Practice question
In an administrative proceeding, a relevant authenticated attendance record and credible firsthand testimony adequately support a finding to a reasonable mind. The respondent argues the finding must fail solely because criminal proof beyond reasonable doubt was not met. Assuming no special rule changes the quantum, is that objection sound?
- Yes; every administrative finding requires the criminal standard
- Yes; documentary evidence is forbidden administratively
- No; the applicable substantial-evidence standard is distinct from criminal conviction
- Yes; only a guilty plea can support the finding
- No; therefore the record need not be evaluated
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/pdf/am_19-08-15-sc_2019.pdf — A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC, current Rules 128 §3, 130 §§21–22, 131 §1, 133 §§1–2,4–6.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1940/feb1940/gr_46496_1940.html — Ang Tibay v. Court of Industrial Relations, G.R. No. 46496, February 27, 1940, EN BANC MAIN decision (substantial evidence and administrative due process).
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/apr2022/gr_248304_2022.html — Agapito v. Aeroplus Multi-Services, Inc., G.R. No. 248304, April 20, 2022, MAIN decision (limits on procedural and evidentiary liberality).
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.