and (D) are
invalid.

53. The prosecutor filed a motion to withdraw the information due to lack of evidence. The court denied
it. What may the prosecutor do?

A. Proceed with trial.

B. Appeal the court’s denial.

C. Refile the case.

D. Reinvestigate the case.

Answer: A. Proceed with trial.

Explanation: Once the case is filed, prosecution is under the court's control. If the court denies
withdrawal, the prosecution must proceed. (B) is improper. (C) and (D) assume dismissal.

54. A judge tried to influence the prosecutor to withdraw a criminal case. What ethical rule is violated?

A. Doctrine of command responsibility

B. Rule on impartiality
C. Doctrine of qualified political agency

D. Rule against ex parte communication

Answer: B. Rule on impartiality

Explanation: Judges must remain impartial and must not influence prosecution decisions. (A), (C), and
(D) do not apply in this scenario.

55. The information charged Juan with robbery “sometime in August 2020.” He was proven to have
committed the crime in July 2020. Is the variance fatal?

A. Yes, the date is material.

B. No, time is not an essential element.

C. Yes, he was not properly informed.

D. No, if he didn’t object.

Answer: B. No, time is not an essential element.

Explanation: Unless time is essential (e.g., prescription, alibi), slight variance is not fatal. (A) and (C)
ignore this. (D) is correct only in certain procedural contexts.

56. A case for rape was dismissed after arraignment without trial. Can the accused invoke double
jeopardy?

A. Yes, if dismissed without consent.

B. No, dismissal is not equivalent to acquittal.

C. Yes, any dismissal triggers double jeopardy.

D. No, rape is imprescriptible.

Answer: A. Yes, if dismissed without consent.

Explanation: Double jeopardy attaches after valid arraignment and dismissal without the accused’s
express consent. (B) is only partly correct. (C) is overbroad. (D) is irrelevant.
57. A motion to quash was granted due to violation of the right to speedy trial. Can the case be refiled?

A. Yes, upon DOJ clearance.

B. No, the dismissal amounts to acquittal.

C. Yes, since it’s not a trial on merits.

D. No, unless new evidence is found.

Answer: B. No, the dismissal amounts to acquittal.

Explanation: Dismissal based on speedy trial violation is equivalent to acquittal (Rule 117). (A), (C), and
(D) cannot override constitutional protections.

58. In a criminal case, the accused was not furnished a copy of the amended information. He was
convicted. Is this valid?

A. Yes, if there was no objection.

B. No, due process was violated.

C. Yes, if he had counsel.

D. No, unless the court allows late service.

Answer: B. No, due process was violated.

Explanation: The accused must be informed of the charges. Failure to furnish a copy of the amended
information violates this right. (A) and (C) are not substitutes. (D) assumes delayed but valid service.

---
59. The private prosecutor seeks to present additional evidence after the prosecution has rested. What
must he do?

A. Ask permission from the judge.

B. File a demurrer.

C. Reopen the trial unilaterally.

D. Nothing; he can proceed anytime.

Answer: A. Ask permission from the judge.

Explanation: Rule 119 requires leave of court to reopen trial before judgment. (B) is inapplicable. (C) and
(D) are procedural violations.

---

60. The accused jumped bail during trial but returned after one year. What is the legal effect?

A. Case is revived, and trial resumes.

B. Bail is automatically reinstated.

C. Case is dismissed for delay.

D. Trial must restart.

Answer: A. Case is revived, and trial resumes.

Explanation: The case remains pending and trial may resume. (B) is wrong; bail may be forfeited. (C)
punishes the court. (D) is not required unless due process is affected.

61. A foreign national was charged with estafa. He claimed diplomatic immunity. How should the court
proceed?
A. Dismiss the case outright.

B. Refer the matter to DFA.

C. Order trial in absentia.

D. Suspend proceedings.

Answer: B. Refer the matter to DFA.

Explanation: The DFA determines claims of diplomatic immunity. The court must defer. (A) and (D) are
premature. (C) ignores jurisdictional issues.

62. A prosecutor failed to file the information within 15 days after preliminary investigation. What is the
remedy?

A. File motion to dismiss.

B. File petition for mandamus.

C. File motion for reconsideration.

D. File administrative case.

Answer: B. File petition for mandamus.

Explanation: The remedy to compel performance of a duty is mandamus. (A) and (C) are not effective.
(D) may be a separate action but not the immediate remedy.

---

63. A minor is charged with theft. What must the court ensure during arraignment?

A. Presence of counsel only.

B. Presence of social worker and parents.

C. Presence of the complainant.

D. None; minors are tried like adults.

Answer: B. Presence of social worker and parents.

Explanation: Under the Juvenile Justice Act and procedural rules, minors require special protection,
including the presence of a guardian and social worker. (A), (C), and (D) are insufficient.

64. A criminal case was terminated, and judgment was rendered. The accused claims the judge was
biased. What is the proper remedy?

A. Appeal the judgment.

B. File for inhibition.

C. File motion to vacate.

D. File administrative case.

Answer: A. Appeal the judgment.

Explanation: Once judgment is rendered, remedies must follow post-trial procedures. (B) and (C) apply
before or during trial. (D) may proceed but will not affect the criminal case.

65. A search warrant was issued for “personal belongings related to theft.” What rule is violated?

A. Doctrine of probable cause

B. Rule against general warrants

C. Rule on territorial jurisdiction

D. Rule on custody of evidence

Answer: B. Rule against general warrants.

Explanation: Warrants must particularly describe items. Vague terms like “personal belongings” violate
Rule 126 and jurisprudence. (A) and (C) are unrelated. (D) concerns handling, not issuance.
66. A judge rendered judgment convicting the accused without holding promulgation. Is the judgment
valid?

A. Yes, if written and signed.

B. No, it must be promulgated.

C. Yes, if given to the defense.

D. No, unless approved by SC.

Answer: B. No, it must be promulgated.

Explanation: Rule 120 requires promulgation in open court. Judgment is not effective unless duly
promulgated. (A), (C), and (D) are incorrect.

67. The accused was acquitted due to insufficiency of evidence. Can the prosecution appeal?

A. Yes, under Rule 65.

B. No, it constitutes double jeopardy.

C. Yes, with DOJ clearance.

D. No, unless there’s fraud.

Answer: B. No, it constitutes double jeopardy.

Explanation: Acquittal cannot be appealed as it would violate double jeopardy. (A) is only allowed in
extreme cases. (C) and (D) do not override the constitutional bar.

68. A person was arrested for murder but charged only with slight physical injuries. What should the
court do?

A. Proceed with trial.

B. Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

C. Order amendment of charge.

D. Remand for preliminary investigation.

Answer: D. Remand for preliminary investigation.

Explanation: If the charge is for a lesser offense requiring PI but one was not conducted, the case must
be remanded. (A) is improper. (B) and (C) do not resolve due process issues.

69. During trial, the judge acted as prosecutor by questioning the witness harshly. What rule is violated?

A. Rule on hearsay

B. Rule on confrontation

C. Rule on judicial neutrality

D. Rule on examination of witnesses

Answer: C. Rule on judicial neutrality

Explanation: Judges must remain impartial. Taking on the role of prosecutor violates due process. (A),
(B), and (D) do not address the core issue.

70. A motion for new trial was granted based on newly discovered evidence. What happens next?

A. Case is dismissed.

B. New trial is conducted.

C. Evidence is summarily admitted.

D. Judgment is automatically reversed.

Answer: B. New trial is conducted.

Explanation: Grant of new trial means the court reopens the case and proceeds to hear it again. (A) and
(D) are incorrect. (C) skips necessary procedures.

DIFFICULT (71–100)

71.
During preliminary investigation, the prosecutor designated the crime as “Homicide” based on the
information presented. However, the affidavit of the complainant alleges the killing was attended by
treachery. The defense moved to quash the Information on the ground of wrong designation of the
offense.

Which is most accurate?

A. The case must be dismissed due to the misdesignation of the offense.

B. The Information must be amended immediately by the court.

C. The designation of the offense is controlling even if facts show otherwise.

D. The allegations in the Information control, not the designation of the offense.

Answer: D.

Rule: Rule 110, Section 8 – Designation of the Offense

Explanation: The designation of the offense is not controlling; what determines the crime charged are
the facts alleged in the Information. Even if the title reads “Homicide,” but the recital shows treachery, it
may be elevated to Murder.

A: Incorrect. Misdesignation is not a ground for dismissal if the facts allege a crime.

B: Incorrect. The court cannot amend motu proprio; the prosecutor must.

C: Incorrect. The title does not prevail over the narration of facts.

72.
An accused was previously charged with slight physical injuries, but the case was dismissed upon motion
of the private complainant before arraignment. Months later, the same complainant filed a second
complaint for the same incident, now alleging serious physical injuries.

Which principle applies?

A. Second prosecution is allowed since the first was dismissed.

B. This is a case of res judicata.

C. The second filing is barred by double jeopardy.

D. The first case does not bar the second because it was not tried.

Answer: C.

Rule: Rule 117, Section 7 – Former conviction or acquittal; double jeopardy

Explanation: Double jeopardy attaches even if there was no trial, as long as the accused was charged and
the case was dismissed without his consent. Here, the first dismissal was not with his consent, thus
barring further prosecution.

A: Incorrect. Accused did not consent to the dismissal.

B: Incorrect. Res judicata applies in civil cases, not criminal.

D: Incorrect. Trial is not necessary for double jeopardy to attach.

73.

A person was charged with slight physical injuries directly before the MTC without undergoing
preliminary investigation. The accused moved to quash the Information.
Is the motion proper?

A. No, because slight physical injuries do not require preliminary investigation.

B. Yes, because it was filed directly to court.

C. No, because only the prosecutor can file a case.

D. Yes, because it is a violation of due process.

Answer: A.

Rule: Rule 112, Section 1 – Preliminary Investigation Required for Offenses Punishable by at Least 4
Years and 2 Months

Explanation: Preliminary investigation is only required for offenses punishable by at least 4 years, 2
months, and 1 day. Slight physical injuries is below that threshold, so direct filing is proper.

B: Incorrect. Direct filing is proper in this case.

C: Incorrect. Private complainant can file minor offenses directly.

D: Incorrect. Due process is not violated in this situation.

74.

Mario was charged with Rape, a non-bailable offense. He filed a petition for bail, arguing that the
evidence is not strong. The court set a hearing.

What should the court determine?

A. Whether the crime charged is bailable or not.

B. Whether the Information is sufficient.

C. Whether the evidence of guilt is strong.

D. Whether bail was filed properly.

Answer: C.

Rule: Rule 114, Section 7 – Capital offenses and non-bailable offenses

Explanation: For non-bailable offenses, the court must conduct a bail hearing and determine if the
evidence of guilt is strong. If not strong, the accused is entitled to bail.

A: Incorrect. The court already knows it is non-bailable.

B: Incorrect. Sufficiency of Information is not the issue.

D: Incorrect. The procedure of bail filing is not yet in question.

75.

During trial, the accused repeatedly requested that his counsel be replaced, alleging lack of preparation.
The court denied the request.

Is this proper?

A. No, the accused can always change counsel.

B. Yes, substitution of counsel is a matter of right.

C. No, it violates the right to effective representation.

D. Yes, unless there is a clear showing of inadequate counsel.

Answer: D.

Rule: Rule 115, Section 1(c) – Right to Competent and Independent Counsel

Explanation: The accused may only replace counsel if he shows that representation is inadequate. Mere
dissatisfaction is insufficient; the court must assess the quality of representation.

A: Incorrect. Unlimited substitution would disrupt proceedings.

B: Incorrect. It is not absolute.

C: Incorrect. Only if actual incompetence is shown.76.

Ana was charged with Estafa. After the prosecution rested, Ana filed a demurrer to evidence without
prior leave of court. The trial court denied it.

What is the effect of filing a demurrer without leave?

A. The accused may present evidence after denial.

B. The accused waives the right to present evidence.

C. The case is automatically dismissed.

D. The court must grant the demurrer.

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 119, Section 23 – Demurrer to Evidence

Explanation: Filing a demurrer without leave of court is risky. If denied, the accused waives the right to
present evidence and the case is submitted for decision based solely on the prosecution’s evidence.

A: Incorrect. Right to present evidence is waived.

C: Incorrect. Dismissal is not automatic.

D: Incorrect. Granting demurrer is discretionary.

77.

Lito was arrested without a warrant inside his house for a bailable offense. No hot pursuit or valid
exception applied. He questioned the legality of the arrest during arraignment.

Is his objection timely?

A. Yes, because illegal arrest may be raised anytime.

B. No, the objection must be raised before arraignment.

C. Yes, arrest issues are jurisdictional.

D. No, arrest legality can’t be questioned once bail is posted.

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 117, Section 9 – Objections to Arrest

Explanation: Objections based on an illegal arrest must be raised before arraignment; otherwise, it is
deemed waived.

A: Incorrect. It must be raised before arraignment.

C: Incorrect. Illegal arrest does not affect court jurisdiction.

D: Incorrect. Bail posting does not bar challenge, but arraignment does.

78.

After being arrested without a warrant, the accused was detained for 10 days before being charged in
court.

What right was violated?

A. Right to speedy disposition of cases.

B. Right against unlawful arrest.

C. Right to preliminary investigation.

D. Right against arbitrary detention.

Answer: D.

Rule: Rule 113, Section 7 – Delivery to Nearest Police Station or Jail

Explanation: A person arrested without a warrant must be delivered to the proper judicial authority
within the reglementary period (12, 18, or 36 hours). Detaining beyond this without charge constitutes
arbitrary detention.

A: Incorrect. Speedy disposition refers to court delays.

B: Incorrect. The issue is not the arrest itself but prolonged detention.
C: Incorrect. Not all warrantless arrests require PI.

79.

The accused failed to appear at arraignment despite due notice. The court issued a bench warrant.

Is this proper?

A. No, arraignment can proceed in absentia.

B. Yes, presence at arraignment is mandatory.

C. No, the warrant must come from the prosecutor.

D. Yes, but only after 3 missed hearings.

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 116, Section 1 – Arraignment and Plea

Explanation: Arraignment requires personal appearance. If the accused fails to appear without valid
reason, the court may issue a bench warrant to compel attendance.

A: Incorrect. Arraignment cannot be in absentia.

C: Incorrect. The court issues warrants, not the prosecutor.

D: Incorrect. One valid absence is sufficient ground.

80.
In a criminal case, the judge dismissed the Information for lack of probable cause based on the records
submitted.

Which Rule supports this action?

A. Rule 110 – Prosecution of Offenses

B. Rule 112 – Preliminary Investigation

C. Rule 115 – Rights of the Accused

D. Rule 119 – Trial

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 112, Section 6 – When warrant of arrest may issue

Explanation: The judge, upon personally evaluating the resolution and evidence of the prosecutor, may
dismiss the case outright if there is no probable cause.

A: Incorrect. Rule 110 deals with the filing of Information.

C: Incorrect. Rule 115 refers to rights during trial.

D: Incorrect. This dismissal occurs before trial.

81.

A judge issued a warrant of arrest based solely on the prosecutor’s resolution and without personally
reviewing the records of the preliminary investigation.

What is the effect?

A. The warrant is valid if the prosecutor recommended it.

B. The warrant is void for lack of judicial determination.

C. The judge need not examine the records.

D. The warrant is valid unless challenged.

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 112, Section 6 – Judicial Determination of Probable Cause

Explanation: A judge must personally determine probable cause before issuing a warrant. Relying solely
on the prosecutor’s resolution violates the Constitution.

A: Incorrect. Only the judge can determine probable cause.

C: Incorrect. Records must be personally reviewed.

D: Incorrect. It is void regardless of challenge.

82.

The accused was convicted of slight physical injuries. On appeal, the RTC increased the penalty beyond
what was imposed by the MTC, without notice to the accused.

Was this proper?

A. Yes, the RTC has full authority to modify judgment.

B. No, the accused must be notified if penalty may be increased.

C. Yes, since slight physical injuries is minor.

D. No, because the MTC judgment is final.

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 122, by analogy – Appeal

Explanation: The accused must be given notice that the penalty may be increased on appeal. Otherwise,
it violates due process.

A: Incorrect. Authority exists, but due process must be followed.

C: Incorrect. Nature of offense is irrelevant.

D: Incorrect. MTC judgment is not final if appealed.

83.

The prosecution called a witness who invoked the right against self-incrimination when asked about his
participation in the crime.

Can the witness validly refuse?

A. No, because he is not the accused.

B. Yes, any person may invoke this right.

C. No, unless already charged.

D. Yes, but only with counsel present.

Answer: B.

Rule: Rule 115, Section 1(e) – Right against Self-Incrimination

Explanation: The right against self-incrimination extends to all witnesses, not just the accused. A witness
cannot be compelled to answer if it may incriminate him.

A: Incorrect. The right is not exclusive to the accused.

C: Incorrect. Formal charge is not a requirement.

D: Incorrect. Counsel is not required for invocation.

84.

During trial, the accused confessed to the crime while under oath in court but later recanted. The court
relied solely on the confession for conviction.

Is this valid?

A. Yes, confession in open court is enough.

B. No, recantation makes it inadmissible.

C. Yes, unless evidence rebuts it.

D. No, confession must be corroborated.

Answer: D.

Rule: Rule 133, Section 3 – Extrajudicial Confession Must Be Corroborated

Explanation: Confessions must be corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti to be valid for conviction.
Even if made in open court, it cannot stand alone.

A: Incorrect. Alone, it’s insufficient.

B: Incorrect. Recantation does not automatically invalidate.

C: Incorrect. Corroboration is still required.

85. The prosecution in a robbery case was granted five trial settings to present its evidence but
repeatedly failed to present a witness due to lack of police coordination. The defense moved to dismiss
the case for violation of the accused's right to speedy trial.

What is the correct ruling?

A. No, the prosecution has the right to present all its witnesses.

B. Yes, repeated postponements without valid reason violate the right to speedy trial.

C. No, only the accused can move to reset the hearing.

D. Yes, delay is always presumed prejudicial to the accused.

✅ Correct Answer: B. Yes, repeated postponements without valid reason violate the right to speedy trial.

Explanation:

Under Rule 119, Section 1, the accused has a constitutional right to a speedy trial. Repeated
postponements by the prosecution without a valid excuse show a failure to observe due diligence. Such
unjustified delays are considered a violation of this right.

A is incorrect because the prosecution's rights are not superior to the accused’s constitutional
protections.
C is incorrect because the prosecution also causes delay and is subject to court regulation.

D is incorrect because not all delays are presumed prejudicial; prejudice must be shown.

Rule reference: Rule 119, Sec. 1 – Right to speedy trial; repeated unjustified delays can lead to dismissal.

86. During trial, the judge allowed the prosecution to present a new witness not included in the original
list. The defense objected, citing surprise and lack of time to prepare.

What should the court do?

A. The witness should be excluded due to trial by ambush.

B. The judge may allow it if the defense is given time to prepare.

C. The prosecution may always present new witnesses.

D. The defense must proceed and raise objections later.

✅ Correct Answer: B. The judge may allow it if the defense is given time to prepare.

Explanation:

Under Rule 115, Sec. 1(g), the accused has the right to know the witnesses against them. However, the
court may admit additional witnesses as long as it does not violate the accused’s rights. A fair solution is
to allow the defense time to prepare or cross-examine.

A is incorrect because exclusion is not automatic.

C is incorrect since due process limits the prosecution's ability to present new witnesses.

D is incorrect because the defense must be given meaningful opportunity to prepare.

Rule reference: Rule 115, Sec. 1(g) – The court may admit new witnesses if no undue prejudice occurs.

87. During pre-trial, the accused agreed to stipulate on the authenticity of certain documents. At trial,
the defense tried to question those same documents. The prosecution objected.

Is the objection valid?

A. No, stipulations are not binding.

B. Yes, pre-trial stipulations are binding unless modified for good cause.

C. No, the accused can change his mind anytime.

D. Yes, but only if both parties consent to enforce the stipulation.

✅ Correct Answer: B. Yes, pre-trial stipulations are binding unless modified for good cause.

Explanation:

Rule 118, Sec. 2 provides that pre-trial agreements, including stipulations on facts or documents, are
binding. They can only be modified upon valid reason and approval of the court. This prevents trial
delays and maintains fairness.

A is incorrect because pre-trial stipulations have legal force.

C is incorrect since unilateral withdrawal is not allowed.

D is incorrect; enforcement does not require renewed consent.

Rule reference: Rule 118, Sec. 2 – Stipulations in pre-trial are binding unless modified for good cause.
88. An accused filed a motion to quash based on lack of authority of the officer who filed the complaint.
The court granted the motion. Can the prosecution refile?

A. No, double jeopardy has already attached.

B. Yes, if the defect is corrected and the offense has not prescribed.

C. No, once dismissed, the case cannot be revived.

D. Yes, but only with the same judge handling the new case.

✅ Correct Answer: B. Yes, if the defect is corrected and the offense has not prescribed.

Explanation:

Rule 117, Sec. 2 allows refiling of a case if the dismissal is not on the merits. A motion to quash due to
lack of authority does not bar another valid complaint if filed within the prescriptive period.

A is incorrect because jeopardy has not attached—there has been no arraignment or trial.

C is incorrect because dismissal based on technical grounds is not final.

D is incorrect; case assignment follows court raffle, not prior judge preference.

Rule reference: Rule 117, Sec. 2 – Certain dismissals allow refiling if the defect is corrected.

89. After the prosecution rested, the defense filed a demurrer to evidence without leave of court. The
court denied it.

What is the effect?

A. The accused may still present evidence.

B. The case is automatically dismissed.

C. The accused waives his right to present evidence.

D. The prosecution must reopen its case.

✅ Correct Answer: C. The accused waives his right to present evidence.

Explanation:

Rule 119, Sec. 23 provides that a demurrer to evidence filed without prior leave is a waiver of the right
to present defense evidence. If the demurrer is denied, the court decides the case based solely on
prosecution evidence.

A is incorrect because leave was not sought.

B is incorrect because denial of demurrer does not result in dismissal.

D is incorrect because the prosecution has already rested.

Rule reference: Rule 119, Sec. 23 – Demurrer without leave waives the right to present evidence.

90. The trial court rendered a judgment of conviction but failed to state the penalty in the dispositive
portion. The defense filed a motion for reconsideration. The prosecution claimed the judgment was
final.

Is the motion proper?

A. No, judgment was already rendered.

B. Yes, the judgment is incomplete and not final.

C. No, only appeals can correct such errors.

D. Yes, but only if filed by the prosecutor.

✅ Correct Answer: B. Yes, the judgment is incomplete and not final.

Explanation:

A judgment of conviction must clearly state the offense and the penalty imposed. If the dispositive
portion lacks the penalty, it is not a final and executory judgment. A motion to correct or reconsider is
appropriate.

A is incorrect because a judgment without penalty is not valid or final.

C is incorrect because a motion for reconsideration is a valid remedy.

D is incorrect because either party may move to correct or clarify.

91.

While on trial for a non-bailable offense, accused Jerico files a motion for reduction of his bail, alleging
that the amount is excessive and beyond his means. The prosecution opposes, arguing that since the
offense is non-bailable, he has no right to bail, much less a lower one. The judge finds that the evidence
of guilt is not strong. What is the proper ruling?

A. Deny the motion because the offense is non-bailable.

B. Grant the motion if the bail is excessive and reduce it to a reasonable amount.

C. Dismiss the motion because inability to afford bail is not a ground.

D. Require the accused to first file a demurrer to evidence.

Answer: B. Grant the motion if the bail is excessive and reduce it to a reasonable amount.

Rule Involved: Rule 114 – Bail Bond Reduction

Explanation:

Even in non-bailable offenses, if the evidence of guilt is not strong, bail may be granted. The Constitution
protects against excessive bail, and the trial court has the duty to fix a reasonable amount.

A is incorrect because the judge has discretion to grant bail when evidence is not strong.

C is wrong because excessive bail violates the accused’s rights regardless of his financial status.

D is inapplicable. A demurrer to evidence is not a precondition for resolving a bail matter.

---

92.

An accused was previously charged with illegal possession of drugs, but the case was dismissed
provisionally without his express consent. Months later, the same charge was refiled. Can the accused
invoke double jeopardy?

A. Yes, because the first case was dismissed even without trial.

B. No, because there was no arraignment in the first case.

C. Yes, because the dismissal was without the accused's consent.

D. No, because there was no judgment on the merits.

Answer: C. Yes, because the dismissal was without the accused's consent.

Rule Involved: Rule 117 – Nolle Prosequi and Double Jeopardy

Explanation:
For double jeopardy to attach, the first case must have been validly instituted, the accused was
arraigned, and dismissal was without his consent. If all are present, refiling is barred.

A lacks nuance; dismissal without trial isn't enough unless jeopardy attached.

B is wrong if the accused was arraigned in the first case.

D is incorrect because judgment on the merits isn't required if the case is dismissed without consent.

---

93.

During trial, the prosecution moves to amend the information to include a new and different mode of
committing the crime that was not alleged initially. The defense objects, claiming it changes the theory
of the case. What should the court do?

A. Allow the amendment as it is merely formal.

B. Deny the amendment since it is substantial and made after plea.

C. Approve the amendment and reset the arraignment.

D. Approve the amendment without need to notify the accused.

Answer: B. Deny the amendment since it is substantial and made after plea.

Rule Involved: Rule 110 – Amendment Substantial vs. Formal

Explanation:
Substantial amendments — such as adding a new mode of commission — are not allowed after
arraignment, especially if they prejudice the accused.

A is wrong because the amendment is not formal; it alters the theory.

C is incorrect because even with re-arraignment, substantial amendments post-plea are barred.

D violates the due process rights of the accused.

---

94.

Accused Rachel wants to take the witness stand during trial to deny the charges against her. Her lawyer
advises against it, fearing cross-examination. Can Rachel insist on testifying?

A. No, her counsel has the final decision on strategy.

B. Yes, it is her constitutional right to testify in her own defense.

C. No, accused are not allowed to testify in criminal trials.

D. Yes, but only if the court allows it.

Answer: B. Yes, it is her constitutional right to testify in her own defense.

Rule Involved: Rule 115 – Right to Testify

Explanation:

The right to testify in one's defense is personal and constitutional. It cannot be denied by counsel or the
court.
A is wrong; the choice to testify belongs to the accused, not the lawyer.

C is absurd and incorrect.

D is wrong; the court cannot deny this right unless used to delay or abuse process.

---

95.

Accused Lino is convicted by the trial court and appeals the decision. While appeal is pending, he files
for bail. The Solicitor General opposes, arguing that bail is not a matter of right after conviction. How
should the appellate court rule?

A. Deny the motion outright.

B. Grant the motion because all accused have the right to bail.

C. Grant the motion if the penalty imposed is not reclusion perpetua or higher.

D. Deny the motion unless he proves the appeal is meritorious.

Answer: C. Grant the motion if the penalty imposed is not reclusion perpetua or higher.

Rule Involved: Rule 114 – Bail Upon Appeal

Explanation:

Post-conviction, bail is not a matter of right but may be granted if the penalty imposed is less than
reclusion perpetua and the accused is not a flight risk.
A is too absolute; court may grant bail.

B is incorrect after conviction.

D imposes an extra burden not required by the Rules.

---

96.

A criminal case for estafa was provisionally dismissed by the trial court before arraignment, upon the
motion of the prosecution citing lack of evidence. Months later, the complaint is refiled. Can the accused
claim double jeopardy?

A. Yes, because the case was dismissed.

B. No, because there was no arraignment.

C. Yes, because the court dismissed the case.

D. No, because the case involved a public crime.

Answer: B. No, because there was no arraignment.

Rule Involved: Rule 117 – Dismissal Without Arraignment

Explanation:

Double jeopardy does not attach unless the accused was arraigned. Dismissals before arraignment are
not protected under the double jeopardy rule.

A is wrong; dismissal alone is not enough.

C is misleading without the element of jeopardy attaching.

D is irrelevant to the rule on jeopardy.

---

97.

During trial, the judge decides to exclude the public and hold the hearings in chambers due to sensitive
allegations. Accused objects, claiming a violation of her rights. Is she correct?

A. No, the court can exclude the public anytime.

B. Yes, she has a constitutional right to a public trial.

C. No, as long as media is allowed.

D. Yes, unless the prosecution agrees to it.

Answer: B. Yes, she has a constitutional right to a public trial.

Rule Involved: Rule 115 – Denial of Public Trial

Explanation:

An accused has the right to a public trial, and exclusion of the public must be justified by compelling
reasons (e.g., child witnesses, national security). A general exclusion without due reason violates this
right.

A is incorrect; discretion is not absolute.

C and D are not grounded in the Rules.

---

98.

An accused who posted bail and was released is now seeking to leave the country while the trial is
pending. The court finds that he may flee and not return. What is the proper action?

A. Cancel his bail and issue a hold departure order.

B. Allow departure if bail was paid in full.

C. Permit departure but require a larger bond.

D. Do nothing unless the accused flees.

Answer: A. Cancel his bail and issue a hold departure order.

Rule Involved: Rule 114 – Bail for Flight Risk

Explanation:

If the court finds the accused to be a flight risk, it may cancel bail and issue precautionary measures like
a hold departure order. Bail is intended to ensure appearance at trial.

B is wrong; full payment doesn’t guarantee compliance.

C is risky and may not suffice.

D is dangerous to the integrity of trial.

---

99.

A witness repeatedly ignores court-issued subpoenas in a criminal trial. What should the court do?

A. Dismiss the case.

B. Issue a bench warrant for the witness.

C. Fine the witness only.

D. Compel the accused to waive the testimony.

Answer: B. Issue a bench warrant for the witness.

Rule Involved: Rule 113 – Bench Warrant for Witness

Explanation:

When a witness refuses to obey subpoena, the court may issue a bench warrant to compel attendance.

A is wrong; the case doesn’t get dismissed for witness non-appearance.

C may accompany the warrant but is not the sole remedy.

D violates the accused’s right to full defense.

---

100.

During cross-examination, the defense counsel is prevented from questioning a hostile prosecution
witness. The judge says cross is unnecessary. The accused protests. Who is correct?

A. The judge; cross-exam is discretionary.

B. The witness; cross-exam is intimidating.

C. The accused; cross-exam is a right under due process.

D. Neither, the prosecution should decide.

Answer: C. The accused; cross-exam is a right under due process.

Rule Involved: Rule 115 – Confrontation and Cross-Examination

Explanation:

An accused has the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him. It is not discretionary and
any denial violates due process.

A is incorrect; courts cannot deny a basic constitutional right.

B does not override the rights of the accused.

D misplaces authority; prosecution cannot waive the defense's right.