In a prosecution for murder, the prosecutor asks accused Darwin if he had been previously arrested for violation of the Anti- Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. As defense counsel, you object. The trial court asks you on what ground/s. Respond. (3%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
As defense counsel, I object on the grounds of irrelevancy, improper character evidence, and improper impeachment. Under Rules 130 and 132 of the Rules of Court, the prosecution cannot initially prove the bad moral character of
Unlock the full Remedial Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
May the prosecution initially introduce evidence of the bad moral character of the accused in a criminal trial?
Under Rule 130, the prosecution cannot initially prove the bad moral character of the accused unless in rebuttal.
How may a witness or an accused testifying in court be impeached regarding prior criminal conduct under Rule 132?
Rule 132 explicitly provides that a witness cannot be impeached by evidence of particular wrongful acts or mere arrests, but only by a final conviction.
Is evidence of a prior arrest for an anti-graft offense admissible to prove guilt in a murder prosecution?
Prior arrests for unrelated crimes are irrelevant, constitute improper character evidence, and cannot be used for impeachment.
Under Rule 128 of the Rules of Court, what test determines the admissibility of evidence?
Choices available with full access.
What is the proper ruling when a prosecutor asks an accused on cross-examination about a prior arrest that did not result in a conviction?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Character Evidence Rules
Under Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, the prosecution cannot present evidence of the bad moral character of the accused unless it is in rebuttal to character evidence first introduced by the defense. Furthermore, character evidence must relate directly to the specific moral trait involved in the offense charged. In a prosecution for murder, evidence regarding an alleged prior arrest for an offense under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act does not pertain to the character trait of peacefulness or non-violence and is strictly inadmissible.
2. Impeachment of Witness
Under Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, a witness cannot be impeached by evidence of particular wrongful acts, uncharged misconduct, or mere prior arrests. Impeachment of a witness or an accused based on prior criminal conduct is strictly limited to evidence of a final conviction for an offense punishable by law. Questioning an accused on cross-examination about a prior arrest without a final judgment of conviction constitutes improper impeachment and violates statutory rules of evidence.
3. Relevancy of Evidence
Under Rule 128 of the Rules of Court, evidence must be relevant to the fact in issue to be admissible. Evidence is relevant if it has a logical relation to the fact in issue such that it tends in any reasonable degree to establish or disprove the truth of the matter. A prior arrest for corruption has no logical connection to whether the accused committed murder. Consequently, questions regarding unrelated prior arrests must be excluded for complete lack of relevance.