Home›Bar Review›2014›Criminal Law›Question XXV
Question XXV
XXV. Mr. Gray opened a savings account with Bank A with an initial deposit of
P
50,000.00. A few days later, he deposited a check for
P
200,000.00 drawn from Bank B and endorsed by Mr. White. Ten days later, Mr. Gray withdrew the
P
200,000.00 from his account. Mr. White later complained to Bank B when the amount of
P
200,000.00 was later debited to his account, as he did not issue the check and his signature thereon was forged. Mr. Gray subsequently deposited another check signed by Mr. Whitefor
P
200,000.00, which amount he later withdrew. Upon receiving the amount, Mr. Gray was arrested by agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).
Mr. Gray was convicted of estafa and attempted estafa, both through the use of commercial documents. (4%)
(a)(A) Mr. Gray claims as defense that, except for Mr. White’s claim of forgery, there was no evidence showing that he was the author of the forgery and Mr. White did not suffer any injuries as to the second check (attempted estafa). Rule on the defense of Mr. Gray.
(b)(B) Mr. Gray claims that he was entrapped illegally because there was no showing that the second check was a forgery and, therefore, his withdrawal based on the second check was a legal act. Is Mr. Gray correct?
Model answer · ALAC
Answer — Legal basis — Application — Conclusion.
AI-drafted in ALAC form and AI-verified against landmark authorities — refined with every round of verification.