AA, a twelve-year-old girl, while walking alone met BB, a teenage boy who befriended her. Later, BB brought AA to a nearby shanty where he raped her. The Information for rape filed against BB states:
“On or about October 30, 2015, in the City of S.P. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused, a minor, fifteen (15) years old with lewd design and by means of force, violence and intimidation, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously had sexual intercourse with AA, a minor, twelve (12) years old against the latter’s will and consent.”
At the trial, the prosecutor called to the witness stand AA as his first witness and manifested that he be allowed to ask leading questions in conducting his direct examination pursuant to the Rule on the Examination of a Child Witness. BB’s counsel objected on the ground that the prosecutor has not conducted a competency examination on the witness, a requirement before the rule cited can be applied in the case.
a.) Is BB’s counsel correct? (3%)
In order to obviate the counsel’s argument on the competency of AA as prosecution witness, the judge motu proprio conducted his voir dire examination on AA.
b.) Was the action taken by the judge proper? (2%)
After the prosecution had rested its case, BB’ s counsel filed with leave a demurrer to evidence, seeking the dismissal of the case on the ground that the prosecutor failed to present any evidence on BB’ s minority as alleged in the Information.
c.) Should the court grant the demurrer? (3%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
[a] No, BB's counsel is wrong; [b] yes, the judge's action was proper; and [c] no, the court should deny the demurrer to evidence. Under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, every child is presumed competent, making prior competency examination
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
What is the legal presumption regarding a child witness under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness?
Under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness every child is presumed qualified to be a witness.
When is a competency examination of a child witness required under the rules?
A competency examination is conducted only when substantial doubt exists regarding the child's capacity.
Is a trial judge authorized to motu proprio conduct a voir dire examination on a child witness?
The trial judge possesses inherent authority to motu proprio evaluate witness competency.
On what ground may a court grant a demurrer to evidence in a criminal prosecution?
Choices available with full access.
Is the minority of the accused an essential element of the crime of rape?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Child Witness Presumption
Under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness (A.M. No. 00-4-07-SC), every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. Prior competency examination is not a prerequisite before the prosecutor may conduct direct examination or ask leading questions. A competency examination is conducted only when the court finds that substantial doubt exists regarding the child's capacity to perceive, remember, communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth. Hence, objecting to a child witness's testimony without demonstrating such doubt is legally baseless.
2. Judicial Voir Dire
The trial court possesses inherent power and discretion to motu proprio conduct a voir dire examination to evaluate the competency of a child witness. While a child is presumed competent under the rules, the judge may evaluate the witness at any stage of the proceedings to satisfy judicial inquiry regarding capacity and truthfulness. Conducting a voir dire examination motu proprio ensures the protection of the child witness while safeguarding the integrity of the trial proceedings, making the judge's action entirely proper and within judicial authority.
3. Demurrer in Rape
Under Rule 119, Section 23 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, a demurrer to evidence is granted only when the prosecution's evidence fails to show sufficient proof to sustain a conviction for the offense charged. In a prosecution for rape, the minority of the accused is not an essential element of the crime, but a matter pertaining to juvenile delinquency law or penalty modification. Failure to present independent proof of the accused's minority does not warrant the dismissal of the rape charge upon a demurrer to evidence.