Practice question
May CICL XXX be read to mean that prosecutors need never allege discernment because waiver is always inevitable?
- Yes, its waiver analysis abolishes the allegation requirement.
- No; the main decision recognizes the requirement, and waiver depends on the procedural circumstances.
- Yes, children are always presumed to have discernment.
- Yes, every timely objection is automatically futile.
- Yes, evidence need never establish discernment.
Legal references
- Rules of Court, Rule 110, Sections 7-15; Rule 116, Section 9; Rule 117, Sections 3(f) and 9; Rule 120, Section 3, as relevant: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html
- CICL XXX v. People, G.R. No. 238798, March 14, 2023, EN BANC MAIN decision, especially its discussion of pleading discernment and waiver (not the separate dissenting opinions): https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/mar2023/gr_238798_2023.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.