2013 Criminal Law Exam MCQs

October 29, 2013
Share this...
Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+0Share on Reddit0Pin on Pinterest0Share on LinkedIn0Email this to someonePrint this page

[Below are the Multiple Choice Questions asked in the 2013 Bar Exams in Labor Law. ]

1. The acquittal of an accused shall bar the civil action arising from the crime where the judgment of acquittal holds that ___________________ .(0.5%)

A. the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt

B. the liability of the accused is not criminal but civil in nature

C. the civil liability does not arise from or is not based on the criminal act for which the accused has been acquitted

D. the accused did not commit the act imputed to him

2. Subsidiary liability may be imposed on the following, except _____________ (0.5%)

A. innkeepers, in relation to the crime committed in their establishment

B. employers engaged in industry, for the crime committed by their employees

C. parents of minors who act with discernment in committing crimes

D. hospital administrators or owners, for crimes committed by their hospital nurses

3. Passion or obfuscation may be appreciated _____________ (0.5%)

A. if it arises from jealousy in an amorous relationship between a married man and a single woman

B. if it arises from jealousy of a man who has been living-in with the woman for the past 20 years

C. if it arises from jealousy with immoral, lustful and vindictive sentiments of the offender against the victim

D. in none of the above situations

4. Who among the following accused is entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance that would lower the imposable penalty by one degree? (0.5%)

A. A minor above 15 years old and below 18 years old who acted with discernment.

B. One who, in fulfillment of his duty to carry out the warrant of arrest of a fugitive, shot the fugitive to death without ascertaining his identity.

C. One who defended himself against an unlawful aggression but used unreasonable means and gave provocation.

D. All of the above.

5. Conspiracy to commit a felony is punishable only in cases where the law specifically provides a penalty.

Which of the following combinations contain specific felonies under the Revised Penal Code? (0.5%)

A. Conspiracy to commit treason, conspiracy to commit rebellion, conspiracy to commit coup d’etat, conspiracy to commit misprision of treason.

B. Conspiracy to commit rebellion, conspiracy to commit coup d’etat, conspiracy to commit treason, conspiracy to commit sedition.

C. Conspiracy to commit rebellion or insurrection, conspiracy to commit sedition, conspiracy to commit illegal assemblies, conspiracy to commit treason.

D. Conspiracy to commit treason, conspiracy to commit sedition, conspiracy to commit terrorism.

E. None of the above.

6. Choose the correct circumstance when a woman may be held liable for rape: (0.5%)

A. With the use of force or intimidation.

B. When the rape is committed by two or more persons.

C. When the offender uses an instrument and inserts it m the mouth of the victim.

D. When she befriends and puts a sleeping pill in the victim’s drink to enable her husband to have intercourse with the victim.

7. The death of the accused extinguishes his criminal liability but civil liability is not extinguished . (0.5%)

A. when the death of the accused occurred before conviction

B. when the death of the accused occurred after conviction and after he has perfected his appeal from conviction

C. when the death of the accused occurred during the pendency of his appeal

D. when the death of the accused occurred after final judgment

E. None of the above.

8. Compelling the pilot of an aircraft of Philippine Registry to change its destination is ____________________. (0.5%)

A. grave coercion

B. a violation of the Anti-Hijacking Law or R.A. No. 6235

C. grave threats

D. a violation of the Human Security Act of 2007 or the Anti-Terrorism Law

E. All of the above.

9. Choose from the list below the correct principle in considering “motive”. (0.5%)

A. If the evidence is merely circumstantial, proof of motive is essential.

B. Generally, proof of motive is not necessary to pin a crime on the accused if the commission of the crime has been proven and the evidence of identification is convincing.

C. Motive is important to ascertain the truth between two antagonistic theories.

D. Motive is relevant if the identity of the accused is uncertain.

E. All of the above are correct.

10. Luis was sentenced to prision mayor and to pay a fine of Php50,000, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.

Is the sentence correct? (0.5%)

A. Yes, because Luis has no property to pay for the fine, so he must suffer the equivalent imprisonment provided by law in lieu of fine.

B. No, because subsidiary imprisonment is applicable only when the penalty imposed is prision correccional or below.

C. Yes, because the sentence says so.

D. No, because the subsidiary imprisonment is applicable only when the penalty imposed is limited to a fine.

E. None of the above.

11. Anthony drew a promissory note and asked his terminally ill and dying business partner Ben to sign it. The promissory note bound Ben to pay Anthony One Million Pesos (Php1,000,000) plus 12% interest, on or before June 30, 2011.

If Ben died before the promissory note’s due date and Anthony still collected Php1,000,000 with interest from Ben’s estate, what crime/s did Anthony commit? (1%)

A. Falsification of a public document.

B. Falsification of a private document and estafa.

C. Estafa.

D. Estafa thru falsification of a private document.

E. None of the above.

12. Out of spite and simply intending to put Gina to shame for breaking off with him, Ritchie emptied a gallon of motor oil on the school’s stairway where Gina usually passed. Gina, unaware of what Ritchie did, used the slippery stairway and slipped, hitting her head on the stairs. Gina died from brain hemorrhage.

What crime did Ritchie commit? (1%)

A. Murder.

B. Reckless imprudence resulting in homicide.

C. Homicide.

D. Impossible crime of homicide.

E. None.

13. Santos was sentenced to suffer imprisonment in three separate judgments: 6 months and 1 day to 4 years for attempted homicide; 6 years and 1 day to 8 years for frustrated homicide; and 6 years and 1 day to 20 years for homicide. After his 20th year in the National Penitentiary, Santos filed a petition for habeas corpus claiming that he had fully served his sentence of 20 years and should therefore be immediately released from imprisonment.

Was Santos correct? (1%)

A. Yes, because he served his sentences simultaneously so that his 20 years of incarceration was sufficient.

B. No, because multiple sentences are served successively not simultaneously.

C. No, only penalties other than imprisonment can be served simultaneously.

D. Yes, because after he has served the minimum of his penalties, he can now be released.

14. Amelia, a famous actress, bought the penthouse unit of a posh condominium building in Taguig City. Every night, Amelia would swim naked in the private, but open air, pool of her penthouse unit. It must have been obvious to Amelia that she could be seen from nearby buildings. In fact, some residents occupying the higher floors of the nearby residential buildings did indeed entertain themselves and their friends by watching her swim in the nude from their windows.

What crime did Amelia commit? (1%)

A. Alarms and scandals because her act of swimming naked disturbs the public tranquility.

B. Grave scandal because she committed highly scandalous acts that are offensive to decency or good customs.

C. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions, and indecent shows under Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, because her act of swimming naked is akin to an indecent live show.

D. Amelia did not commit any crime because the swimming pool is located in her private home.

15. After drinking a bottle of Jack Daniels, Jonjon drove his BMW sports car at high speed, rammed into a group of crossing pedestrians, and hit a traffic light post. The incident caused the death of one (1) pedestrian, serious injuries to three (3) others, and the destruction of the traffic light post.

If you were the prosecutor, what would you charge Jonjon? (1%)

A. Homicide with serious physical injuries through simple negligence.

B. Damage to property, serious physical injuries and homicide through reckless negligence.

C. Simple negligence resulting in damage to property, serious physical injuries and homicide.

D. Reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, serious physical injuries and damage to property.

16. On June 1, 2011, Efren bought a used top-of-the-line Mercedes Benz for P7.5 Million from Switik Trading. On the same day, he paid Php2,500,000 in cash and issued Switik Trading a check for P5,000,000 dated July 31, 2011. He then brought the car to a friend’s house and hid it in an underground garage. The check Efren issued was dishonored for insufficiency of funds when presented for payment on due date. Efren was asked to honor and pay the check or to return the car, but he refused.

What crime/s did Efren commit?(1%)

A. Carnapping.

B. Estafa and carnapping.

C. A violation of BP Blg. 22.

D. Estafa and a violation of BP Blg. 22.

E. None of the above.

17. In his Answer to a complaint, Atty. Jose (counsel for the defendant) stated that Atty. Agrada (counsel for the plaintiff) is “hobo, inutile, good for nothing, stupid, and a menace to clients.”

Can Atty. Jose be held criminally liable for libel? (1%)

A. No, because an Answer to a complaint is a court pleading where communications made are privileged; the writer cannot be held liable for libel.

B. Yes, because the statement casts aspersion on the character, integrity and reputation of Atty. Agrada as a lawyer and exposed him to public ridicule.

C. Yes, although a court pleading is a privileged communication, malicious statements that are irrelevant and impertinent to the issue in the pleading may be libelous.

D. Yes, there was a malicious intent to ridicule Atty. Agrada as a lawyer.

E. No, because the statement is in a pleading, but Atty. Jose can be charged administratively for misconduct before the Supreme Court.

18. Using his charms because of his movie star looks, Phil, in a movie date with Lyn, a 19-year old colegiala, kissed her on the cheek and stroked her pubic hair. Lyn shouted for help and Phil was arrested.

Phil is liable for ___________ (1%)

A. rape by sexual assault for using his fingers

B. violation of the Anti-Child Abuse Law for lascivious conduct

C. unjust vexation

D. acts of lasciviousness

E. None of the above.

19. If Rod killed Irene, his illegitimate daughter, after taking her diamond earrings and forcing her to have sex with him, what crime/s should Rod be charged with? (1%)

A. Robbery and rape with parricide.

B. Robbery, rape and parricide.

C. Rape with homicide and theft.

D. Rape with homicide.

E. None of the above.

20. From an extension line, Ricardo overheard a telephone conversation between Julito and Atty. Hipolito. The latter (Atty. Hipolito) was asking money from Julito in exchange for dropping the extortion charge filed against Julito. Ricardo was charged of violating the Anti-Wire Tapping Act or R.A. 4200.

Under these facts, was there a violation as charged? (1%)

A. Yes, because the conversation was private in nature.

B. Yes, because the conversation was overheard without the consent of the parties, Julito and Atty. Hipolito.

C. No, because what is punishable is intentional listening to a conversation through a wire.

D. No, because a telephone extension line is not the device or arrangement contemplated by the law and the use of an extension line cannot be considered as wire tapping.

E. None of the above.

21. Judge Talim, upon complaint and application of the realty corporation Batmanson, Inc., issued a writ of preliminary injunction against Darjeeling Ventures, Inc., a competitor of Batmanson, Inc., without notice and hearing.

If you were counsel for Darjeeling Ventures, Inc., what criminal charge should you file against Judge Talim? (1%)

A. Rendering a manifestly unjust judgment.

B. Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory order.

C. Causing undue injury through manifest partiality under R.A. No. 3019.

D. Bribery.

E. None of the above.

22. George, the 20-year old son of a rich politician, was arrested at the NAIA arrival lounge and found positive for opium, a dangerous drug. When arrested, 15 grams of cocaine were found in his backpack.

What offense would you charge George under R.A. No. 9160 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)? (1%)

A. Use of dangerous drug.

B. Use and possession of dangerous drugs.

C. Possession of dangerous drugs.

D. Importation of dangerous drugs.

E. None of the above.

23. During a military uprising aimed at ousting the duly constituted authorities and taking over the government, General Tejero and his men forcibly took over the entire Rich Hotel which they used as their base. They used the rooms and other facilities of the hotel, ate all the available food they found, and detained some hotel guests.

What crime did General Tejero and his men commit? (1%)

A. Rebellion complexed with serious illegal detention and estafa.

B. Rebellion.

C. Coup d’etat.

D Terrorism.

E. None of the above.

24. Andres was convicted of frustrated homicide and was sentenced to 6 years and 1 day as minimum, to 8 years of prision mayor as maximum. Andres appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeals, which convicted him of attempted homicide, and sentenced him to 6 months of arresto mayor as minimum, to 4 years of prision correccional as maximum.

Instead of appealing his conviction, Andres filed an application for probation with the Regional Trial Court. Is Andres qualified to avail of the benefits of the probation law? (1%)

A. No, because when he filed a notice of appeal with the Court of Appeals, he waived his right under the probation law.

B. Yes, because after his appeal, he qualified for probation as the sentence imposed on him was less than 6 years.

C. Yes, because the probation law is meant to favor the accused.

D. No, because his previous sentence of more than 6  years disqualified him so that he can no longer avail of probation as an alternative remedy.

E. None of the above

25. Juancho owns a small piggery in Malolos, Bulacan. One Saturday afternoon, he discovered that all his pigs had died. Suspecting that one of his neighbors had poisoned the pigs, Juancho went home, took his rifle, went around the neighborhood, and fired his rifle in the air while shouting, “makakatikim sa akin ang naglason ng mga baboy ko.” Barangay officials requested police assistance and Juancho was apprehended. Juancho was charged with and convicted of the crime of alarms and scandals. Juancho did not appeal his conviction.

Is Juancho qualified for probation? (1%)

A. Yes, because the penalty for alarms and scandals is less than six (6) years.

B. Yes, because Juancho did not appeal his conviction.

C. No, because the crime of alarms and scandals carries with it a fine of Php200.

D. No, because the crime of alarms and scandals affects public order.

E. None of the above.

Share this...
Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+0Share on Reddit0Pin on Pinterest0Share on LinkedIn0Email this to someonePrint this page



Leave a Comment