COR JESU COLLEGE – LAW SCHOOL

FINAL PAPER
PRACTICUM 2
AIANNA BIANCA PENDEZ BIRAO

A compilation of the interviews with the following practicing lawyers: (a) 2 private lawyers;
(b) 2 public attorneys; and (c) 2 public prosecutors. This final paper is in compliance with the
requirements of the subject Practicum 2 under the advisory of Atty. Michelle Louise
Brandares.
INTERVIEW NO. 1

ATTY. WILLIAM GACETA CARPENTERO

Atty. William, is a graduate of the University of Mindanao’s

(UM) College of Law in Davao City. At the age of 26, he passed
the bar in the year 2016 and has been in the practice of law for 4
years, more or less.

Currently, he, together with his father, established a general

professional partnership in the name of Carpentero Law Firm
located at National Highway, Southern Paligue, Padada, Davao
del Sur.

He started teaching in the College of Law at the University of

Mindanao, Davao City in the year 2016. Afterwards, he was
invited to teach in Cor Jesu College (CJC) School of Law in the
year 2018 for the subjects Law on Sales and Special Proceedings.

Upon interviewing Atty. William, two (2) questions were

asked, to wit:

1) How do you prepare for trials? and

2) What are your techniques during trials?

(Transcription of the interview)

“Interviewer: Atty, may I ask how do you

prepare for trials?

Atty. William: Well, as a law student you

were taught in law school to
read and read. Same goes
with us lawyers, we have to
rigorously and prudently read
the facts of the case at hand
before entering the court.

1
As you can see, us lawyers,
we handle numerous cases in
various kinds, be it civil,
criminal, special proceedings
or administrative. And it is
expected of us to know our
cases well since it is our job
to represent persons on their
behalf in order to further the
ends of justice. It must also
be noted that these persons
whom I am representing have
a fiduciary relationship with
me as their lawyer. Hence, I
cannot afford to overlook
even the slightest crack on
the wall. However, human as
we are, we cannot attain
perfection, so I also admit
that there are times when I
am not at my best.
Nevertheless, my limited
ability as a human being
should not be a hinder for me
to keep myself very well
abreast with the law,
jurisprudence and current
social issues as well.

With that being said, I always

read. I keep myself afloat
with legal information and I
always prepare my outline of
questions when I have to
prepare for a cross
examination or direct
examination.

Also, before going to court, if

I need to bring any witnesses,

2
 I keep them briefed and
informed so I talk to them
days before the actual
hearing.

Interviewer: During the trial, Atty, what

are your techniques?

Atty. William: These are one of the many

techniques that must be
observed a counsel at most
times, to wit:

1. Knowing the nature of the

case if it involves a criminal,
civil, or administrative
dispute. The reason behind it
is that, judges or adjudicators
would base its decision on the
pieces of evidence presented.
If it is a criminal case, moral
certainty that the accused has
committed the crime charged
is required for an accused to
be convicted ergo, the
prosecution must prove that
all elements of the crime was
committed, if not, the
accused would be acquitted of
the crime charged. If it is a
civil case, preponderance of
evidence is required which
means, a party who has a
quantum of proof proving his
claim over a property or civil
action has a better chance of
winning the case as compared
to a party who presented
less. In civil case though, the
documents must be related to

3
the cause of action, if not, it
will not be given credence by
the court. If it is an
administrative case,
substantial evidence, not
quantum of proof, is merely
required. Often than not,
rules of court on
administrative matters is
merely suppletorily hence,
liberal interpretation of the
rules is being observed.

2. In the examination of the

witness, an examining
counsel must be able to
determine just by looking the
demeanor of the witness as to
whether or not, he or she is
telling the truth. An
examining counsel must
likewise propound questions if
the witness has personal
knowledge surrounding the
document or any other pieces
of documents he voluntarily
offered in court. Witness
sometimes add more
information to the case so as
to make it appear that he has
knowledge on the case filed,
now, it is the duty of the
examining counsel to pick
apart the testimony to ferret
out the truth it. On the same
vein, witnesses would omit
certain incidents as it might
be unfavorable to them thus,
it is the duty of the counsel to
expose before the court the

4
 omitted information for the
same reason: ferret out the
truth.

3. Respect the judge at all

times no matter how
belligerent he or she is. This
rule also applies to fellow
counsels.

4. Know the rules in court as

all judges have their own
style in hearing the case.

5. Secure original copies of

the documents.

Interviewer: Thank you very much, Atty,

for the time you have given
me and for squeezing this
interview in your hectic
schedule. I very much
appreciate the insights you
have imparted through this
dialogue.”

5
INTERVIEW NO. 2

ATTY. WILLIAM GEMPESAW

CARPENTERO

Atty. William Gempesaw Carpentero, is a graduate of the

University of San Jose - Recoletos (USJR) formerly known as
Colegio de San Jose–Recoletos at Cebu City, Philippines. He
passed the bar examination in the year 1997 and has been in the
practice of law for twenty-three (23) years, more or less, or for
more than two (2) decades already.

Currently, he, together with his youngest son, established a

general professional partnership in the name of Carpentero Law
Firm located at National Highway, Southern Paligue, Padada,
Davao del Sur.

Upon interviewing Atty. Carpentero, two (2) questions were

asked, to wit:

1) How do you prepare for trials? and

2) What are your techniques during trials?

(Transcription of the interview)

“Interviewer: Atty, may I ask how do you

prepare for trials?

Atty. Carpentero: I look up for [quick]

reference to the relevant laws
in the book and thereafter
make myself focus and
prepare for the trial. Usually,
a day before the trial I
prepare my cases scheduled
for trial.

6
Interviewer: During the trial, Atty, what
are your techniques?

Atty. Carpentero: I have my outline of the

facts I intend to elicit and to
prove during my trial and I
have to somehow make
myself conversant to the
applicable laws and
jurisprudence that will apply
on my cases and during the
trial.

Interviewer: Thank you very much, Atty,

for the time you have given
me and for squeezing this
interview in your hectic
schedule. I very much
appreciate the insights you
have imparted through this
dialogue.”

7
INTERVIEW NO. 3

ATTY. EFREN PIÑ OL, JR.

Atty. Piñol, is a graduate of the University of Mindanao (UM)
Davao City, Philippines. He passed the bar examination in the
year 2016 and is currently the Public Attorney II, OIC District
Head of Malita District, Davao Occidental.

Upon interviewing Atty. Piñol, two (2) questions were asked,

to wit:

1) How do you prepare for trials? and

2) What are your techniques during trials?

(Transcription of the interview)

“Interviewer: Atty, may I ask how do you

prepare for trials?

Atty. Piñol: I read my cases beforehand

in order to prepare for my
defense so that I can outline
and present my arguments
clearly and intelligibly. It is
very important for lawyers
like us to read in advance,
research in advance and to
talk to the client most
especially. In an ideal world,
we should prepare weeks
before or days before,
however, public attorneys like
us in PAO do not have the
luxury of doing that because
our work load is very much
cramped and we handle so
many cases. To tell you the
truth, sometimes I have to

8
 prepare just [minutes] before
my assigned case is called in
the court. Sometimes, I also
have to cross-examine [a
witness] on the spot. Even
with the following
circumstances, we have to do
our best to deliver for our
clients.

Interviewer: During the trial, Atty, what

are your techniques?

Atty. Piñol: The first thing I do is read the

facts of the case and know
what it is all about. After
knowing the elements of the
case, I then read the
affidavits of the witnesses in
order to find out if there is a
cause of action. Once you
have known all the allegations
of the complaint or allegations
stipulated by the adverse
party, then I outline the
research I have done
concerning the case at hand.
When I do this, it is like law
school all over again because
I have to study very well.

Interviewer: Thank you very much, Atty,

for the time you have given
me and for squeezing this
interview in your hectic
schedule. I very much
appreciate the insights you
have imparted through this
dialogue.”

9
INTERVIEW NO. 4

ATTY. RETZELYN MAE QUINTANA

Public Attorney’s Office – Digos City, Davao del Sur

Upon interviewing Atty. Quintana, two (2) questions were

asked, to wit:

1) How do you prepare for trials? and

2) What are your techniques during trials?

(Transcription of the interview)

“Interviewer: Atty, may I ask how do you

prepare for trials?

Atty. Quintana: Based before the trial

date, I actually have to read
the case. But I practiced that
for every case folder that I
have, I have this case like
attached to the folder itself so
that from the trial date, I
don’t have to check or read
every page of the records.
Especially if the case has
been are already on let’s say
five years, six years. So it
would really take time if you
have to go to every page,
right? So what I do is that
days before the hearing, I
checked the things and I
checked what has happened
already. For example, the
child before presentation of
prosecution evidence, I’m the
defense counsel, so I would
check who are the witnesses

10
presented already, what are
their testimonies, and if
there’s another witness that
would be presented, I have to
read the affidavit. So simply
what I do is I really need to
familiarize the background of
the case before I actually
appear for trial. Like for
example, a case for murder.
Let’s say the stage is on the
presentation of evidence for
the defense. So I checked the
evidence that has been
presented already and of
course if the presentation of
evidence and you’re the
defense counsel for defense,
you have to present the
witness before trial you have
to of course talk to your client
because it would really be
impossible that you will
present your witness and you
will only keep him or her in
court. So it depends actually
on the type of trial that you
will be appearing for, if for
the prosecution, presentation
of evidence or for the
defense, turn of the defense
to present their witness.

In my case, since I’m with

PAO, most of my cases,
actually general cases I
appear for the defense or the
accused. So I’m more on if
the presentation of evidence,
especially us, I would be

11
cross-examining the witness,
if that happens or if the
presentation of prosecution
evidence, first read the
affidavits of all the witnesses.
During the trial, you wouldn’t
know who will be the
witnesses to be presented, so
at least you have an idea
already before you go to trial
the testimony of the
witnesses. Like for example, if
it’s the private complainant
that had executed an affidavit
and the private complainant,
just in a case for murder, the
murder, not the eye witness,
so you would know
beforehand the questions that
you will be asking, but if it is
the eye witness that they will
be presenting, there would be
a different set of questions
because the eye witness is
very crucial for the
prosecution evidence. Just
know the case, what has
happened and you should be
able to know if that particular
witness is to be presented, or
they will be presenting a
different witness, it would
only be during the trial that
you would be studying the
affidavit of the witnesses. It’s
very important that before
you go to trial, you read all
the records, affidavits. As I
said earlier, you don’t have to
go every records, just check

12
 or check the most previous
trials like if this witness has
been presented already, I
don’t have to repeat this
affidavit anymore but if
there’s another witness that
has to be presented most
probably they would be
presenting this one, his
affidavit, and of course you
have to have a very good
night sleep beforehand
because you have to sleep or
have enough sleep, the next
morning your mind would be
clear. Might as well give
yourself time, like for
example, if your hearing
would be on let’s say on
Tuesday, do the work, the
hardwork Saturday, Sunday,
Monday you take a rest, then
Tuesday prepare yourself for
trial.

Interviewer: During the trial, Atty, what

are your techniques?

Atty. Quintana: Best trial technique, I

haven’t been in practice of
law for quite some time. I
started in PAO, 2016, so that
would make almost four years
and well so far what works for
me is that you have to be
attentive in court because in
my case as a PAO lawyer, we
handle a lot of cases. For
example in particular trial
date, in a calendar of a day is

13
20 cases, PAO handles around
10-15 cases and at first it was
really difficult for us because
even handling one case is
very difficult already but
imagine handling 15 cases for
that particular day you have
to deal with that so it’s very
difficult but it takes time
because you will be able to
handle the pressure. At first,
it would be very like, I will be
very afraid, honestly, like I’m
the one who has committed
the crime or I am the one
who’s putting the charge but
what I do is at first I just
observe the veterans, how
they do it because I actually
don’t have an experience
before I became a PAO lawyer
or before I became a lawyer.
I just worked as a paralegal. I
don’t have any experience
working in a law firm because
I was a full time student then.
So the very first time that I
appeared for trial, it was my
first time to be in court. Well,
I had experienced during my
law school days observing
trials but I actually I haven’t
gotten anything from that
because there are other
people, I was at the back,
what I do is to get a
certificate of appearance,
after that I was, I don’t really
have an idea what was
happening the.

14
The first time that I appeared
in court, it was the first time
that I had actually viewed
how it is to be done. So best
practice is be observant and
open for learning and do not
be afraid to ask because if
you are a new lawyer, there
will be veterans would be
much more understanding of
you, actually, the Judge. My
first court was with the
Executive Judge, Judge Davin
and she knew that I was just
then a new lawyer and Branch
18 was actually, there was a
lot of cases in Branch 18, and
you cannot expect a new
lawyer, like for example, first
time to appear, will be able to
present evidence already.
Just be humble, like “Your
Honor, I’m not yet ready, I
haven’t done with the records
yet” because they would be
more forgiving if they knew
that you are just a new
lawyer but in the next
hearing, of course you should
be ready already.

The part is for every

experience that you have, you
have to learn. Like for
example, if it’s for
arraignment, what to do and
not to do, if it’s for
presentation of evidence,
what to do and not to do. It is

15
 inevitable, it is hard to have
you, you know your worst,
during those pressures you
will learn a lot, and the next
time you are able to know.
Just observe how others are
doing it and through time you
will be able to get hand of it.

Interviewer: Thank you very much, Atty,

for the time you have given
me and for squeezing this
interview in your hectic
schedule. I very much
appreciate the insights you
have imparted through this
dialogue.”

16
INTERVIEW NO. 5

PROS. BLAIR M. DURA

Assistant Prosecutor Attorney II
City Prosecutor’s Office – Digos City, Davao del Sur

Upon interviewing Fiscal Dura, two (2) questions were

asked, to wit:

1) How do you prepare for trials? and

2) What are your techniques during trials?

(Transcription of the interview)

“Interviewer: Atty, may I ask how do you

prepare for trials?

Fiscal Dura: When I was still a defense

counsel. Hmm, way back
when I was still a defense
counsel, to defend an
innocent person. You will be
surprised, it’s much more
difficult to defend an innocent
person. Especially if that
complainant and the sought
to be victim or the
prosecutors are very good
and well-presented and I
don’t know how to do it.
Maybe there were some
irregularities but when you
determine your client to be
really innocent, that’s when
it’s difficult because that’s
when you can’t afford to
make a mistake. Okay lang
kung alam mong guilty kahit
talo ka, hindi ka masyadong

17
 ma kokonsensya kasi guilt
naman talaga. Tanggapin na
lang natin kasi ginawa mo
man talaga. But when you are
defending an innocent person,
nagkamali ka, naging guilty,
you cannot really accept that.
So that’s the most hardest
case to handle. And after that
case, hindi na ako
tumatanggap ng mga kasong
nagsasabing inosente talaga
sila. Bakit? Kung inosente ka
talaga, hindi ako tatanggap sa
iyo, kasi tinatanggap ko dito
sa office ko, yung may sala
lang talaga. Mga makasasala
lang akong gina dawat dri.
So, go find another lawyer if
you are innocent. It is not my
expertise to defend the
innocent people, ganun yung
sinasabi ko. Anyway, kung
sad-an jud ang tao tapos ma
pildi ka, mamali ka, ma
convict ka, kung tinuod man
kaha, dli kaayo ka ma
konsensya saimong
kaugalingon.

Interviewer: During the trial, Atty, what

are your techniques?

Fiscal Dura: one mistake that lawyers

commit is actually thinking on
the fight into a personal level
you do not fight with the
opposing counsel, you do not
fight with the judge. You read
the problem areas in Christian

18
ethics, may mga lawyers na
they take the fight personally
against the other lawyers and
it’s really sad coz when you
become lawyers, your
opposing counsel is not an
opposing counsel but a fellow
lawyer, a brother in the
profession. So you don’t want
to get into the fight with
them, leave the fight to the
clients, it’s the client’s fight.
Not yours personally. Only
tackle in the cross
examination those questions
that would refer to the issues
of the client, do not ask
question referring to the
conduct of the lawyer. One
example of this is the
preparation of the judicial
affidavit. Ginagawa nang
personal ng iba. “So who took
prepared your judicial
affidavit” “How did he
prepare”. So here you are
going up to the level of
attacking the opposing
counsel. So once that would
happen, you would
antagonize everybody, not
only the opposing counsel but
you also antagonize the
judge. But not only the judge,
you would also antagonize
those other lawyers that are
sympathetic to your opposing
counsel that will create a lot
of problem for you.

19
Interviewer: Thank you very much, Atty,
for the time you have given
me and for squeezing this
interview in your hectic
schedule. I very much
appreciate the insights you
have imparted through this
dialogue.”

20
INTERVIEW NO. 6

PROS. SUZETTE G. DALUMPINES

Assistant City Prosecutor
City Prosecutor’s Office – Digos City, Davao del Sur

Upon interviewing Prosecutor Dalumpines, two (2) questions

were asked, to wit:

1) How do you prepare for trials? and

2) What are your techniques during trials?

(Transcription of the interview)

“Interviewer: Atty, may I ask how do you

prepare for trials?

Pros. Dalumpines: First you really have to

study your case, the “ins and
outs” of your case, you study
the theory of your case. You
study everything, all the
affidavits. If it is a civil case,
all the related laws and as
much as possible, if it is to
present a witness, brief your
witness first. You really have
to interview your witness. You
cannot just randomly present
your witness without talking
to your witness first. Ideally,
that’s the case. But in some
cases, like in our case, there
are times that we have to
present our witness even if
we have not talk with that
witness because we have so
many cases set in that
particular day and that is the

21
only time the witness come to
court and then, introduce
himself as the witness and it’s
the first time you will see him
or her and you really have to
present him, you should take
advantage of his presence,
otherwise the next scheduled
hearing he might not come
again and you will lose the
chance to present him. But in
all other cases if you really
have time to talk to the
witness then you really must
talk to your witness to avoid
surprises and also if let’s say
you need to exhaust all
possible questions that the
defense counsel or the other
counsel might ask to the
witness then go through them
and then brief your witness
for any possible answers and
ideally you do not push your
witness.

In some cases, you really

have to tell your witness on
how to arrange or re-arrange
the task to suit your case. So
that’s first preparation. If you
really have to go to trial as if
you’re going to war you have
to prepare all your
ammunitions, all your in outs,
your mental condition, even
your physical condition, and
it’s like a burning desire
within you to present your
case, you really have to love

22
 your case. If you are a private
practitioner at least you have
the choice to either accept or
reject the case brought to you
but in our case we have no
choice. If a case is raffled to
the court where we are
assigned then we really have
to present the case whether
or not we believe on our
witness because that is our
job. But if you’re a private
practitioner at least you have
a choice. And when you go to
court, first preparation at
least when you go to court, at
least you must have already
read your case, you must
have thought of all possible
scenarios that may come out
during the trial. That’s the
first thing I can think of when
you have to prepare for a
trial.

Interviewer: During the trial, Atty, what

are your techniques?

Pros. Dalumpines: There is no black and

white rule when you go to
trial. As I have mentioned
earlier, you really have to go
to court prepared. Do not be
relaxed or complacent when
you go to court. You have to
feel these butterflies within
your stomach because when
you feel it, you keep on your
toes, you would be aware,
you would be alert on

23
whatever questions or
whatever answers that may
popped up during trial. And
during the trial, you really
have to listen to the Judge,
you look at the facial
expressions of the Judge. Try
to read the mind of the
Judge. There are Judges who
are very expressive in their
faces. If let’s say, they find
the answers somewhat
ridiculous, it would appear in
their face. If they find the
answer credible or if they pity
the witness. You see, you
really have to look at the face
of the Judge. The smirk, the
raising of the eyebrow, the
expressions. Also you have to
look at the faces of the
witnesses. There are
witnesses who are good liars,
there are witnesses who are
volunteering facts. I mean
you get something out of it,
you grill the witness from
those things that should not
be said during the trial,
should not be part of the
testimony. There are also
times that when you ask a
witness if it is a witness of the
other party, that witness
would keep on looking at their
counsel as if asking for a nod
or a shake of the head, asking
to be led to appropriate
answers, or even would look
at the audience, the people at

24
the back of the sala where
they would make gestures to
help the witness answers
some difficult questions, you
look at them and then if you
find that this witness is not
credible, you put it on record
that the witness is looking at
the people at the gallery
asking or looking for answers,
that is to check on the
credibility of the witnesses.

And also if this witness has an

affidavit, try to lead him first
on the testimony he gave
earlier and then when you
cross-examine him, check his
affidavit or presumably you
have already read his affidavit
in advance, then try to see if
there are inconsistencies and
then attack that particular
inconsistencies and put it on
record that there is an
inconsistent answer on the
affidavit and on the statement
earlier made on direct, that is
for cross-examination. But if
he is your own witness,
atleast you have already
briefed him. He would already
know and it is already
expected on that his answers
were already discussed before
he was placed on the witness
stand. If your own witness is
on cross-examination, you
have to protect your witness.

25
Do not allow the defense
counsel or even the Judge to
humiliate your witness
because there are Judges in
fact who will humiliate your
witness. Protect your witness,
protect the mental condition
of your witness, protect his
statement, especially if that
statement is strong and the
other counsel is trying to
destroy that particular
statement. Also during the
trial, you have to be very
familiar with your rules on
evidence, what are the
objections, what are the
statements or what are the
things that would come out
objectionable and then object
it immediately. Do not allow
unless of course, there are
times let’s say leading
questions or misleading
questions and then you would
think that it is favourable to
you, just let it be. There are
times when the question is
not proper but it does not
really destroy your case,
sometimes I just let it be just
so the trial will continue. Do
not object on all objectionable
minor things, focus on major
things. Like if somebody
would do something
unreasonable, if you can let it
go, just let it go. If it is
something that you cannot let
it go, then fight for it. That’s

26
 the same with the trial. There
are times that the questions
are objectionable if it does
not ruin your case just let it
be. If there’s threat, a little
threat that it will ruin your
case then try to protect your
case.

Interviewer: Thank you very much, Atty,

for the time you have given
me and for squeezing this
interview in your hectic
schedule. I very much
appreciate the insights you
have imparted through this
dialogue.”

27
DOCUMENTATIONS

28
29
30