GENERAL PROVISIONS

PEOPLE v. YATAR
 Rape w/ homicide (convicted)
 Evidence used to convict – DNA
 DNA is object evidence
 Flight was considered (it was not material but is relevant, it may tend to prove that Yatar was a
convict)
 Q: Is DNA material or relevant evidence?
A:

WHAT IS EVIDENCE
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
respecting a matter of fact

WHAT ARE THE AXIOMS OF ADMISSIBILITY (ALL MUST BE

PRESENT)
1. Relevancy
2. Competency
3. Admissibility
4. Offer

PEOPLE v. ZULUETA
 “the privacy of communication and correspondence to be inviolable is no less applicable
because it is the wife who thinks herself aggrieved by her husband’s infidelity”

TATING v. MARCELLA
 Who are parties in case?
1. CIVIL – plaintiff & defendant
2. CRIMINAL – complainant & accused
3. SPECIAL PROCEEDING – petitioner

ONG CHIA v. REPUBLIC

 rules on evidence does not apply “directly” on naturalization cases
 only suppletory & in analogy
 cadastral, labor, naturalization cases
 Ong Chia said that the evidence should not be admitted by the appellate court because it has
not yet been offered
 Evidence not offered in trial court should not be admitted
 It was assailed by Ong Chia that the Evidence was not offered, hence inadmissible
 For evidence to be admitted, must be presented before all the parties
  RELEVANCY (“only that which tends to prove”…it may not be directly related)
MATERIAL EVIDENCE (direct claim connected to evidence)

LECTURE:
1. Factum Probans
2. Factum Probandum
3. Relevancy of Evidence (read together with Lucas v. Lucas of Rule 133 to understand Prima
Facie Evidence)

WHAT DOES THE WORD SANCTION REFER TO THE RULES ON

ADMISSIBILITY?
 Competency

WHAT DOES ASCERTAINING MEAN?

 To know the real thing
 Q: How will you authenticate?
 Q: How will you authenticate Testimonial Evidence?
A: Swear under oath

HOW MANY KINDS OF OBJECT EVIDENCE?

 Kinds:
a) identifiable
b) made identifiable
c) not identifiable

PEOPLE v. MERCURY DELA CRUZ

 Distinguish it from the doctrine of People v. Dela Rosa

SCC Chemicals Corp. v. CA

 DOCTRINE: Hearsay evidence is inadmissible when not objected
 How many times did they fail to appear? – several times
 SCC failed to cross-examine the witness
 The right to cross-examine is waivable
 Hence, the evidence BECOMES admissible

WHAT ARE THE THREE KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY?

1. Conditional – not apparent at the time offered but relevancy will readily be seen when
connected to other piece of evidence not yet offered

Ex. A files a case against B for collection of sum of money

 Witness was testifying on matters which does not tend to prove
 It can be admitted under conditional admissibility
 On the condition that it would show the relevancy
 Ex. Annulment of Deed of Sale
 X sold to Y, Y sold to W
 Will show the relevancy of the testimony
 It can be irrelevant and incompetent

2. Multiple
3. Curative – cures a defect
Ex. Evidence is incompetent, it is inadmissible.
Q: How do you cure it?
A:

 Three schools of thought: Massachusetts & English rule (does not apply in the Philippines)
The meaning is different in Philippines.

For instance if there is defect, but no objection, it is admissible. There is nothing to cure. You
do not apply curative admissibility.

But if evidence is inadmissible, but the court admitted it, then there is a defect. It must be
cured. The adverse party is allowed to controvert. The defect is that which was inadmissible
but was admitted.

PEOPLE v. SALAFRANCA
 Doctrine: Multiple Admissibility; Dying declaration may be admissible despite its hearsay
character
 During trial, Court held Salafranca was guilty because of the dying declaration made by the
victim to his uncle
 Evidence was said to be hearsay because was not at the scene of the crime
 If your testimony is not based on personal knowledge, it is only hearsay
 However, the hearsay rule provides for exceptions
 Another exception is the Res Gestae
 Multiple admissibility if the Court admits for more than 3 reasons

HOW DO YOU ESTABLISH THE AUTHENTICITY OF OBJECT

EVIDENCE?
 How do you establish if it is a real thing?
 Through TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
 Which of the 3 is the strongest? – OBJECT EVIDENCE. When it is presented it cannot be said
that it is another thing.
 TESTIMONAL IS THE WEAKEST – it is the only kind of evidence that may not tell the truth.
 While testimonial evidence is the weakest, it is the MOST IMPORTANCE. Object and
Documentary evidence cannot stand on their own. According to Dean Riano “it must be
sponsored”.
 Corroborative evidence

WHAT ARE THE THREE RULES UNDER DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE?

 1. Best Evidence Rule
2. Testimonial Evidence
3. Electronic Evidence Rule

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE – unidentifiable

People v. Dela Cruz
 How was the object evidence authenticated?
 CHAIN OF CUSTODY – “authorized movement of the object”
 Substantial compliance
 Convicted
 Take note of Sec. 21 of Dangerous Drugs Act
 Substantial Compliance is NOW the applicable doctrine

People v. Manuel Dela Rosa

 Acquitted on the ground that the chain was unfollowed

People v. Oliva
 Amendatory rule

SALAS v. MATUSALEM
 Illegal filiation may not be proven by mere testimonial evidence
 What are the pieces of evidence used to establish support? – birth certificate, baptismal
certificate
 “while baptismal certificate is public record as held in hearsay evidence”
 “failure to establish paternity, support does not follow”

JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION (in relation to civpro)

 When evidence need not be offered
 If it is not successful, re-raffle to judge
 Face to face trial (no more offer of evidence, because there it is in the terms of reference)
Ex. Annulment of Deed of Sale
 About A&B
 But was shown XYZ
 May show later on that such evidence would be relevant

HOW DO YOU AUTHENTICATE TESTIMONIAL?

 You have to convince the court that you will tell the truth
 Take an oath

WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

~memorize provisions~
 1. Judicial Notice
2. Judicial Admission

WHAT ARE THE 2 KINDS OF ADMISSION

1. Oral
2. Written

DISTINGUISH CONFESSION FROM ADMISSION

Every confession is an admission but not every admission is a confession.
 Is extra judicial admission admissible as to the co-accused?
(relate to PEOPLE v. BAHARAN)
It was held that Mercene’s admission implicating the co-accused was given on the witness stand.
Extrajudicial may not be given as evidence against co-accused.

WHERE DO YOU FIND THE JUDICIAL ADMISSION?

 Pleadings
 Motions
 The effect of admission in pleadings is that it CANNOT BE CONTROVERTED.
 XPN:
1. Palpable Mistake
2. ______________

JUDICIAL CONFESSION
 Plea of guilty (Rule 116, Criminal Procedure)

WHEN YOU AMEND A PLEADING, WHAT HAPPENS?

 Admissions become extrajudicial confessions
 Therefore, need proof
 Amended pleading, supersedes

JUDICIAL NOTICE
1. Mandatory
(It need not be proved because the Court is to take judicial notice of that)

 New rules provide (executive, legislative and judicial of the NATIONAL GOVERNMENT)
Q: What is the effect to statements of Cabinet Secretaries? Should courts take judicial notice?
A:
Q: Suppose that the President gives a statement at a forum “KILL ALL BISHOPS”, is it an official
statement? Should the Court take judicial notice?
A: The Court shall not take note of that. The official function of the executive is to EXECUTE THE
LAWS.
 Legislative ~ legislate
Judicial ~ interpret

MAQUILING v. COMELEC
 It was contended that he should be disqualified because he was an American citizen.
 Courts cannot take mandatory judicial notice of foreign laws
 It need to be supported by evidence
 DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION: in the absence of proof, foreign law will be
presumed to be the same as the laws of the jurisdiction hearing the case

LAUREANO v. CA
 Laureano claims applicability of Singapore laws
 He has burden of proof
 Since he failed to prove, Philippine laws shall apply
Relate to (VAN WILSEM CASE under support)
Ex. While he was crossing Roxas Boulevard – It need not be proved because it is part of territoriality

LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. BANAL

 Same case, pending in the same sala, the judge cannot take judicial notice of
 Can the court take judicial notice of the same case, pending in the same sala? – Generally,
NO. The exception is in Republic v. Sandiganbayan.
 Relate to SEVERANCE & CONSOLIDATION (put together cases, not issues)

REPUBLIC v. SANDIGANBAYAN
 Ill-gotten wealth of Marcoses
 The cases were consolidated
 It can be taken mandatory judicial notice, as an EXCEPTION TO THE RULE
 Settled is the rule that you cannot take judicial notice of a case that is pending in another sala

PEOPLE v. KULAIS
 Testified in another case
 Erroneous taking of judicial notice of a witness testimony in another case does not affect
conviction of the appellant
 Guilt was established beyond reasonable doubt

2. Discretionary
a. Public knowledge – “notoriety”, unquestionable that such fact may not be contested
b. Easily demonstrable
c. Known to the Judges by reason of their functions
Q: Can the Court take judicial notice of the fact that Bea Alonzo & Gerald Anderson are now
separated?
A:
Q: Neighbor is accused of murder. He is notorious. Can the court take judicial notice? (By reason of
judicial function)
A: NO. Knowing the accused’ character is not by knowing his judicial function.
 Settled is the rule that when a victim of rape takes the witness stand, she is telling truth. The
probative value of her statement is very high.

LIGTAS v. PEOPLE
 Whether DARAB decision can be taken judicial notice for theft – YES, when such decision has
become final & executory
 Because of tenancy, he cannot be charged of theft
 As an exception to the rule on judicial NOTICE

WHEN SHALL THE JUDGE USE THEIR DISCRETION?

 Amendment: There shall be notice & hearing

WHEN CAN THE COURT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE?

1. During trial
2. After trial before judgment
3. Appeal

 Order of trial is DIFFERENT from Order from presentation of evidence

 The emphasis of the new rule now is DUE PROCESS before the Court can take judicial notice

WHAT IS OBJECT EVIDENCE

 What are the 5 kinds of object evidence
 “addressed to the senses of the Court”, pertains to the judge
 You can testify as witness by exercising any of the 5 senses, so you need not see it
 What is important is personal knowledge
 Object evidence is the STRONGEST but it cannot stand on its own

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
 Relate to the definition and requisites of admissibility

WHAT IS REAL EVIDENCE?

 Object evidence
 Addressed to the senses of the court (judge)
 5 Kinds of object evidence
a. Visual

b. Audio/ Auditory (sound)

 c. Olfactory (smell)
d. Tactile (touch)
e. Gustatory (taste)
WHY IS OBJECT EVIDENCE THE STRONGEST?
 The possibility of error is almost ZERO
 In DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, there is possibility of error
Ex. Deed of Sale (It is possible that not everything contained therein is true)

WHY IS TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE WEAKEST?

 Man is prone to tell a lie
 A person can pass the blame to someone else
 It is authenticated when the witness TAKES OATH

WHEN IS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE RELEVANT?

 When it tends to prove a fact

PEOPLE v. VIBAR
 What was the document sought to be authenticated?
 Rape committed by Vibar against AAA (incestuous rape)
 Vibar was convicted
 Upon appeal, there was a letter provided stating that there was a conspiracy against him to file
the case
 Letter was NOT admitted because of LACK OF AUTHENTICATION
 Documentary evidence can be object evidence, establishing the FACT that there is a letter
 The letter in the case was sought to be offered as documentary evidence, had it been
authenticated it could have been admitted
 The FAILURE FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE was AUTHENTICATION OF EVIDENCE
 It could had overturned the judgment of conviction had it been authenticated

ST. MARTIN POLYCLINIC v. LWV CONSTRUCTION

 Petitioner is licensed to conduct medical examinations
 An examination was conducted for purposes of sending abroad
 He (applicant for overseas employment) passed the examination
 Thereafter it was founded that he was positive for HEPATITIS C
 Complaint filed before the MTC (COA was MONEY CLAIMS, not BREACH OF CONTRACT)
 Money claims depend on the jurisdictional amount of the money claim
 Appeal (Petition for Review on Certiorari)
 When the RTC exercises appellate JD, the appeal is by Rule 42 (Petition for Review, not by
notice of appeal)
 CA sustained the decision of RTC (LWV won)
 The basis of the decision of MTC to CA was the certification
  Issue before the SC was the admissibility of certification
 Certification as “private document”
 It lacks one of the requisites for ADMISSIBILITY which is AUTHENTICATION
 Relate to APOSTIL CONVENTION (authenticate in foreign land)  Now amended by May 1,
2020
 It no longer requires the consular office
 For it to be admissible, the country must be a member of the apostil convention

BEST EVIDENCE RULE AMENDED TO ORIGINAL

 Sec. 4 has been deleted
 Recordings are NOW DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
 How will it affect by anti-wiretapping law
 SOUNDS – “Any material”, so it may be considered as documentary evidence
 Electronic signature may be considered as sound ABROAD
 ALL SOUNDS in recording is NOW considered as documentary evidence
 What is documentary evidence is the recording and NOT the sound
 Recording, photographs and writings are now documentary evidence
 Under the OLD RULES it was only writings
 “OR ITS EQUIVALENT”  sounds, numbers and digits NOT recordings/photographs
 DISCUSSION 1:14:00

WHEN IS THE CASE WHEN THE OBJECT IS NOT SUBJECT OF

INQUIRY
 Ex. Annulment of Deed of Sale
 Case is Declaration of Nullity of Deed of Sale (It will depend if you need the original copy)
 If the basis is the requisites of a contract, then you NEED THE ORIGINAL
 If the case is that the deed was executed, then NO NEED FOR ORIGINAL
 If the case is LACK OF CONSIDERATION, then you NEED THE ORIGINAL because the
consideration is a content of the document
 If the content of the document is the subject of inquiry, then BEST EVIDENCE RULE will
APPLY

AMENDMENT: WHEN THE ORIGINAL IS NOT CLOSELY RELATED TO

THE CONTROLLING ISSUE
 Amendment
 Ex. Case is of Annulment of Sale
 BUT parties who entered are not qualified
 Therefore the content of the document is not controlling factor

PARAGRAPH C  NEW RULE UNDER SEC. 7

 “summaries”
 Relate to Case of Republic v. Mupas

REPUBLIC v. MUPAS
  Consolidated case
 How does the exception to the best evidence rule apply?
 What were presented in court (falling under summons)?
 Photocopies were not admitted
 If SUMMARIES (summation of several documents, the conclusion would only be presented)
already an EXCEPTION to ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE
 What is the requisite for summaries to be admitted as secondary evidence?
 The original from which the documents were taken must be available for
inspection by the adverse party
 1) Availability of original
2) Accessibility of original

MCMP v. MONARK EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

 Contract of lease entered
 Wasn’t paid so there was an action for sum of money
 What must be established for exception to apply
1. Existence of Document
2. Due execution
3. Loss of Document
4. Lack of Bad Faith

LOON v. POWERMASTER
 Appeal already
 Exception to exception
 General rule is that evidence must have been presented prior appeal or else the evidence is
not admissible
 Sec. 2, Rule 1 (Rules of Court does not apply in naturalization, land registration, labor case,
they apply SUPPLETORILY or by ANALOGY)

ROBINOL v. BASSIG
 Receipts were presented
 Atty. Bassig won

DISQUALIFICATIONS
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF INDEPENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENT
 Applied in the case of People v. Aguirre
 Patula v. People

WHO CAN BE A WITNESS

 “One who can perceive, who is perceiving and can make known his perception”
 Observe – using the 5 senses
 Even if you are blind, you can testify
ARE CHILDREN DISQUALIFIED FROM TESTIFYING?
 Children are no longer disqualified by virtue of their immaturity
 Apply Rule on Examination of Child Witness (Sec. 6)
 Relate to Sec. 21
 Irrespective of the age, the child is competent

PEOPLE v. GOLIMLIM
 Rape of a mental retardate

Distinguish Marital Disqualification Rule from Marital Privilege Rule

1. As to time frame of testimony – the disqualification applies only during the marriage. For
marital privilege communication rule, disqualification still applies even after marriage
2. As to spouse being a party to the case –
3. XPN –
Ex. Jusel and Don not yet married. Inamin ni Don na pinatay si X, neighbor ni Jusel. Got married.
Nagkaron ng kaso. May nakaalam na alam ni Jusel. Jusel took witness stand against husband.
Q: What can the adverse counsel interpose, MDR or MPCR?
A: Marital Disqualification Rule. Hindi pa sila kasal nung inamin niya.

Syhunliong v. Rivera
 Applies privileged communication on trade secret
 Employer-employee relation
 QUALIFIED PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION –
 Also under electronic evidence because of the text messages
 Contract of employment – among the terms and conditions is that you cannot divulge
information, because it is QUALIFIED PRIVILEGED INFO.

ELECTRONIC DATA MESSAGE v. ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT

 It is a document when it establishes a right or extinguishes an obligation

PEOPLE v. AGUIRRE
 Qualified trafficking
 They were not able to cross-examine
 It will not be hearsay evidence when there is no possibility to cross-examine
 Apply the rules on qualification of witness – It was said that they only heard that they will be
brought to the place where the foreigners were
 FIRST EXCEPTION TO HEARSAY RULE – Doctrine of Independently Relevant Statement

Ex. Mr. X on Witness Stand

 Mr. A told him that it was B who killed C
  Is it hearsay?
 It depends. Apply the requisites of hearsay.
 D.I.R.S. – you do not establish the truth of such statement, but the fact that it was stated

REQUISITES FOR HEARSAY

1. Out of court statement or declaration
2. Out of court statement was repeated in court
3. Repetition was made for the purpose of establishing the truth of the out of court declaration

ALVAREZ v. RAMIREZ
 Arson case (sister of the spouse – collateral relative)
 Spouse was not able to testify because was sustained by the court
 Wife was supposed to take the witness stand but was said that she was disqualified under the
marital disqualification rule
 Marital Disqualification rule does not apply
 Marital relation must be preserved – but here they were already SEPARATED, so the Marital
Disqualification Rule does not apply

PRIVILEGE
 Never intended to be known to the public
 In COMMON LAW RELATION IT DOES NOT APPLY – sanctioning that which is illegal
Ex. Kris Aquino divulging to public she was sick
 NOT privileged

LAWYER & CLIENT on PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

 Even if you are not a lawyer, the privilege will now apply
 “IN VIEW TO” – Even if you did not officially enter into a lawyer client relation, the privilege
applies
 “ANY PERSON WHO HAS ASSISTED THE LAWYER”