RULES OF COURT (Evidence)

_____________________________________________________________

HAND BOOK ON THE LAW ON EVIDENCE

Instructor

Q: What is evidence?
1|Page
A: Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of ascertaining in a judicial
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (Sec. 1, Rule 128)

Q: What are the four component elements?

A: 1. Means of ascertainment – includes not only the procedure or manner of ascertainment but
also the evidentiary fact from which the truth respecting a matter of fact may be ascertained

2. Sanctioned by the rules – not excluded by the Rules of Court

3. In a judicial proceeding – contemplates an action or proceeding filed in a court of law

4. The truth respecting a matter of fact – refers to an issue of fact and is both substantive
(determines the facts needed to be established) and procedural (governs the manner of proving
said facts)

Q: Why is evidence required?

A: It is required because of the presumption that the court is not aware of the veracity of the facts
involved in a case. It is therefore incumbent upon the parties to prove a fact in issue thru the
presentation of admissible evidence.

Q: What is the scope of the Rules of Evidence?

A: The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings, except as
otherwise provided by law or by these rules. It is guided by the principle of uniformity. (Sec. 2,
Rule 128)

EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES VERSUS EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES

Q: Distinguish Evidence in Civil Cases from Evidence in Criminal Cases.

Civil Cases Criminal Cases

The party having the burden of proof must The guilt of the accused has to be proven
prove his claim by a preponderance of beyond reasonable doubt
evidence
An offer of compromise is not an admission of An offer of compromise by the accused may be
any liability, and is not admissible in evidence received in evidence as an implied admission
against the offeror of guilt
The concept of presumption of innocence does The accused enjoys the constitutional
not apply presumption of innocence

PROOF VERSUS EVIDENCE

Q: Distinguish proof from evidence.

Proof Evidence
The effect when the requisite quantum of The mode and manner of proving competent
evidence of a particular fact has been duly facts in judicial proceedings
admitted and given weight
The probative effect of evidence The means of proof

2|Page
 FACTUM PROBANS VERSUS FACTUM PROBANDUM

Q: Distinguish factum probandum from factum probans.

Factum Probandum Factum Probans

The ultimate fact sought to be established The intermediate facts
Proposition to be established Materials which establish the proposition
Hypothetical Existent

ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

Q: Distinguish admissibility of evidence from probative value of evidence.

Admissibility Probative Value

Question of whether certain pieces of evidence Question of whether the admitted evidence
are to be considered at all. proves an issue.

REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

Q: What are the requisites for admissibility of evidence?

A: 1. Relevancy – such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-
existence.

2. Competency – if not excluded by law or by the rules.

Q: What is the doctrine of “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree?

A: The doctrine speaks of that illegally seized documents, papers, and things are inadmissible in
evidence. The exclusion of such evidence is the only practical means of enforcing the
constitutional injunction against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Q: What is meant by relevance of evidence?

A: Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or
nonexistence

MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY

CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY

Multiple Evidence that is plainly relevant and competent

for two or more purposes will be received if it
satisfies all the requirements prescribed by law
in order that it may be admissible for the
purpose for which it is presented, even if it
does not satisfy the other requisites of
admissibility for other purposes.
Conditional Evidence appears to be immaterial is admitted

3|Page
 by the court subject to the condition that its
connection with another fact subsequent to be
proved will be established. Otherwise, such
fact already received will be stricken off the
record at the initiative of the adverse party.
Curative Evidence that is otherwise improper is
admitted (despite objection from the other
party) to contradict improper evidence
presented or introduced by the other party, to
cure, contradict or neutralize such improper
evidence.

DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Q: Distinguish Direct Evidence from Circumstantial Evidence.

Direct Evidence Circumstantial Evidence

Establishes the existence of a fact in issue Does not prove the existence of a fact in issue
without the aid of any inference or directly, but merely provides for logical
presumption inference that such fact really exists
The witness testifies directly of his own Each proof is given of facts and circumstances
knowledge as to the main facts to be proved from which the court may infer other
connected facts which reasonably follow,
according to the common experience of
mankind

Q: When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to convict the accused?

A: It is sufficient for conviction if:

1. There is more than one circumstance;
2. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
3. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable
doubt (Sec. 4, Rule 133; People vs Sevilleno, G.R. No. 152954, March 11, 2004)

POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EVIDENCE

Q: What is positive and negative evidence?

A:

1. Positive – when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur, it is entitled to greater
weight since the witness represents of his personal knowledge the presence or absence of a fact.
2. Negative – when the witness states that he did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact and
there is total disclaimer of personal knowledge. Such is admissible only if has to contradict
positive acts of the other side or would tend to exclude the existence of fact sworn to by the other
side.

Note: A denial is a negative evidence. It is considered by jurisprudence to be a very weak form

of defense and can never overcome an affirmative or positive testimony particularly when it
comes from the mouth of a credible witness. (People vs Mendoza, 450 SCRA 328, January 21,
2005).

COMPETENT AND CREDIBLE EVIDENCE

4|Page
Q: Distinguish competent evidence from credible evidence.

Competent Evidence Credible Evidence

Evidence is not excluded by the rules Refers to worthiness of belief (believability)
Note: That quality which renders a witness
worthy of belief

BURDEN OF PROOF AND BURDEN OF EVIDENCE

Q: What is burden of proof?

A: It is the duty of a party to present evidence to establish his claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law (Sec. 1, Rule 131). It is also called onus probandi.

Q: What are the two concepts of burden of proof?

A: 1. Burden of going forward – Party’s obligation of producing evidence.

2. Burden of persuasion – The burden of persuading the trier of fact that the burdened party is
entitled to prevail.

Q: Distinguish burden of proof from burden of evidence.

Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence

It is the duty of a party to present evidence on It is the duty of a party to provide evidence at
the facts in issue necessary to establish his any stage of the trial until he has established a
claim or defense by the amount of evidence prima facie case, or the like duty of the adverse
required by law (Sec. 1, Rule 131) party to meet and overthrow that prima facie
case thus established. In both civil and criminal
cases, the burden of evidence lies on the party
who asserts an affirmative allegation.
(Regalado, Vol. II, p. 817, 2008 ed.)
Whether it shifts throughout the proceedings
Does not shift as it remains throughout the Shifts to the other party when one party has
entire case exactly where the pleadings produced sufficient evidence to be entitled to a
originally placed ruling in his favour
What determines it
Generally determined by the pleadings filed by Generally determined by the developments at
the party; and whoever asserts the affirmative the trial, or by the provisions of the substantive
of the issue has the burden of proof law or procedural rules which may relieve the
party from presenting evidence on the fact
alleged
Effect of a legal presumption
It does not shift the burden of proof. However, It creates a prima facie case and thereby
the one who has the burden of proof is relieved sustains the said burden of evidence on the
from the time being, from introducing evidence point which it covers, shifting it to the other
in support of his averment because the party. It relieves those favored thereby of the
presumption stands in the place of evidence. burden of proving the fact presumed.

Note: The burden of proof is on the party who asserts the affirmative of the issue at the
beginning of the case and continues on him throughout the case. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit,
no qui negat - he who asserts, not he who denies, must prove.

5|Page
Where insanity is alleged, the burden of proof rests upon him who alleges insanity to establish
that fact but where insanity is once proved to exist, the burden of evidence is shifted to him who
asserts that the act was done while the person was sane (Engle v. Doe, G.R. No. L-23317, Aug.
7, 1925).

Q: What is the test to determine where the burden of proof lies?

A: The test is to ask which party to an action or suit will fail if he offers no evidence competent
to show the facts averred as the basis for the relief he seeks to obtain. If the defendant has
affirmative defenses, he bears the burden of proof as to those defenses which he sets up in
answer to the plaintiff’s cause of action (Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Spouses Royeca, G.R.
No. 176664, July 21, 2008).

Q: Who has the burden of proof?

CIVIL CASE
Plaintiff Defendant
To show the truth of his allegations if the If he raises an affirmative defense.
defendant raises a negative defense
CRIMINAL CASE
Prosecution Accused
Because of presumption of innocence When he admits the offense/crime charged but
raises justifying, exempting circumstances, or
absolutory causes.

Q: Who has the burden of evidence?

CIVIL CASE
Plaintiff Defendant
Has to prove his affirmative allegations in the Has to prove the affirmative allegations in his
complaint counterclaim and his affirmative defences
CRIMINAL CASE
Has to prove its affirmative allegations in the Has to prove his affirmative allegations
Information regarding the elements of the regarding the existence of justifying,
crime as well as the attendant circumstances exempting, absolutory, or mitigating
circumstances

Q: What are the degrees of proof necessary to satisfy the burden of proof?

A: 1. Civil case – Preponderance of evidence

2. Administrative case – Substantial evidence

3. Criminal case:
a. During preliminary investigation – Well founded belief of the fact of commission of a crime
b. Issuance of warrant of arrest – Probable cause
c. To convict an accused – Evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt
d. Accused claims justifying/exempting circumstances – Clear and convincing evidence

Q: Who has the burden of proof in self-defense?

6|Page
A: One who invokes self-defense admits responsibility for the killing. Accordingly, the burden
of proof shifts to the accused who must then prove the justifying circumstance. He must show by
clear and convincing evidence that he indeed acted in self-defense, or in defense of a relative or a
stranger. Self-defense, like alibi, is a defense which can easily be concocted.

It is well-settled in this jurisdiction that once an accused has admitted that he inflicted the fatal
injuries on the deceased, it is incumbent upon him in order to avoid criminal liability, to prove
the justifying circumstance claimed by him with clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence. He
cannot rely on the weakness of the prosecution but on the strength of his own evidence, “for even
if the evidence of the prosecution were weak it could not be disbelieved after the accused himself
had admitted the killing.” (Cabuslay v. People and Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 129875, Sept. 30,
2005).

PRESUMPTIONS

Q: What are matters which need not be proved?

A: 1. Facts admitted or not denied provided they have been sufficiently alleged (Sec. 11, Rule 8);

2. Agreed and admitted facts (Sec. 4, Rule 129);

3. Facts subject to judicial notice (Sec. 3, Rule 129); and

4. Facts legally presumed (Secs. 2 & 3, Rule 131).

Q: What is presumption?

A: It is an assumption of fact resulting from a rule of law, which requires such fact to be assumed
from another fact or group of facts found or otherwise established in the action (Black’s, 5thEd.,
1067 citing Uniform Rule 12; NJ evidence Rule 13). It is an inference of the existence or non-
existence of a fact which courts are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts. (In the
matter of the Intestate Estates of Delgado and Rustia, G.R. No. 175733, Jan. 27, 2006)

Q: What are the kinds of presumptions of law?

A: 1. Conclusive presumptions (presumptions juris et de jure)

2. Disputable presumptions (presumptions juris tantum)

CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS

Q: What is a conclusive presumption?

A: Conclusive presumptions are those which are not permitted to be overcome by any proof to
the contrary.

Q: What are the classes of conclusive presumptions?

A: 1. Estoppel in pais – Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act or omission,
intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing to be true, and to act upon
such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be
permitted to falsify it [Sec. 2, (par. a)].

7|Page
2. Estoppel by deed – A party to a property deed is precluded from asserting, as against another
party to the deed, any right or title in derogation of the deed, or from denying the truth of any
material fact asserted in the deed e.g. The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord
at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them [Sec. 2
(par. b)]

Q: What are the requisites for a party to be estopped?

A: 1. Conduct amounting to false representation or concealment of material facts; or at least

calculated to convey the impression that the facts are otherwise than, and inconsistent with, those
which the party subsequently attempts to assert;

2. Intent, or at least, expectation, that this conduct shall be acted upon by, or at least influence,
the other party; and

3. Knowledge, actual or constructive, of the real facts.

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS

Q: What are disputable presumptions?

A: Those which are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by
other evidence. (Sec. 3, Rule 131)

Q: What are the disputable presumptions under Section 3 of Rule 130?

A: 1. A person is innocent of a crime or wrong. Note: It applies to both civil and criminal cases.
Presumption of innocence of the accused accompanies him until the rendition of judgement and
disappears after conviction, such that upon appeal, the appellate court will then presume the guilt
of the accused.

2. Unlawful act is done with an unlawful intent.

3. Person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act.

4. Person takes ordinary care of his concerns. Note: All people are sane and normal and moved
by substantially the same motives. When of age and sane, they must take care of themselves.
Courts operate not because one person has been defeated or overcome by another but because
that person has been defeated or overcome illegally. There must be a violation of the law (Vales
v. Villa, G.R. No. 10028, Dec. 16, 1916).

5. Evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced.

The requisites for the presumption to apply are:

a. The evidence is material;
b. The party had the opportunity to produce it; and
c. The evidence is available only to the said party.

The presumption will not be applicable when:

a. Suppression of evidence is not willful;
b. Evidence suppressed or withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative;
c. Evidence is at the disposal of both parties; and
d. Suppression is by virtue of an exercise of privilege.

8|Page
6. Money paid by one to another was due to the latter.

7. Thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter.

8. Obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid.

9. Prior rents or instalments had been paid when a receipt for the later ones is produced.

10. A person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the
taker and doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person possesses or exercises acts
of ownership over, are owned by him. Note: Presumption of possession of stolen goods arises
once the prosecution is able to prove that a certain object has been unlawfully taken, and that the
accused is in possession of the object unlawfully taken. Presumption of innocence disappears and
presumption of guilt takes place.

11. Person in possession of an order on himself for the payment of the money or the delivery of
anything has paid the money or delivered the thing accordingly.

12. Person acting in public office was regularly appointed or elected to it.

13. Official duty has been regularly performed. Note: All things are presumed to have been done
regularly and with due formality until the contrary is proved (Omnia praesumuntur rite et
solemniter esse acta donec probetur in contrarium). An adverse presumption may arise where
the official act in question appears irregular on its face. This presumption extends to persons who
have been appointed pursuant to a local or special statute to act in quasi-public or quasi-official
capacities and to professionals like lawyers and surgeons.

14. A court or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the
lawful exercise of jurisdiction. Note: Lawful exercise of jurisdiction is presumed in all cases, be
it superior or inferior courts, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, unless the record itself
shows that jurisdiction has not been acquired or the record itself shows the absence of
jurisdiction, in which case jurisdiction to render a judgment may not be presumed.

15. All the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the court and passed upon by
it; all matters within an issue raised in a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before
arbitrators and passed upon by them.

16. Private transactions have been fair and regular. Note: Presumption that all men act fairly,
honestly and in good faith, and that an individual intends to do right rather than wrong and
intends to do only what he has the right to do.

17. Ordinary course of business has been followed. Note: Persons engaged in a given trade or
business are presumed to be acquainted with the general customs, usages and other facts
necessarily incident to the proper conduct of the business.

18. There was a sufficient consideration for a contract.

19. Negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient consideration. 20. An
endorsement of negotiable instrument was made before the instrument was overdue and at the
place where the instrument is dated.

21. A writing is truly dated.

22. Letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail. Note: For this
presumption to arise, it must be proved that the letter was properly addressed with postage pre-
paid and that it was actually mailed.

9|Page
23. Absentee of 7 years, it being not known whether or not he is still alive, is considered dead for
all purposes except for succession. For the purpose of opening his succession, an absence of 10
years is required; and if he disappeared after the age of 75, absence of only 5 years is sufficient.
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of estate among
the heirs:

a. Person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft which is missing, who
has not been heard of for 4 years since the loss of the vessel or aircraft;

b. Member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed hostilities, and has been
missing for 4 years;

c. Person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and whose
existence has not been known for 4 years;

d. If a married person has been absent for 4 consecutive years, the spouse present may
contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has well-founded belief that the absent spouse is
already dead; 2 years in case of disappearance where there is danger of death under the
circumstances hereinabove provided. Before marrying again, the spouse present must institute a
summary proceeding as provided in the Family Code and in the rules for declaration of
presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of re-appearance of the absent
spouse.

24. Acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was conformable to the law
or fact.

25. Things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and ordinary habits of life.

26. Persons acting as co-partners have entered into a contract of co-partnership.

27. A man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered into a lawful
contract of marriage.

28. Property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each other and who
live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage or under
void marriage, has been obtained by their joint efforts, work or industry.

29. In cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not capacitated to marry each other
and who have acquired properly through their actual joint contribution of money, property or
industry, such contributions and their corresponding shares including joint deposits of money
and evidences of credit are equal.

30. If the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage within 300 hundred
days after such termination of the former marriage, these rules shall govern in the absence of
proof to the contrary:

Presumptions of paternity:

a. A child born before 180 days after the subsequent marriage is conceived during the former
marriage, provided it is born within 300 days after the termination of the former marriage.

b. A child born after 180 days following the subsequent marriage is considered to have been
conceived during the subsequent marriage, even though it be born within the 300 days after the
termination of the former marriage.

31. A thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with things of that nature.

10 | P a g e
32. The law has been obeyed.

33. A printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by public authority, was
so printed or published.

34. A printed or published book, purporting to contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of
the country where the book is published, contains correct reports of such cases.

35. A trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a particular person has
actually conveyed it to him when such presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such
person or his successor in interest.

LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE

Q: How are the rules on evidence construed?

A: The rules of evidence must be liberally construed. (Section 6, Rule 1) The Rules of
Procedure are mere tools intended to facilitate rather than to frustrate the attainment of justice. A
strict and rigid application of the rules must always be eschewed if it would subvert their primary
objective of enhancing substantial justice.

Procedural rules myst be liberally interpreted and applied so as not to frustrate substantial justice
(Quiambao vs. Court of Appeals, 454 SCRA 17, March 28, 2005). However, to justify relaxation
of the rules, a satisfactory explanation and a subsequent fulfillment of the requirements have
always been required (Barcenas vs Tomas, 454 SCRA 593, March 31, 2005).

QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE (WEIGHT AND

SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE) (RULE 133)

Q: Define weight of evidence.

A: It is the probative value given by the court to particular evidence admitted to prove a fact in
issue.

Q: When is evidence credible?

A: It is credible if it is admissible and believable and worthy of belief, such that it can be used by
the courts in deciding a case.

Q: Explain the Equipoise Doctrine in the law of evidence and cite its constitutional and
procedural bases.

A: The doctrine refers to a situation where the evidence of the parties are evenly balanced or
there is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates. In such case the decision should be
against the party with the burden of proof (Marubeni Corp. v. Lirag, G.R. No. 130998, Aug. 10,
2001).

Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law (Sec. 1, Rule 131).

11 | P a g e
In criminal cases, the equipoise rule provides that where the evidence is evenly balanced, the
constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the scales in favor of the accused. (Malana v.
People, G.R. No. 173612, Mar. 26, 2008)

Q: What is the hierarchy of quantum of evidence?

PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
Required to Convict an Accused
Moral Certainty or that degree of proof
which produces conviction in unprejudiced
mind

CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE

Degree of Proof which produces in the mind
of the court a firm belief or conviction as the
allegation sought to be established
Adduced to overcome a prima facie case or a
disputable presumption

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
Degree of Proof in Civil Cases
Evidence of greater weight or superior
weight of evidence than that which is offered
in opposition to it.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Applicable in cases filed before
administrative or quasi-judicial bodies
Such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to suspect a
conclusion

Q: Distinguish positive testimony from negative testimony.

Positive Testimony Negative Testimony

Affirms that a fact did or did not occur. When a witness states that he did not see or
know the occurrence of a fact.
Entitled to greater weight since the witness
represents his personal knowledge of the There is a total disclaimer of personal
presence or absence of a fact. knowledge, hence without any representation
or disavowal that the fact in question could or
When a witness declares of his own knowledge could not have existed or happened.
that a fact did not take place, it is an
affirmation of a positive testimony.

Q: What are the guidelines in the assessment of credibility of a witness?

12 | P a g e
A: 1. A witness who testified in clear, positive and convincing manner and remained consistent
in cross-examination is a credible witness (People v. Comanda, G.R. No. 175880, July 6, 2007);
and

2. Findings of fact and assessment of credibility of a witness are matters best left to the trial court
that had the frontline opportunity to personally evaluate the demeanor, conduct, and behavior of
the witness while testifying (Sps. Paragas v. Heirs of Balacano, G.R. No. 168220, Aug. 31,
2005).

Q: What is motive?

A: It is the moving power which impels one to action for a definite result (The Revised Penal
Code [Book One] by L. Reyes, p.57, 2001 ed.).

Q: When is evidence of motive relevant?

A: 1. Where the identity of the assailant is in question;

2. To determine the voluntariness of the criminal act or the sanity of the accused;

3. To determine from which side the unlawful aggression commenced, as where the accused
invoked self-defense wherein unlawful aggression on the part of his opponent is an essential
element;

4. To determine the specific nature of the crime committed;

5. To determine whether a shooting was intentional or accidental, the fact that the accused had
personal motives to shoot the victim being weighty; and

6. Where the accused contends that he acted in defense of a stranger, since it is essential, for such
defense to prosper, that the accused was not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil motive.
(Regalado, Vol. II, pp. 893-894, 2008 ed.)

Q: What is alibi?

A: It is a defense where an accused claims that he was somewhere else at the time of the
commission of the offense. It is one of the weakest defenses an accused may avail because of the
facility with which it can be fabricated, just like a mere denial (People v. Esperanza, G.R. Nos.
139217-24, June 27, 2003). A categorical and positive identification of an accused, without any
showing of ill-motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter, prevails over an alibi
(People v. Gingos and Margote, G.R. No. 176632, Sept. 11, 2007). When this is the defense of
the accused, it must be established by positive, clear and satisfactory evidence.

Note: For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must show that:

1. He was somewhere else; and

2. It was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time of its
commission. (People v. Gerones, et.al., G.R. No. L-6595, Oct. 29, 1954)

Q: What is Out-of-Court Identification?

A: It is a means of identifying a suspect of a crime and is done thru:

1. Show-ups: where the suspect alone is brought face to face with the witness for identification;
13 | P a g e
2. Mug shots: where photographs are shown to the witness to identify the suspect; or

3. Line-ups: where a witness identifies the suspect from a group of persons lined up for the
purpose. (People v. Claudio Teehankee, Jr., G.R. Nos. 111206-08, Oct. 6, 1995)

Q: What is the relevance of an eyewitness identification?

A: It is often decisive of the conviction or acquittal of an accused. Identification of an accused

through mug shots is one of the established procedures in pinning down criminals. However, to
avoid charges of impermissible suggestion, there should be nothing in the photograph that would
focus attention on a single person (People v. Villena, G.R. No. 140066, Oct. 14, 2002).

Q: Is a police line-up mandatory to prove the identity of an offender?

A: A police line-up is merely a part of the investigation process by police investigators to

ascertain the identity of offenders or confirm their identification by a witness to the crime. Police
officers are not obliged to assemble a police line-up as a condition sine qua non to prove the
identity of an offender. If on the basis of the evidence on hand, police officers are certain of the
identity of the offender, they need not require any police lineup anymore (Tapdasan, Jr. v.
People, G.R. No. 141344, Nov. 21, 2002).

Q: When is “out-of-court identification” admissible and reliable?

A: It is admissible and reliable when it satisfies the “totality of circumstances” test. Under the
“totality of circumstances” test, the following factors are considered:

1. Witness’ opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime;

2. Witness’ degree of attention at that time;

3. Accuracy of any prior description given by the witness;

4. Level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the identification;

5. Length of time between the crime and the identification; and

6. Suggestiveness of the identification procedure. (People v. Claudio Teehankee, Jr., G.R. Nos.
111206-08, Oct. 6, 1995)

Q: Is the testimony of only one witness sufficient to convict the accused?

A: Yes. Truth is established not by the number of witnesses but by the quality of their
testimonies. In determining the sufficiency of evidence, what matters is not the number of
witnesses but the credibility and the nature and quality of their testimonies. The testimony of a
lone witness is sufficient to support a conviction if found positive and credible (Ceniza-
Manantan v. People, G.R. No. 156248, Aug. 28, 2007).

Q: Define res ipsa loquitur.

A: It literally means the thing speaks for itself. This doctrine provides that the fact of the
occurrence of an injury, taken with the surrounding circumstances, may permit an inference or
raise a presumption of negligence, or make out a plaintiff's prima facie case, and present a
question of fact for defendant to meet with an explanation. Where the thing which caused the
14 | P a g e
injury complained of is shown to be under the management of the defendant or his servants and
the accident is such as in ordinary course of things does not happen if those who have its
management or control use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of
explanation by the defendant, that the accident arose from or was caused by the defendant's want
of care (Ramos v. CA, G.R. No. 124354, Dec. 29, 1999)

Q: What are the requisites in applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur?

A: 1. The occurrence of an injury;

2. The thing which caused the injury was under the control and management of the defendant;

3. The occurrence was such that in the ordinary course of things, would not have happened if
those who had control or management used proper care; and

4. The absence of explanation by the defendant (Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, G.R. No.
126297, Jan. 31, 2007).

Q: What is the Rule on Partial Credibility of a witness?

A: The testimony of a witness may be believed in part and disbelieved in another part, depending
on the probabilities and improbabilities of the case (People v. Tan, G.R. No. 176526, Aug. 8,
2007).

Note: If the testimony of the witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with an
intention to deceive, the court may disregard all the witness’ testimony. Falsus in uno, falsus in
omnibus (False in one thing, false in everything).

Q: May the testimony alone of the complaining party in a rape case sufficient to convict the
accused?

A: Yes. In rape cases, the lone testimony of the offended party, if free from serious and material
contradictions, is sufficient to sustain a verdict of conviction. No woman would openly admit
that she was raped and consequently subject herself to an examination of her private parts, undergo
the trauma and humiliation of a public trial, and embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail
how she was raped, if she was not raped at all. This ruling especially holds true where the complainant is
a minor, whose testimony deserves full credence. (People v. Esperanza, G.R. Nos. 139217-24, June 27,
2003).

Q: What is the Sweetheart Theory?

A: It is an admission by the accused of sexual intercourse with the victim but argues that they
were lovers and the act is consensual and consequently places on the accused the burden of
proving the supposed relationship by substantial evidence. To be worthy of judicial acceptance,
such defense should be supported by documentary, testimonial, or other evidence. Corroborative
proof like notes, pictures or tokens that such a relationship had really existed must be presented
(People v. Hapin, G.R. No.175782, Aug. 24, 2007).

Q: Is extrajudicial confession a sufficient ground for conviction?

A: It is not sufficient ground for conviction unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
(Sec. 3)

Q: What is corpus delicti?

15 | P a g e
A: It is the actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged. It refers to the fact of
the commission of the crime, not to the physical body of the deceased or to the ashes of a burned
building. The corpus delicti may be proven by the credible testimony of a sole witness, not
necessarily by physical evidence (Rimorin v. People, G.R. No. 146481, Apr. 30, 2003).

Q: What are the elements of corpus delicti?

A: 1. Proof of the occurrence of a certain event; and

2. A person’s criminal responsibility for the act (People v. Corpuz, G.R. No. 148919, Dec. 17,
2002).

Note: The identity of the accused is not a necessary element of the corpus delicti.

Q: What are the elements of illegal possession of firearm which constitute the corpus
delicti?

A: 1. The existence of the firearm; and

2. That it has been actually held with animus possidendi by the accused without the
corresponding license therefor. (People v. Solayao, G.R. No. 119220, Sept. 20, 1996)

PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

Q: What is meant by reasonable doubt?

A: It is that state of the case which, after the entire comparison and consideration of all the
evidence leaves the mind of the judge in that condition that he cannot say that he feels an abiding
conviction to a moral certainty of the truth of the charge. (People v. Calma, G.R. No. 127126,
Sept. 17, 1998)

Q: What does proof beyond reasonable doubt require?

A: It only requires moral certainty or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an
unprejudiced mind. It does not mean such degree of proof as excluding the possibility of error,
produce absolute certainty. (Basilio v. People, G.R. No. 180597, Nov. 7, 2008)

Q: Must the identity of the accused be proved beyond reasonable doubt?

A: Yes. When the identity of the accused is not established beyond reasonable doubt, acquittal
necessarily follows. Conviction for a crime rests on the strength of the prosecution’s evidence,
never on the weakness of that of the defense.

Note: In every criminal prosecution, the prosecution must prove two things:

1. The commission of the crime; and

2. The identification of the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. What is needed is positive
identification made with moral certainty as to the person of the offender (People v. Maguing,
G.R. No. 144090, June 26, 2003).

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE

Q: What are the matters that must be taken into consideration in determining where the
preponderance of evidence lies?

16 | P a g e
A: 1. All the facts and circumstances of the case;
2. The witnesses’ manner of testifying, their intelligence, their means and opportunity of
knowing the facts to which there are testifying;
3. The nature of the facts to which they testify;
4. The probability or improbability of their testimony;
5. Their interest or want of interest;
6. Their personal credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear upon the trial; or
7. The number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily with the greater number
(Sec. 1, Rule 133).

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Q: What is substantial evidence?

A: It is that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
justify a conclusion. (Sec. 5)

Q: When is substantial evidence sufficient to establish a fact?

A: In cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established
if it is supported by substantial evidence.

CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE

Q: What are the instances when clear and convincing evidence is required as quantum of
proof?

A: 1. Granting or denial of bail in extradition proceedings (Government of Hong Kong Special

Administrative Region v. Olalia, Jr., G.R. No. 153675, April 19, 2005);

2. When proving a charge of bias and partiality against a judge (Rivera v. Mendoza, A.M. No.
RTJ-06-2013, Aug. 4, 2006);

3. GR: When proving fraud (Alonso v. Cebu Country Club, Inc., G.R. No. 130876, Dec. 5, 2003)
XPN: Under Art. 1387 of the New Civil Code, certain alienations of property are presumed
fraudulent.

4. When proving forgery (Citibank, N.A. v. Sabeniano, G.R. No. 156132, Feb. 6, 2007);

5. When proving ownership over a land in annulment or reconveyance of title (Manotok Realty,
Inc. v. CLT Realty Development Corp., G.R. No. 123346, Dec. 14, 2007);

6. When invoking self-defense, the onus is on the accused-appellant to establish by clear and
convincing evidence his justification for the killing (People v. Tomolin, G.R. No. 126650, July
28, 1999);

7. When proving the allegation of frame-up and extortion by police officers in most dangerous
drug cases (People v. Boco, G.R. No. 129676, June 23, 1999);

8. When proving physical impossibility for the accused to be at the crime scene when using alibi
as a defense (People v. Cacayan, G.R. No.180499, July 9, 2008);

9. When using denial as a defense like in prosecution for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act
(People v. Mustapa, G.R. No. 141244, Feb. 19, 2001);

17 | P a g e
10. To overcome the presumption of due execution of notarized instruments (Viaje v. Pamintel,
G.R. No. 147792, Jan. 23, 2006);

11. When proving bad faith to warrant an award of moral damages (Resolution of the SC in Cual
v. Leonis Navigation, G.R. No. 167775, Oct. 10, 2005);

12. When proving that the police officers did not properly perform their duty or that they were
inspired by an improper motive (People v. Concepcion, G.R. No. 178876, June 27, 2008); or

13. When a person seeks confirmation of an imperfect or incomplete title to a piece of land on
the basis of possession by himself and his predecessors-in-interest, he must prove with clear and
convincing evidence compliance with the requirements of the applicable law. (Republic v.
Imperial Credit Corp., G.R. No. 173088, June 25, 2008) (List of cases: Riano, Evidence: A
Restatement for the Bar, pp. 422-426, 2009 ed.)

JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

1. WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

Q: What are the facts that need not be proved?

A: 1. Those which the courts may take judicial notice (Rule 129);

2. Those that are judicially admitted (Rule 129);

3. Those that are conclusively presumed (Rule 131); and

4. Those that are disputably presumed but uncontradicted (Rule 131).

MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

Q: What is judicial notice?

A: It is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act upon without
proof because they are supposed to be known to them. It is based on considerations of
expediency and convenience. It displaces evidence, being equivalent to proof.
Note: Judicial notice fulfils the objective which the evidence intends to achieve. It is not
equivalent to judicial knowledge or that which is based on the personal knowledge of the court;
rather, it is the cognizance of “common knowledge.” Judicial notice relieves the parties from the
necessity of introducing evidence to prove the fact notified. It makes evidence unnecessary.

Q: What are the requisites of judicial notice?

A: 1. The matter must be one of common and general knowledge;

2. It must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or uncertain; and

3. It must be one which is not subject to a reasonable dispute in that it is either:

a. Generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court; or

18 | P a g e
b. Capable of accurate and ready determination by resorting to sources whose accuracy cannot
reasonably be questionable (Expertravel & Tours, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 152392, May 26, 2005).

Q: When is a matter considered “common knowledge”?

A: They are those matters coming to the knowledge of men generally in the course of ordinary
experiences of life, or they may be matters which are generally accepted by mankind as true and
are capable of ready and unquestioned demonstration.

JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

Q: What is judicial admission?

A: It is an admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the
same case, which does not require proof (Sec. 4).

Q: What are the elements of judicial admission?

A: 1. It must be made by a party to the case or his counsel;

2. It must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case; and

3. It can be verbal or written admission. There is no particular form required.

Q: When are judicial admissions made?

A: It may be made by the party himself or by his counsel:

1. In the pleadings filed by the parties;

2. In the course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations, including
depositions, written interrogatories and requests for admissions; or
3. In other stages of the judicial proceedings, as in pre-trial.

Q: What remedy is available to a party who gave a judicial admission?

A: 1. Written admission – File a motion to withdraw such pleading, or any other written
instrument containing such admission.

2. Oral admission – The counsel may move for the exclusion of such admission.

Q: What are the rules on admissions made in pleadings?

A: GR: The facts alleged in a party’s pleadings are deemed admissions and are binding upon that
party.

XPN: Hypothetical admissions made by party litigant, as when a defendant moves to dismiss the
case based on lack of jurisdiction or sets up affirmative defenses.

Q: What are the rules on admissions made in pleadings which were not filed with the
court?

A: 1. If signed by the party litigant himself – considered as extrajudicial admission.

2. If signed by the counsel – not admissible because a counsel only binds his client with respect
to admissions in open court and in pleadings actually filed with the court.

19 | P a g e
Q: What is self-serving evidence?

A: No. The self-serving rule which prohibits the admission of declaration of a witness applies
only to extrajudicial admissions. If the declaration is made in open court, such is raw evidence. It
is not self-serving. It is admissible because the witness may be cross-examined on that matter.

Q: Are judicial admissions made by the accused during his arraignment binding upon
him?

A: No. A plea of guilty entered by the accused may be later withdrawn at any time before the
judgment of conviction becomes final. Such plea is not admissible in evidence against the
accused and is not even considered as an extrajudicial admission.

EFFECT OF JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

Q: What are the consequences of judicial admissions?

A: 1. A party who judicially admits a fact cannot later challenge that fact as judicial admissions
constitute waiver of proof; production of evidence is dispensed with;

2. No evidence is needed to prove a judicial admission and it cannot be contradicted unless it is

shown to have been made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made.

OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE

NATURE OF OBJECT EVIDENCE

Q: Define object evidence.

A: Object evidence, also known as real evidence, demonstrative evidence, autoptic preference
and physical evidence, is that evidence which is addressed to the senses of the court (Sec. 1). It is
not limited to the view of an object. It extends to the visual, auditory, tactile, gustatory, and
olfactory. It is considered as evidence of the highest order.

Q: What are the purposes of authentication of object evidence?

A: 1. Prevent the introduction of an object different from the one testified about; and

2. Ensure that there has been no significant changes in the object’s condition.

REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY

Q: What are the requisites for the object evidence to be admissible?

A: It must:

1. Be relevant to the fact in issue;

2. Be authenticated before it is admitted;

3. Not be hearsay;

4. Not be privileged; and

20 | P a g e
5. Meet any additional requirement set by law

Q: What does object evidence include?

A: 1. Any article or object which may be known or perceived by the use of the senses;

2. Examination of the anatomy of a person or of any substance taken therefrom;

3. Conduct of tests, demonstrations or experiments; and

4. Examination of representative portrayals of the object in question (e.g. maps, diagrams)

Q: In a criminal case for murder, the prosecution offered as evidence photographs showing
the accused mauling the victim with several of the latter’s companions. The person who
took the photograph was not presented as a witness. Be that as it may, the prosecution
presented the companions of the victim who testified that they were the ones in the
photographs. The defense objected to the admissibility of the photographs because the
person who took the photographs was not presented as witness. Is the contention of the
defense tenable?

A: No. Photographs, when presented in evidence, must be identified by the photographer as to its
production and testified as to the circumstances under which they were produced. The value of
this kind of evidence lies in its being a correct representation or reproduction of the original, and
its admissibility is determined by its accuracy in portraying the scene at the time of the crime.

The photographer, however, is not the only witness who can identify the pictures he has taken.
The correctness of the photograph as a faithful representation of the object portrayed can be
proved prima facie, either by the testimony of the person who made it or by other competent
witnesses who can testify to its exactness and accuracy, after which the court can admit it subject
to impeachment as to its accuracy.
Here, the photographs are admissible as evidence inasmuch as the correctness thereof was
testified to by the companions of the victim (Sison v. People, G.R. Nos. 108280-83, Nov. 16,
1995).

Q: Ron was charged with murder for shooting Carlo. After trial, Ron was found guilty as
charged. On appeal, Ron argued that the trial court should have acquitted him as his guilt
was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. He argues that the paraffin test conducted on
him 2 days after he was arrested yielded a negative result. Hence, he could not have shot
Carlo. Is Ron correct?

A: No. While the paraffin test was negative, such fact alone did not ipso facto prove that Ron is
innocent. A negative paraffin result is not conclusive proof that a person has not fired a gun. It is
possible to fire a gun and yet be negative for nitrates, as when the culprit is wearing gloves or he
washes his hands afterwards. Here, since Ron submitted himself for paraffin testing only two
days after the shooting, it was likely he had already washed his hands thoroughly, thus removing
all traces of nitrates therefrom (People v. Brecinio, G.R. No. 138534, Mar. 17, 2004).

CATEGORIES OF OBJECT EVIDENCE

Q: What are the categories of object evidence for purposes of authentication?

A: 1. Unique objects – those that have readily identifiable marks (e.g. a calibre 40 gun with serial
number XXX888)

21 | P a g e
 2. Objects made unique – those that are readily identifiable (e.g. a bolo knife used to hack a
victim which could be identified by a witness in court)

3. Non-unique objects – those which have no identifying marks and cannot be marked (e.g.
footprints left at a crime scene)

DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE

Q: Distinguish real evidence from demonstrative evidence.

Real Evidence Demonstrative Evidence

Tangible object that played some actual role in Tangible evidence that merely illustrates a
the matter that gave rise to the litigation matter of importance in the litigation
Intends to prove that the object is used in the Intends to show that the demonstrative object
underlying event fairly represents or illustrates what it is alleged
to be illustrated

VIEW OF AN OBJECT OR SCENE

Q: What is ocular inspection or “view”?

A: An ocular inspection conducted by the judge without the presence of the parties or due notice
is not valid, as an ocular inspection is part of the trial.

CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN RELATION TO SECTION 21

OF THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002

Q: What is Chain of Custody Rule in relation to Sec. 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous

Drugs Act of 2002?

A: It is a method of authenticating evidence. It requires that the admission of an exhibit be

preceded by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what the
proponent claims it to be. It would include testimony about every link in the chain, from the
moment the item was picked up to the time it is offered into evidence, in such a way that every
person who touched the exhibit would describe how and from whom it was received, where it
was and what happened to it while in the witness’ possession, the condition in which it was
received and the condition in which it was delivered to the next link in the chain. These
witnesses would then describe the precautions taken to ensure that there had been no change in
the condition of the item and no opportunity for someone not in the chain to have possession of
the same. (Lopez v. People, G.R. No. 172953, Apr. 30, 2008)

Q: When is there a need to establish a chain of custody?

A: It is necessary when the object evidence is nonunique as it is not readily identifiable, was not
made identifiable or cannot be made identifiable, e.g. drops of blood or oil, drugs in powder
form, fiber, grains of sand and similar objects.

Q: What is the purpose of establishing a chain of custody?

22 | P a g e
A: To guaranty the integrity of the physical evidence and to prevent the introduction of evidence
which is not authentic but where the exhibit is positively identified the chain of custody of
physical evidence is irrelevant.

RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE

Q: In what cases do the Rules on DNA Evidence apply?

A: It shall apply whenever DNA evidence is offered, used, or proposed to be offered or used as
evidence in all criminal and civil actions as well as special proceedings (Sec. 1).

MEANING OF DNA

Q: What is DNA?

A: DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of the
body (Sec. 3, Rule on DNA Evidence). It is the fundamental building block of a person’s entire
genetic make-up, which is found in all human cells and is the same in every cell of the same
person (People v. Umanito, G.R. No. 172607, Oct. 26, 2007).

Q: What is DNA evidence?

A: It constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles, results and other genetic information directly
generated from DNA testing of biological samples (Sec. 3)

Q: What is DNA testing?

A: It means verified and credible scientific methods which include the extraction of DNA from
biological samples, the generation of DNA profiles and the comparison of the information
obtained from the DNA testing of biological samples for the purpose of determining, with
reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA obtained from two or more distinct biological
samples originates from the same person (direct identification) or if the biological samples
originate from related persons (Kinship Analysis) (Sec. 3).

APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING ORDER

Q: May DNA testing be conducted absent a prior court order?

A: Yes. The Rules on DNA Evidence does not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a prior
court order, at the behest of any party, including law enforcement agencies, before a suit or
proceeding is commenced (Sec. 4).

Q: What are the requisites for the issuance of a DNA testing order?

A: In pending actions, the appropriate court may, at any time issue a DNA testing order either
motu proprio or upon application of any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation
after due hearing and notice to the parties and upon showing of the following:

1. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case;

2. The biological sample:
3. was not previously subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or
4. was previously subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require confirmation for good
reasons;
5. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;
6. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is relevant to the
proper resolution of the case; and

23 | P a g e
7. The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting the
accuracy or integrity of the DNA testing (Sec. 4).

Q: Is the order granting the DNA testing appealable?

A: No. An order granting the DNA testing shall be immediately executory and shall not be
appealable. Any petition for certiorari initiated therefrom shall not, in any way, stay the
implementation thereof, unless a higher court issues an injunctive order (Sec. 5)

Q: During Alexis’ trial for rape with murder, the prosecution sought to introduce DNA
evidence against him, based on forensic laboratory matching of the materials found at the
crime scene and Alexis’ hair and blood samples. Alexis’ counsel objected, claiming that
DNA evidence is inadmissible because the materials taken from Alexis were in violation of
his constitutional right against self-incrimination as well as his right of privacy and
personal integrity. Should the DNA evidence be admitted or not? Reason.

A: The DNA evidence should be admitted. It is not in violation of the constitutional right against
self incrimination or his right of privacy and personal integrity. The right against self-
incrimination is applicable only to testimonial evidence. Extracting a blood sample and cutting a
strand from the hair of the accused are purely mechanical acts that do not involve his discretion
nor require his intelligence.

Q: Is the result of DNA testing automatically admitted as evidence in the case in which it
was sought for?

A: No. The grant of a DNA testing application shall not be construed as an automatic admission
into evidence of any component of the DNA evidence that may be obtained as a result thereof
(Sec. 5).

Q: If a DNA test was conducted, what are the possible results that it may yield?

A: 1. The samples are similar, and could have originated from the same source (Rule of
Inclusion). In such a case, the analyst proceeds to determine the statistical significance of the
similarity.

2. The samples are different hence it must have originated from different sources (Rule of
Exclusion). This conclusion is absolute and requires no further analysis;

3. The test is inconclusive. This might occur due to degradation, contamination, failure of some
aspect of protocol, or some other reasons. Analysis might be repeated to obtain a more
conclusive result (People v. Vallejo, G.R. No. 144656, May 9, 2002).

Q: What should the courts consider in evaluating DNA testing results?

A: 1. The evaluation of the weight of matching DNA evidence or the relevance of mismatching
DNA evidence;

2. The results of the DNA testing in the light of the totality of the other evidence presented in the
case; and

3. DNA results that exclude the putative parent from paternity shall be conclusive proof of non-
paternity (Sec. 9).

24 | P a g e
POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; REMEDY

Q: To whom is the post-conviction DNA testing available?

A: Post-conviction DNA testing may be available, without need of prior court order, to the
prosecution or any person convicted by final and executory judgment.

Q: What are the requisites for the applicability of the Post-conviction DNA testing?

A: 1. Existing biological sample;

2. Such sample is relevant to the case; and

3. The testing would probably result in the reversal or modification of the judgment of conviction
(Sec. 6).

Q: What is the remedy of the convict if the post conviction DNA testing result is favorable
to him?

A: The convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of
origin. In case the court, after due hearing, finds the petition to be meritorious, it shall reverse or
modify the judgment of conviction and order the release of the convict, unless continued
detention is justified for a lawful cause (Sec. 10).

Q: What are the things to be considered in assessing the probative value of DNA evidence?

A: 1. How the samples are collected;

2. How they were handled;

3. The possibility of the contamination of the samples;

4. The procedure followed in analyzing the samples;

5. Whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in conducting the tests; and

6. The qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests

Q: What are the things to be considered in evaluating whether or not the DNA testing
methodology is reliable?

A: 1. The falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether the theory or technique
can be and has been tested;

2. The subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or methods;

3. The general acceptance of the principles or methods by the relevant scientific community;

4. The existence and maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the correctness of data
generated;

5. The existence of an appropriate reference population database; and

6. The general degree of confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used in comparing

DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of statistical calculations used in comparing
DNA profiles.

25 | P a g e
 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

MEANING OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Q: Define Documentary Evidence.

A: Documents as evidence consist of writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers,
figures, symbols, or other modes of written expressions, offered as proof of their contents (Sec.
2)

Q: May a private document be offered and admitted in evidence both as documentary

evidence and as object evidence? Explain.

A: Yes. A private document is considered as object evidence when it is addressed to the senses
of the court or when it is presented in order to establish certain physical evidence or
characteristics that are visible on the paper and the writings that comprise the document. It is
considered as documentary evidence when it is offered as proof of its contents.

REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY

Q: What are the requisites for admissibility of documentary evidence?

A: 1. The document must be relevant;

2. The evidence must be authenticated;
3. The document must be authenticated by a competent witness; and
4. The document must be formally offered in evidence

BEST EVIDENCE RULE

MEANING OF THE RULE

Q: What is Best Evidence Rule?

A: GR: It provides that when the subject of the inquiry is the contents of the document, no
evidence shall be admissible other than the original document itself.

Exceptions:

1. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith
on the part of the offeror;

2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the
evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice;

3. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is
only the general result of the whole; Note: The voluminous records must be made accessible to
the adverse party so that the correctness of the portion produced or summary of the document
may be tested on cross-examination.

4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public
office (Sec. 3) Note: Where the issue is only as to whether such a document was actually
executed, or exists, or on the circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the best
evidence rule does not apply and testimonial evidence is admissible.

26 | P a g e
WHEN APPLICABLE

Q: When is this applicable?

A: The rule will come into play only “when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document.”

Q: Why is the best evidence rule often described as a misnomer?

A: Because it merely requires the best evidence available and, in the absence thereof, allows the
introduction of secondary evidence. Alternative Answer: It is a misnomer because it is applicable
only to documentary evidence and not to testimonial and object evidence.

Q: At the trial of Ace for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act, the prosecution offers in
evidence a photocopy of the marked P100.00 bills used in the “buy-bust” operation. Ace
objects to the introduction of the photocopy on the ground that the best evidence rule
prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the original.

1. Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or documentary evidence?

2. Is the photocopy admissible in evidence?

A: 1. It is real (object) evidence, because the marked bills are real evidence.
2. Yes, it is admissible in evidence, because the best evidence rule does not apply to object or
real evidence. The best evidence rule is inapplicable since such secondary evidence is only
intended to establish the existence of a transaction and not the contents of the document.

Q: Are affidavits and depositions considered as best evidence?

A: No, hence, not admissible if the affiants and witnesses are available as witnesses.

Q: What is the best evidence of telegrams and cables?

A: It depends on the issue to be proved.

1. Contents of the telegram received by the addressee: the original dispatch received.
2. The telegram sent by the sender: the message delivered for transmission.
3. Inaccuracy of transmission of the telegram: both telegrams as sent and received

Q: In a civil case for collection of money, Paula sought to escape liability from a promissory
note by showing that the same was a forgery. She presented an expert witness to prove that
her signature in the promissory note was forged. Jean objected to the presentation of
Paula’s expert witness on the ground that the finding of said witness is based on a mere
photocopy of the promissory note. Is the objection of Jean tenable?

A: Yes. As a rule, forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive and
convincing evidence and the burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery. The best evidence
of a forged signature in an instrument is the instrument itself reflecting the alleged forged
signature.

The fact of forgery can only be established by a comparison between the alleged forged signature
and the authentic and genuine signature of the person whose signature is theorized upon to have
been forged. Without the original document containing the alleged forged signature, one cannot
make a definitive comparison which would establish forgery. A comparison based on a mere
photocopy or reproduction of the document under controversy cannot produce reliable results
(Heirs of Gregorio v. CA, G.R. No. 117609, Dec. 29, 1998).

27 | P a g e
Q: When Anna loaned a sum of money to Blair, Anna typed a single copy of the promissory
note, which they both signed. Anna made two photocopies of the promissory note, giving
one copy to Blair and retaining the other copy. Anna entrusted the typewritten copy to his
counsel for safekeeping. The copy with Anna's counsel was destroyed when the law office
was burned.

1. In an action to collect on the promissory note, which is deemed to be the "original" copy
for the purpose of the best evidence rule?
2. Can the photocopies in the hands of the parties be considered "duplicate original
copies"?
3. As counsel for Anna, how will you prove the loan given by Anna to Blair?

A: 1. The copy that was signed and lost is the only "original" copy for purposes of the best
evidence rule (Sec. 4 [b]).

2. No, because they merely are photocopies which were not signed (Mahilum v. CA, G.R. No. L-
17970, July 10, 1966), They constitute secondary evidence (Sec. 5).
3. It may be proved by secondary evidence through the photocopies of the promissory note.
When the original document is lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror,
upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on
his part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by a recital of its contents in some authentic
document, or by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated (Sec. 5).

MEANING OF ORIGINAL

Q: What is an original document?

A: There are three concepts of “original” document:

1. The original of a document is one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry;

2. When a document is in 2 or more copies executed at or about the same time, with identical
contents, including signed carbon copies, all such copies are equally regarded as originals; or

3. When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being copied from another at
or near the time of the transaction, including entries in journals and ledgers, all the entries are
likewise equally regarded as originals (Sec. 4).

Q: What is the rule on duplicate original?

A: It states that when a document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same time
with identical contents, all such copies are equally regarded as originals (Sec. 4b, Rule 130). It
may be introduced in evidence without accounting for the non-production of the other copies.

REQUISITES FOR INTRODUCTION OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Q: What is secondary evidence?

A: Secondary evidence is that which shows that better or primary evidence exists as to the proof
of the fact in question. It is the class of evidence that is relevant to the fact in issue, it being first
shown that the primary evidence of the fact is not obtainable. It performs the same functions as
that of primary evidence.

Q: When may secondary evidence be admitted?

A: It may be admitted only by laying the basis for its production and such requires compliance
with the following:
28 | P a g e
1. The offeror must prove the due execution and existence of the original document;
2. The offeror must show the cause of its unavailability; and
3. The offeror must show that the unavailability was not due to his bad faith.

Q: What is the order of presentation of secondary evidence?

A: 1. Copy of the original;

2. A recital of the contents of the document in some authentic document; or
3. By the testimony of witnesses (Sec. 5, Rule 130)

Q: What is Definite Evidentiary Rule?

A: Where the law specifically provides for the class and quantum of secondary evidence to
establish the contents of a document, or bars secondary evidence of a lost document, such
requirement is controlling. E.g. Evidence of a lost notarial will should consist of a testimony of
at least two credible witnesses who can clearly and distinctly establish its contents (Sec. 6, Rule
76).

Q: How may the due execution of the document be proved?

A: It may be proved through the testimony of:

1. The person who executed it;

2. The person before whom its execution was acknowledged;
3. Any person who was present and saw it executed and delivered;
4. Any person who thereafter saw and recognized the signature;
5. One to whom the parties thereto had previously confessed the execution thereof; or
6. By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker. (Sec. 20, Rule
132)

Q: What are the requisites for the admission of secondary evidence when the original
consists of numerous accounts?

A: 1. The original must consist of numerous accounts or other documents;

2. They cannot be examined in court without great loss of time; and
3. The fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole. (Sec. 3c,
Rule 130)

Q: How may the contents of the document be proved when the original is in the custody of
a public officer?

A: The contents may be proved by:

1. A certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof (Sec. 7, Rule 130); and
2. Official publication. (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 203, 1999 ed.)

RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE (A.M. NO. 01- 7-01-SC)

Q: In what cases do the Rules on Electronic Evidence applies?

A: It shall apply to all civil actions and proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial and administrative
cases (Sec. 2, Rule 1).

Q: State the rule on the admissibility of electronic evidence.

29 | P a g e
A: An electronic document is admissible in evidence if it complies with the rules on
admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws and is authenticated in the
manner prescribed by the Rules on Electronic Evidence (Sec. 2, Rule 3).

MEANING OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE; ELECTRONIC DATA MASSAGE

Q: What is Electronic Evidence?

A: According to Black's Law Dictionary, evidence is "any species of proof, or probative matter,
legally presented at the trial of an issue, by the act of the parties and through the medium of
witnesses, records, documents, exhibits, concrete objects, etc. for the purpose of inducing belief
in the minds of the court or jury as to their contention." Electronic information (like paper)
generally is admissible into evidence in a legal proceeding..

Q: What is Electronic Data Message?

A: Electronic data message refers to information generated, sent, received or stored by

electronic, optical or similar means.

AUTHENTICATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS AND ELECTRONIC

SIGNATURES

Q: How is an electronic document authenticated?

A: 1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed the
same;

2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be authorized by the
Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documents were applied to the
document; or
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge (Sec. 2,
Rule 5).

PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

Q: What is Parol Evidence?

A: It is any evidence aliunde (extrinsic evidence) which is intended or tends to vary or contradict
a complete and enforceable agreement embodied in a document (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 730, 2008
ed.). It may refer to testimonial, real or documentary evidence.

Q: What is the rationale of the parol evidence rule?

A: 1. To give stability to written statements;

2. To remove the temptation and possibility of perjury; and
3. To prevent possible fraud.

APPLICATION OF THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

Q: What are the requisites for the application of the parol evidence rule?

A: 1. There must be a valid contract;

2. The terms of the agreement must be reduced to writing;
3. The dispute is between the parties or their successors-in-interest; and
4. There is dispute as to the terms of the agreement.

WHEN PAROLE EVIDENCE CAN BE INTRODUCED

30 | P a g e
Q: What is Parol Evidence Rule?

A: It states that when the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and their successors-in
interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement (Sec. 9).

Q: What are the exceptions to the parol evidence rule?

A: A party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of the written agreement
if he puts in issue in his pleadings the following:

1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;

2. Failure of the written agreement to express the true intent of the parties thereto;
3. Validity of the written agreement; or
4. Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the
execution of the written agreement. (Sec. 9)

Q: What is authentication?

A: It is proving the due execution and genuineness of the document.

Q: What is document?

A: It is a deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by which something is proved,

evidenced or set forth. (Bermejo v. Barrios, G.R. No. L-23614, Feb. 27, 1970)
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DOCUMENTS

Q: What are public and private documents.

A: Public documents are: 1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the
sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines,
or of a foreign country;
2. Documents acknowledge before a notary public except last wills and testaments; and
3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to the entered
therein.

WHEN EVIDENCE OF AUTHENTICITY OF A PRIVATE WRITING IS NOT

REQUIRED (ANCIENT DOCUMENTS)

Q: What are the requisites for an ancient document to be exempt from proof of due
execution and authenticity (rule on ancient document/authentic document rule)?

A: 1. The private document be more than 30 years old;

2. That it be produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine; and
3. That it is unblemished by any alteration or circumstances of suspicion (Sec. 21).

HOW TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF A HANDWRITING

Q: How is the genuineness of a person’s handwriting proved?

A: 1. It may be proved by any witness who actually saw the person writing the instrument;
2. By any person who is familiar or has acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person,
his opinion as to the handwriting being an exception to the opinion rule under Secs. 48 & 50 of
Rule 130;
3. By a comparison of the questioned handwriting from the admitted genuine specimens thereof;
or
31 | P a g e
4. By expert witness (Secs. 20 & 22, Rule 132; Sec. 49, Rule 130).

Q: How are public records proved?

A: Written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies
and tribunals, and public officers, e.g. a written foreign law, may be evidenced by:

1. If it is within the Philippines a. an official publication thereof; or b. by a copy attested by the

officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy.
2. If it is kept in a foreign country

a. an official publication thereof; or

b. by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy and
accompanied with a certificate that such officer has the custody. The certificate may be made by
a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or
by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which
the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office (Sec. 24, Rule 132).

PUBLIC RECORD OF A PUBLIC DOCUMENT

Q: What must the attestation of a copy state?

A: Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence, the
attestation must state, in substance:
1. That the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be;
2. It must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of
a court having a seal, under the seal of such court.

PUBLIC RECORD OF A PUBLIC DOCUMENT

Q: How may a public record of a private document be proved?

A: Any of the following: 1. By the original record; or

2. By a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, with an appropriate certificate
that such officer has the custody (Sec. 27, Rule 132).

TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

QUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS

Q: Who are qualified to be witnesses?

A: All persons who:

1. can perceive and perceiving;
2. can make known their perception to others (Sec. 20, Rule 130);
3. must take either an oath or an affirmation (Sec. 1, Rule 132; Riano, Evidence: A Restatement
for the Bar, p. 245, 2009 ed.); and
4. must not possess the disqualifications imposed by law or the rules (Riano, Evidence: A
Restatement for the Bar, p. 246, 2009 ed.)

Q: What are the qualifications of a witness?

A: A prospective witness must show that he has the following abilities:

1. To Observe – the testimonial quality of perception;

2. To Remember – the testimonial quality of memory;
3. To Relate – the testimonial quality of narration; and
32 | P a g e
4. To Recognize a duty to tell the truth – the testimonial quality of sincerity.

Q: What cannot be considered as grounds for disqualification?

A: General Rule:
1. Religious or political belief;
2. Interest in the outcome of the case; or
3. Conviction of a crime (Sec. 20).

Exceptions: Unless otherwise provided by law like the following:

1. Those convicted of falsification of document, perjury or false testimony is prohibited from

being witnesses to a will (Art. 821, NCC).
2. Those convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude cannot be discharged to become a
State witness (Sec. 17, Rule 119; Sec. 10, R.A. 6981).
3. Those who fall under the disqualification provided under Secs. 21-24, Rule 130.

DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES

Q: Who are disqualified to be witnesses under the rules?

A: Those who are:

1. Disqualified by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity;
2. Disqualified by reason of marriage;
3. Disqualified by reason of death or insanity of adverse party; and
4. Disqualified on the ground of privileged communication:
a. Marital privilege;
b. Attorney-client privilege;
c. Doctor-patient privilege;
d. Minister-penitent privilege; or
e. Public officer as regards communications made in official confidence.

DISQUALIFIED BY REASON OF MENTAL INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY

Q: What are the requisites for a witness to be disqualified under this rule?

A: 1. The proposed witness must be incapable of making known his perception to others; and
2. The incapacity must exist as of the time of his production for examination (Riano, Evidence:
A Restatement for the Bar, p. 254, 2009 ed.).

Q: Who are disqualified by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity?

A: 1. Mental incapacity – those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for
examination, is such that they are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to
others; he can still be a witness during his lucid interval. The disqualification is only absolute if
the insane person is publicly known to be insane and does not have lucid intervals.

2. Mental immaturity – children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of
perceiving the facts respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully. (Sec. 21)

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE/SPOUSAL IMMUNITY

Q: What is purpose of this disqualification?

33 | P a g e
A: The rule forbidding one spouse to testify for or against the other is based on principles which
are deemed important to preserve the marriage relation as one of full confidence and affection,
and that this is regarded as more important to the public welfare than that the exigencies of the
lawsuits should authorize domestic peace to be disregarded for the sake of ferreting out facts
within the knowledge of strangers.

Q: What are the requisites in order for the spousal immunity to apply?

A: 1. That the spouse for or against whom the testimony is offered is a party to the case;
2. That the spouses are validly married;
3. The testimony is one that is offered during the existence of the marriage; and
4. The case is not one of the exceptions provided in the rule.

Q: What kind of testimony is covered by the prohibition?

A: The prohibition extends not only to testimony adverse to the spouse but also to a testimony in
favor of the spouse.

Q: What are the exceptions to the spousal immunity?

A: 1. In a civil case by one against the other; or

2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants (Sec. 22), or
3. Where the testimony was made outside the marriage.
DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF THE ADVERSE
PARTY (DEAD MAN STATUTE/SURVIVING PARTIES RULE)

Q: What are the elements for the application of the rule?

A: 1. The defendant in the case is the executor or the administrator or a representative of the
deceased or the person of unsound mind;
2. The case is against the executor or the administrator or a representative of the deceased or the
person of unsound mind;
3. The subject matter of the action is a claim or demand against the estate of a deceased person or
a person of unsound mind; and
4. The testimony is as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or
before such person became of unsound mind. (Sec. 23, Rule 130)

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

Q: Who may assert the privilege?

A: The holder of the privilege, authorized persons and persons to whom privileged
communication were made can assert the privilege.

(1) HUSBAND AND WIFE

Q: What are the requisites for the application of this privilege?

A: 1. There was a valid marriage;

2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between the spouses
during the said marriage; and
3. The spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not given his consent to such
testimony.

Q: When is the privilege inapplicable?

34 | P a g e
A: 1. In a civil case by one against the other; or
2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct
ascendants or descendants.

(2) ATTORNEY AND CLIENT

Q: What are the requisites for the application of the privilege?

A: 1. Attorney-client relation;
2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between them in the
course of professional employment; and
3. The client has not given his consent to the attorney’s testimony; or if the attorney’s secretary,
stenographer or clerk is sought to be examined, that both the client and the attorney have not
given their consent.

Q: What is the purpose of this privilege?

A: To encourage full disclosure by client to his attorney of all pertinent matters as to further the
administration of justice.

Q: When is the privilege inapplicable?

A: It does not apply to communications which are:

1. intended to be made public;
2. intended to be communicated to others;
3. intended for an unlawful purpose;
4. received from third persons not acting in behalf or as agents of the client; or
5. made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the attorney-client relationship

(3) PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT

Q: What are the requisites for the application of the privilege?

A: 1. The action involves a civil case;

2. The relation of physician and patient existed between the person claiming the privilege or his
legal representative and the physician;
3. The advice or treatment given by him or any information was acquired by the physician while
professionally attending to the patient;
4. The information was necessary for the performance of his professional duty; and
5. The disclosure of the information would tend to blacken the reputation of the patient.

Q: What is the purpose of this privilege?

A: The privilege is intended to facilitate and make safe, full and confidential disclosure by
patient to doctor of all facts, circumstances, and symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of
their subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication on the witness stand, to the end that the
physician may form a correct opinion, and be enabled safely and efficaciously to treat his patient.

(4) PRIEST AND PENITENT

Q: What are the requisites for its application?

A: 1. The confession must have been made to the priest in his professional character according to
the discipline of the church to which the priest or minister belongs [Sec. 24(d)]; and
2. Communications made must be confidential and must be penitential in character e.g., under
the seal of the confessional

35 | P a g e
Q: What is the purpose of this privilege?

A: To allow and encourage individuals to fulfill their religious, emotional or other needs by
protecting confidential disclosures to religious practitioners.

(5) PUBLIC OFFICERS

Q: What are the requisites for its application?

A: 1. The communication must have been made to a public officer;

2. The communication was given to the public officer in official confidence; and
3. The public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the communication.

OTHER PRIVILEGED MATTERS

Q: What other matters are considered privileged?

A: 1. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any information,
statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of serving as a guardian ad litem,
unless the court finds it necessary to promote the best interests of the child [Sec. 5 (e), Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness];
2. Editors, publisher, or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper, magazine or periodical of
general circulation cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news report or any
information given to him in confidence, unless a court or a House or a committee of Congress
finds that such revelation is demanded for State security (R.A. 1477);

3. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted;

4. Trade secrets cannot be disclosed although this is not absolute as the court may compel
disclosure where it is indispensable for doing justice (Francisco, p. 335, 1992 ed.);

5. Bank deposits are absolutely confidential in nature except upon written permission of the
depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon lawful order of a competent court (R.A. 1405;
Francisco, p. 335, 1992 ed.);

6. Conciliators and similar officials shall not testify in any court or body regarding any matter
taken up at the conciliation proceedings conducted by them (Art. 233, Labor Code); and

7. Informers, for the protection of their identity, cannot be compelled to testify by the prosecutor
when their testimony would merely be cumulative and corroborative.

EXAMINATION OF A WITNESSES

Q: What are the rights of a witness?

A: 1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or

insulting demeanor;

2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;

3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;

4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
otherwise provided by law (right against self-incrimination) Note: This refers to immunity
statutes wherein the witness is granted immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted
in his testimony, e.g. under Sec. 8, R.A. 1379, the law providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully
acquired property; and under P.D. 749, in prosecutions for bribery and graft.
36 | P a g e
5. Not to give an answer, which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it be to the very fact at
issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a witness must answer to
the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense (Sec. 3).

RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE

Q: What is the principle of res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet?

A: This principle literally means “things done between strangers ought not to injure those who
are not parties to it”. It has two branches:
1. The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another (Sec.
28).
2. Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove that
he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time (Sec. 34).

Q: What are the exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule (first branch)?

A: 1. Admission by a co-partner or agent (Sec. 29, Rule 130);

2. Admission by a co-conspirator (Sec. 30, Rule 130); and 3. Admission by privies (Sec. 31, Rule
130)

ADMISSION BY A PARTY

Q: What is admission?

A: It is an act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact which may be given in

evidence against him (Sec. 26, Rule 130). It is any statement of fact made by a party against his
interest or unfavorable to the conclusion for which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts
alleged by him.

Q: What are the requisites for an admission to be admissible?

A: 1. Must involve matters of fact and not of law;

2. Must be categorical and definite;
3. Must be knowingly and voluntarily made; and
4. Must be adverse to the admitter’s interests (Ibid.)

Q: What are the classifications of admissions?

A: 1. Express – it is a positive statement or act.
2. Implied – it is one which may be inferred from the declarations or acts of a person.
3. Judicial – when made in the course of a judicial proceeding.
4. Extrajudicial – when made out of court or even in a proceeding other than the one under
consideration. (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 117, 2009 ed.)
5. Adoptive – It is a party’s reaction to a statement or action by another person when it is
reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an admission of something stated or implied by the
other person. A third person’s statement becomes the admission of the party embracing or
espousing it. Adoptive admission may occur when a party:
a. Expressly agrees to or concurs in an oral statement made by another;
b. Hears a statement and later on essentially repeats it;
c. Utters an acceptance or builds upon the assertion of another;
d. Replies by way of rebuttal to some specific points raised by another but ignores further points
which he or she has heard the other make; or
e. Reads and signs a written statement made by another. (Republic v. Kendrick Development
Corp., G.R. No. 149576, Aug. 8, 2006)

37 | P a g e