CRIMINAL

EVIDENCE
ATTY. MARICAR T. LONGAYAN-TABILIN
 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

• IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY OF EVIDENCE IN

LAW ENFORCEMENT
As an element of our Criminal Justice System,
it is the duty of every law enforcement agency
to provide the prosecution with the materials
and information (evidence) necessary in order
to support conviction.

“Every person charged with a crime is

presumed innocent unless proven otherwise.”
WHAT TO LEARN IN EVIDENCE

1. How to determine which evidence is

admissible; and
2. Then, after having determined that the
evidence is admissible, how to present that
evidence in a manner that would make the
court admit it once it is offered.
“The prosecution must rely on the strength of
its evidence and not on the weakness of that of
the defense”
SCOPE OF RULES OF EVIDENCE

1. Prescribes the manner of presenting

evidence (Burden of Proof, rules 131-
132);
2. Fixes the qualification and privilege of
witnesses and the mode of examining
them (Rule 132);
3. Determines among the probative matters,
things which are logically and in their
nature evidential, and what classes of
things shall not be received.
ABSENCE OF VESTED RIGHT

There is NO vested right in the rules of evidence

because the rules are subject to change by the
Supreme Court pursuant to its powers to
promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice
and procedure. The change in the rules of
evidence is however, subject to the
constitutional limitation on the enactment of ex
post facto law.
WAIVER OF THE RULES

The rules of evidence may be waived. When an

otherwise objectionable evidence is not
objected to, the evidence becomes admissible
because of waiver.

For instance, while as a rule hearsay evidence is

excluded and carries no probative value, the
rule admits of an exception. Where a party
failed to object to hearsay evidence, then the
same is admissible.
RULE 128: GENERAL PROVISIONS

Section 1. Evidence defined. – Evidence is

the means, sanctioned by the rules, of
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the
truth respecting a matter of fact.
CONCEPT OF EVIDENCE

1. It is a means of ascertainment – used to arrive at a

legal conclusion
2. It is sanctioned by the rules of court – meaning not
excluded by the rules on relevancy and admissibility
3. It is used in a judicial proceeding – the rules does not
apply to non-judicial proceedings
4. it pertains to the truth respecting a matter of fact –
the truth referred to is not necessarily the actual truth
but one referred to as the judicial or legal truth
PURPOSE OF EVIDENCE

• Is to ascertain the truth respecting a

matter of fact in a judicial proceeding.
Evidence 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.
EVIDENCE - WHEN REQUIRED

• Introduction of evidence is needed

when the court has to resolve a
question of fact.

• In criminal cases, the main issues are

the following:
1. Is the accused guilty of the crime
charged?
2. Is he liable for damages?
WHEN NOT REQUIRED

• Where no factual issue exists in a case, there is

no need to present evidence because since
evidence is the means of proving a fact. If there
is no question of fact, presentation of evidence
is no longer required.
• Evidence is not also required on matters of
judicial notice
• When the pleadings in a civil case do not tender
an issue of fact
• Evidence may likewise be dispensed with by
agreement of the parties
APPLICABILITY OF THE RULES

The rules of evidence, being parts of the Rules

of Court, apply only to judicial proceedings.

“Sec. 4. In what cases not applicable.-These

Rules shall not apply to election cases, land
registration, cadastral, naturalization and
insolvency proceedings, and other cases not
herein provided for, except by analogy or in a
suppletory character and whenever practicable
and convenient.”
TRUTH AS THE PURPOSE OF
EVIDENCE

The truth referred to is not necessarily the actual

truth but one aptly referred to as the judicial or
legal truth. Actual truth may not always be achieved
in a judicial proceedings because the findings of the
court would depend on the evidence presented
before it based on accepted rules for admissibility.

Example: It was Mr. X who shot Mr. V. If the available

evidence presented and admitted in court points to
Mr. Z as the culprit, then the judicial or legal truth is
that it was Mr. Z who shot Mr. V.
PROOF vs. EVIDENCE

• Proof is not evidence itself. There is proof only

because of evidence. It is merely the probative
effect of evidence and is the conviction or
persuasion of the mind resulting from a
consideration of the evidence

• Evidence is the medium or means by which a

fact is proved or disproved. Proof is the effect
of evidence because without evidence there is
no proof. Bare allegations unsubstantiated by
evidence, are not equivalent to proof.
FALSUS IN UNO
FALSUS IN OMNIBUS

• It literally means “false in one thing, false in

everything”. It is particularly applied to the
testimony of witness who may be considered
unworthy of belief as to all the rest of his
evidence if he is shown to have testified
falsely in one detail.

• It is not a positive rule of law and is not

strictly applied in our jurisdiction.
FACTUM PROBANS vs.
FACTUM PROBANDUM

Evidence signifies a relationship between two

facts, namely:
1. The fact or proposition to be established
(factum probandum); and
2. The facts or material evidencing the facts or
proposition to be established (factum probans)

Stated in another way, the factum

probandum is the fact to be proved; the fact
which is in issue and to which the evidence is
directed. On the other hand, factum probans
is the probative value or evidentiary fact
tending to prove the fact in issue
ILLUSTRATION

If X claims to have been injured by the

negligence of Y who denies having been
negligent, the negligence of Y and the causal
connection between such negligence, and the
injuries of X taken as a whole, constitute the
factum probandum of the case. The evidence
offered by X, whether it be object,
documentary or testimonial, constitute the
materials to prove the liability of Y. The totality
of evidence to prove the liability refers to the
factum probans.
Cont.

In a criminal case, the factum probandum includes

all matters that the prosecution must prove
beyond reasonable doubt in order to justify a
conviction.
Ex. In a prosecution for robbery, the prosecution
has the burden to prove the following matters
beyond reasonable doubt:
• That there be a personal property belonging to
another
• That there is unlawful taking of that property
• That the taking is with intent to gain; and
• That there is violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things.
ALIBI AS A DEFENSE

As a defense, alibi is inherently weak and crumbles in

the light of positive identification by truthful
witnesses. It is evidence negative in nature and self-
serving and cannot attain more credibility than the
testimonies of prosecution witnesses who testify on
clear and positive evidence.
For the defense of alibi to prosper, the following
must be established:
1. the presence of the accused in another place at
the time of the commission of the offense; and
2. the physical impossibility for him to be at the
scene of the crime at the time of its commission.
LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE
RULES OF EVIDENCE

• The Rules of Evidence must be liberally

construed. The rules 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 must be liberally interpreted
and applied so as not to frustrate substantial
justice.
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

Depending on its ability to establish the fact

in dispute, an evidence may be:
1. Direct evidence—evidence which proves the
fact in dispute without the aid of any inference
or presumption.
2. Circumstantial evidence—such evidence from
which the existence of a particular fact in
dispute may be inferred as a necessary or
probable consequence.
cont. classification of evidence

Requisites for conviction by circumstantial

evidence:
1. There is more than one circumstance
2. The fact from which the inferences are
derived are proven
3. The combination of all the circumstances
is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt
cont. classification of evidence

Depending on the degree of its value in

establishing a disputed fact, an evidence may be:
1. Prima Facie—evidence which suffices for the
proof of a particular fact until contradicted and
overcome by other evidence.
2. Cumulative evidence—evidence which is of the
same kind and character as that already given and
tends to prove the same proposition.
3. Corroborative evidence—evidence which is of a
different kind and character as that already given
and tends to prove the same proposition.
4. Conclusive evidence—evidence which is
incontrovertible or the law does not allow it to be
contradicted.
cont. classification of evidence

Depending on its weight and acceptability, an

evidence may be:
1. Primary or best evidence—if it affords the
greatest certainty of the fact in question.
2. Secondary evidence—evidence which is
inferior to the primary evidence.
cont. classification of evidence

Depending on its quality, an evidence may be:

1. Relevant evidence—if it has a relation to the
fact in issue as to induce belief in its
existence or non-existence.
2. Admissible evidence—if is relevant to the
issue and is not excluded by law or the Rules
of Court. This is also known as Competent
evidence.
3. Credible evidence—if it is not only
admissible evidence but also believable and
used by the court in deciding a case.
POSITIVE vs NEGATIVE EVIDENCE

Evidence is positive when the witness affirms that a

fact did or did not occur.
Evidence is negative when the witness states that he
did not see or know the occurrence of a fact.
When a witness declares of his own knowledge that a
fact did not take place, that is actually positive
testimony since it is an affirmation of the truth of a
negative fact.
Positive testimony is entitled to greater weight since
the witness represents of his personal knowledge the
presence or absence of a fact; whereas in negative
testimony, there is a total disclaimer of personal
knowledge, hence without any representation or
disavowal that the fact in question could or could
not have existed or happened.
SCOPE (UNIFORMITY)

SECTION 2. SCOPE. – The rules of

evidence shall be the same in all courts
and in all trials, hearings, except as
otherwise provided by the law or these
Rules.
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

SECTION 3. Admissibility of evidence. -

Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to
the issue and is not excluded by the
Constitution, the law or these Rules

To be admissible two elements must concur

1. the evidence is relevant (relevance)
2. the evidence is not excluded by the rules
(competence)
RELEVANT EVIDENCE

SECTION 4. Evidence must have such a relation

to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its
existence or non-existence. xxx

The concept of relevance is one of logic. It deals

with the rational relationship between the
evidence and the fact to be proved. In other
words, the evidence adduced should be directed
to the matters in dispute and any evidence
which has neither direct nor indirect relationship
to such matters should be set aside as irrelevant.
COMPETENT EVIDENCE

Competent evidence is one that is not excluded

by the law or the rules.
The test of relevance is logic and common
sense, the test of competence is the law or the
rules. If the law or a particular rule excludes the
evidence, it is incompetent.
The question as to competence is: Is the
evidence allowed by the law or the rules? If it is
allowed, the evidence is competent. If it is not
allowed, it is incompetent.
Illustrations:

• In a prosecution for homicide, the witness

swears that the accused killed the victim
because his ever truthful friend told him so.
• In robbery, the wife of the accused testified
that the husband admitted to her in
confidence that it was he who killed their
neighbor. The husband objected to the offer of
his wife’s testimony
• A witness testified that he actually saw the
alleged victim fire a gun at the accused
without the latter’s provocation. Is the
testimony relevant/competent?
EXCLUSIONARY RULE

• Commonly known as “the fruit of a poisonous

tree doctrine”

• Evidence illegally obtained are inadmissible

for reasons of public policy. This is so because
of the constitutional requirement of due
process. Due process has been defines as the
“law the hears before it condemns, which
proceeds upon inquiry, and renders judgment
only after fair trial.
CASES RE:
INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE
• (People vs. Aminnudin) Two days before the
arrest, constabulary officers received a tip that
the accused was on board a vessel carrying
marijuana. Acting on the information, they
waited for the accused and approached him as
he descended the ship and arrested him.
• The Supreme Court ruled that the accused was
not, at the moment of his arrest, committing a
crime nor was it shown that he was about to do
or that he just done so.
• The marijuana is incompetent evidence because
its seizure was illegal. The seizure was not
incident to a valid arrest.
SIMILAR CASE

• People vs. Molina- An arrest was made merely

on the basis of reliable information that the
person arrested was carrying marijuana. The
accused were arrested while inside a pedicab
despite the absence of any outward indications
of a crime being committed.
• The Supreme Court declared that a warrantless
arrest cannot be justified where no crime is
being committed at the time of the arrest.
DIRECT EVIDENCE

• Direct Evidence means evidence which if

believed, proves the existence of a fact in
issue without interference or presumption.
• Direct evidence proves a fact without the need
to make an inference from another fact.
• Thus, the testimony of the witness claiming
that he personally witnessed the attack by the
accused on the victim without the latter’s
provocation is a direct testimonial evidence.
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

• Circumstantial evidence is that evidence that

indirectly proves a fact in issue through an
inference which the fact finder draws from the
evidence established.
• Circumstantial or indirect evidence is the
exact opposite of direct evidence.
• When the evidence is circumstantial, a fact is
established by making an inference from a
previously established fact.
 CONVICTION BY
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Section 4, Rule 133. In a criminal case,

circumstantial evidence may be sufficient for
conviction provided the following requisites
concur:
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 to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
COLLATERAL MATTERS

SECTION 4. Relevancy; collateral matters. – xxx

Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed,
except when it tends in any reasonable degree to
establish the probability or improbability of the fact
in issue
• A matter is collateral when it is only a “parallel or
diverging line” merely “additional” or “auxiliary”.
The term connotes an absence of a direct
connection between the evidence and the matter
in dispute.
• As a rule, evidence on a collateral matter is not
allowed. It is not allowed because it does not have
direct relevance to the issue of the case.
Exception: a collateral matter may be admitted if
it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the
probability or improbability of the fact in issue.
CLASSIFICATION OF
COLLATERAL MATTERS

• Antecedent circumstances - facts existing

before the commission of the crime (hatred,
bad moral character, conspiracy, etc.)
• Concomitant circumstances – facts existing
during the commission of the crime (
opportunity, presence of the accused at the
scene of the crime)
• Subsequent circumstances – facts existing
after the commission of the crime (flight,
attempts to conceal effect of the crime,
possession of stolen property)
ADMISSIBILITY vs. WEIGHT OF
THE EVIDENCE

- The admissibility of evidence should not be

confused with its probative value. Admissibility
refers to the question of whether certain
pieces of evidence are to be considered at all,
while probative value refers to the question of
whether the admitted evidence proves an
issue.
- The admissibility of the evidence depends on
its relevance and competence while the
weight of evidence pertains to its tendency to
convince and persuade
ADMISSIBLE vs. CREDIBLE
EVIDENCE

• Admissible evidence is not necessarily credible

evidence
• The term admissible means that the evidence
is of such character that the court is bound to
receive.
• The term credibility refers to worthiness of
belief, that quality which renders a witness
worthy of belief (believability)
• After the competence of a witness is allowed,
the consideration of his credibility follows
KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY

• MULTIPLE - there are times when an evidence is

admissible for two or more purposes. When the
evidence is relevant and competent for two or
more purposes, such evidence should be admitted
for any or all the purposes for which it is offered
provided it satisfies all the requirements of law for
its admissibility therefore
• Evidence 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 for its admissibility for other purposes.
KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY

• CONDITIONAL - A fact offered in evidence may

appear to be immaterial unless it is connected
with other facts to be subsequently proved. In
such case, evidence of that fact may be
received on condition that the other facts be
afterwards proved.
• The proponent of the evidence may ask that
the evidence may be conditionally admitted in
the meantime subject to the condition that he
is going to establish its relevancy and
competency at a later time
KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY

• CURATIVE - an improper evidence is offered and

admitted by the court over the objection of the
adverse party; in such case, the adverse party is
likewise entitled to introduce a similar improper
evidence to counteract that already given.
• A party has the right to introduce incompetent
evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted
the same kind of evidence adduced by the adverse
party. This is to prevent manifest injustice.
•
RECITATIONS
RULE 129
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

Section 1. Judicial notice, when mandatory. –

A court shall take judicial notice, without the
introduction of evidence, of the existence and
territorial extent of states, their political
history, forms of government and symbols of
nationality, the law of nations, the admiralty
and maritime courts of the world and their
seals, the political constitution and history of
the Philippines, official acts of the legislative,
executive and judicial departments of the
National Government of the Philippines, the
laws of nature, the measure of time, and the
geographical divisions.
JUDICIAL NOTICE, MANDATORY

• Judicial notice is based on the maxim “what is

known need not be proved”.
• The function of judicial notice is to abbreviate
litigation by the admission of matters that
need no evidence judicial notice is a
substitute for forma proof of a matter by
evidence.
• Judicial notice takes the place of proof,
hence, it makes evidence unnecessary.
JUDICIAL NOTICE, MANDATORY

• When the matter is subject to a mandatory

judicial notice, no motion or hearing is
necessary for the court to take judicial notice
of a fact because this is a matter which a
court ought to take judicial notice of.

• Example: the existence and territorial extent

of states; political history, forms of
government and symbols of nationality of
states; the law of nations; the laws of nature;
the measure of time, etc.
RULE 129, SECTION 2
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

Section 2. Judicial notice, when

discretionary.– A court may take judicial
notice of matters which are of public
knowledge, or are capable of unquestionable
demonstration, or ought to be known to
judges because of their judicial functions.
JUDICIAL NOTICE, DISCRETIONARY

Under the principle of discretionary judicial

notice, a court may take judicial notice of
matters which are of public knowledge, or are
capable of unquestionable demonstration, or
ought to be known to judges because of their
judicial functions.
REQUISITES, DISCRETIONARY
JUDICIAL NOTICE

The principles of discretionary judicial notice

will apply where the following requisites are
met:
1. the matter must be one of common
knowledge;
2. the matter must be settled beyond
reasonable doubt; and
3. the knowledge must exist within the
jurisdiction of the court
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN
LAWS

DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION

• It is well-settled that our courts cannot take
judicial notice of foreign laws.
• Foreign laws must be alleged and proved.
• In the absence of proof, the foreign law will
be presumed to be the same as the laws of the
jurisdiction hearing the case under the
doctrine of processual presumption.
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE LAW
OF NATIONS

When foreign law refers to the law of nations,

said law is subject to mandatory judicial notice.
Under the Constitution, the Philippines adopts
the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of land
(Sec.2, Art.II).
RULE 129, SECTION 3
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

Section 3. Judicial notice, when hearing

necessary. – During the pre-trial and the trial,
the court, motu proprio or upon motion, shall
hear the parties on the propriety of taking
judicial notice of any matter.
Before judgment or on appeal, the court, motu
proprio or upon motion, may take judicial notice
of any matter and shall hear the parties thereon
if such matter is decisive of a material issue in
the case.
RULE 129, SECTION 4
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

Section 4. Judicial admissions.– An

admission, oral or written, made by [the]
party in the course of the proceedings in the
same case, does not require proof. The
admission may be contradicted only by
showing that it was made through palpable
mistake or that the imputed admission was
not, in fact, made.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

Sec. 4, Rule 129 states that an admission, verbal

or written, made by a party in the course of the
proceedings in the same case, does not require
proof. The admission may be contradicted only
by showing that it was made through palpable
mistake or that no such admission was made.

Elements: (1) judicial admission must be made

by a party to the case; and (2) must be made in
the course of the proceedings in the same case
ADMISSIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES
DURING PRE-TRIAL

Section 2, Rule 118 – All agreements or

admission made or entered during the pre-trial
conference shall be reduced in writing and
signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise
they cannot be used against the accused.
JUDICIAL CONFESSION

Rule 130, Section 34. Confession.– The

declaration of an accused acknowledging his
or her guilt of the offense charged, or of any
offense necessarily included therein, may be
given in evidence against him or her.
ADMISSIONS vs CONFESSIONS

• An admission is an act, declaration or omission

of a party as to a relevant fact. It is a
voluntary acknowledgment made by a party of
the existence of the truth of certain facts
which are inconsistent with his claims in an
action
• A confession is the declaration of the accused
acknowledging his guilt of the offense
charged, or of any offense necessarily included
therein
JUDICIAL CONFESSION vs
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION
• Sec. 2(d) RA 7438 provides “Any extrajudicial
confession made by a person arrested, or under
custodial investigation shall be in writing and
signed by such person in the presence of his
counsel or in the latter’s absence, upon a valid
waiver, and in the presence of any of the parents,
older brothers and sisters, his spouse, the
municipal mayor, municipal judge, district school
supervisor or priest or minister of the gospel as
chosen by him; otherwise, such extrajudicial
confession shall be inadmissible as evidence in any
proceeding.”
• While a judicial confession may sustain a
conviction, an extrajudicial confession is not
sufficient for conviction. The rule requires that the
confession be corroborated by evidence of corpus
delicti.
EFFECT OF EXTRAJUDICIAL
CONFESSION OF GUILT
While a judicial confession may sustain a
conviction, an extrajudicial confession is not
sufficient for conviction. The rule requires that
the confession be corroborated by (1) evidence
of corpus delicti and (2) the requirement of Sec.
2(d) RA 7438 .

Section 3, Rule 133 - Extrajudicial confession,

not sufficient ground for conviction. –An
extrajudicial confession made by an accused
shall not be sufficient ground for conviction,
unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti
Question

• While in police custody, Carlito broke down in

the presence of an assisting counsel and orally
confessed to the investigator that he had
raped and killed the woman, detailing the acts
he had performed up to his dumping of the
body near the creek. He was genuinely
remorseful. During the trial, the state
presented the investigator to testify on the
oral confession of Carlito. Is the oral
confession admissible as evidence of guilt?
CORPUS DELICTI

• Corpus delicti is the body of the crime or the

offense.
• Strictly speaking, it means the actual
commission of the crime and someone is
criminally responsible therefor.
• It is the substance of the crime; the fact that a
crime has actually been committed
• In case of murder or homicide, it is not
necessary to recover the body of the victim or
show where it can be found. It is enough that
the death and the criminal agency causing the
death is proven.
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA

Rule 130, Section 29 – The rights of a party

cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another, except as hereinafter
provided.

Rule 132, Section 35. - Similar acts as evidence.–

Evidence that one did or did not do a certain
thing at one time is not admissible to prove that
he or she did or did not do the same or similar
thing at another time; but it may be received to
prove a specific intent or knowledge, identity,
plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or usage,
and the like.
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA

It has two branches, namely:

1. The rule that the rights of party cannot be
prejudiced by an act, declaration or admission
of another (Rule 130, Section 29)

Ex. If X makes a statement before the

media admitting his participation in a
murder, his statement is admissible against
him, the rest of his statement pointing to Y
and Z as co-participants are not admissible
against Y and Z; and
cont.

2. The rule that evidence of previous conduct or

similar acts at one time is not admissible to
prove that one did o did not do the same act at
another time (Rule 132, Section 35)

Example: Assumed that Mr. X is accused of

physical injuries. Is evidence that in the past
he committed several acts constituting
physical injuries admissible to prove his
propensity for committing such acts or that he
acted in conformity with his past acts?
EXCEPTIONS TO THE
RES INTER ACTA RULE
1. Admission by a co-partner or agent (Rule 130,
Section 30) Requisites:
a. The declaration or act of the partner and
agent must have been made or done within
the scope of his authority
b. The declaration or act of the partner and
agent must have been made or done during
the existence of the partnership or agency ;
and
c. The existence of the partnership or agency is
proven by evidence other than the
declaration or act o the partner or agent
cont.

2. Admission by a Co-conspirator, Rule 130,

Section 31)
Requisites:
a. The declaration or act be made or done
during the existence of the conspiracy;
b. The declaration or act must relate to the
conspiracy; and
c. The conspiracy must be shown by evidence
other than the declaration or act
cont.

3. Admission by Privies (Rule 130, Section 31)

Requisites:
a. There must be an act, declaration or an omission
by the predecessor-in-interest
b. The act, declaration or omission of the
predecessor must have occurred while he was
holding (not after) the title to the property; and
c. The act, declaration or omission must be in
relation to the property
Privies-are persons who are partakers or have an
interest in any action or thing, or any relation to
another. Ex. Lessor and his lessee; administrator;
heir
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 27. Admission of a party. – The act,

declaration or omission of a party as to a
relevant fact may be given in evidence
against him or her.
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
Section 28. Offer of compromise not admissible. – In
civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission
of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence
against the offeror. Neither is evidence of conduct nor
statements made in compromise negotiations
admissible, except evidence otherwise discoverable or
offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or
prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of
undue delay, or proving an eff ort to obstruct a
criminal investigation or prosecution.

In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses

(criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be
compromised, an offer of compromise by the accused
may be received in evidence as an implied admission of
guilt.
cont. Section 28

A plea of guilty later withdrawn or an unaccepted

offer of a plea of guilty to a lesser offense is not
admissible in evidence against the accused who
made the plea or offer. Neither is any statement
made in the course of plea bargaining with the
prosecution, which does not result in a plea of guilty
or which results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn,
admissible.

An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital

or other expenses occasioned by an injury is not
admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal
liability for the injury.
OFFER OF COMPROMISE

In criminal cases, offer of compromise by the

accused may be received in evidence as an
implied admission of guilt. Ex. The offer of
marriage of the accused in rape case is,
generally, speaking, an admission of guilt.

• QUESTION: X was charged with rape. X’s father

approached the victims father and offered
1million to settle the case. Is the offer
admissible in evidence?
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 29. Admission by third party. – The

rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an
act, declaration, or omission of another,
except as hereinafter provided.
(1st branch of res inter acta rule)
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 30. Admission by co-partner or agent. –

The act or declaration of a partner or agent
authorized by the party to make a statement
concerning the subject, or within the scope of his or
her authority and during the existence of the
partnership or agency, may be given in evidence
against such party after the partnership or agency is
shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. The same rule applies to the act or
declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other
person jointly interested with the party.
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 31. Admission by conspirator.– The act or

declaration of a conspirator in furtherance of
the conspiracy and during its existence may be
given in evidence against the co-conspirator
after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other
than such act of declaration.
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 32. Admission by privies. – Where one

derives title to property from another, the
latter’s act, declaration, or omission, in relation
to the property, is evidence against the former
[if done] while the latter was holding the title.
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 33. Admission by silence. – An act or

declaration made in the presence and within the
hearing or observation of a party who does or
says nothing when the act or declaration is such
as naturally to call for action or comment if not
true, and when proper and possible for him or
her to do so, may be given in evidence against
him or her.
RULE 130, SECTIONS 27-34
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

Section 34. Confession.– The declaration of an

accused acknowledging his or her guilt of the
offense charged, or of any offense necessarily
included therein, may be given in evidence
against him or her.
recitation
KINDS OF EVIDENCE

RULE 130: RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY

A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE

Section 1. Object as evidence.– Objects

as evidence are those addressed to the
senses of the court. When an object is
relevant to the fact in issue, it may be
exhibited to, examined or viewed by the
court.
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE

Requisites for admissibility of object evidence:

1. The object must be both relevant and
competent
2. the object must pass the test of
authentication
3. to authenticate the object, there must be
someone who should identify the object to
be the actual thing involved in the case
4. The object must be formally offered
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE

For purposes of authentication of an object or

for laying the foundation for the exhibit, object
evidence may be classified into the following:
1. Objects that have readily identifiable marks
(unique objects) e.g. pistol with serial
number
2. Objects that are made readily identifiable
(objects made unique) e.g. knife with
marking
3. Objects with no identifying marks and cannot
be marked (non-unique objects) e.g. shabu
DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE

Demonstrative evidence is not the actual thing

but it is referred to as demonstrative because
it represents or demonstrates the real thing.
This category of evidence is not separately
defined in the rules and appears to have been
incorporated under the general term “object”
evidence.
• Photographs – it is competent when it is
properly authenticated by a witness who is
familiar with the scene and who testifies that
the photograph faithfully represents what it
depicts.
Cont.

• Motion pictures and recordings – because of

possibility of tampering and distortion, courts have
required stricter standard for laying the foundation
for motion pictures and tape recordings. The court
would require a detailed testimony as to the
qualification of the operator, detailed description
of the equipment used and the conditions under
which they were taken
• Diagrams, models or maps – aside from the
requirement of relevance, a diagram, model or
map must be identified by a witness who is familiar
with what the evidence depicts, and that the same
is an accurate representation of the scene it
portrays
Cont.
• Xray pictures – are properly authenticated by
the xray technician or the physician who
testifies to the competence of the person
taking it, the procedure taken and that the
xray picture shown is that of the person, the
anatomical part or the object involved in the
case.
• Scientific tests, demonstrations and
experiments – in-court reenactment of material
events by witnesses has been held permissible
to help illustrate the testimony of a witness.
OCULAR INSPECTION

• Courts have recognized that there are times when

a party cannot bring an object to the court for
viewing in the courtroom. In such a situation the
court may take a view of an object.

• The court may inspect a crime scene to clarify

itself with certain matters raised by the litigants.
Going out of the courtroom to observe places and
objects is commonly termed a “view”. The court
has an inherent power to order a view when there
is a need to do so.
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Section 2. Documentary evidence. –

Documents as evidence consist of writings,
recordings, photographs or any material
containing letters, words, sounds, numbers,
figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or other
modes of written expression offered as proof of
their contents. Photographs include still
pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films,
motion pictures or videos.
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Requisites for admissibility of object evidence

1. The document must be relevant;
2. The evidence must be authenticated;
3. The document must be authenticated by a
competent witness
4. The document must be formally offered in
evidence
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE

Section 3. Original document must be

produced xxx – When the subject of
inquiry is the contents of a document,
writing, recording, photograph or other
record, no evidence is admissible other
than the original document itself,
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE

The purpose of the original document rule (best

evidence rule) is the prevention of fraud or mistake
in the proof of the contents of a writing. The basic
premise justifying the rule is the need to present to
court the exact words of a writing where a slight
variation of words may mean a great difference in
rights.

Requisites:
1. the subject matter must involve a document and
2. the subject of the inquiry is the contents of the
document
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT

Section 4. Original of document. –

(a) An “original” of a document is the document
itself or any counterpart intended to have the
same effect by a person executing or issuing it.
An “original” of a photograph includes the
negative or any print therefrom. If data is
stored in a computer or similar device, any
printout or other output readable by sight or
other means, shown to refl ect the data
accurately, is an “original.”
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT-DUPLICATE

(b) A “duplicate” is a counterpart produced by

the same impression as the original, or from the
same matrix, or by means of photography,
including enlargements and miniatures, or by
mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by
chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent
techniques which accurately reproduce the
original.
•
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT-DUPLICATE

(c) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent

as an original unless (1) a genuine question is
raised as to the authenticity of the original, or
(2) in the circumstances, it is unjust or
inequitable to admit the duplicate in lieu of the
original.
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE,
EXCEPTIONS
(a) When the original is lost or destroyed, or cannot be
produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the
offeror;
(b) 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, or
the original cannot be obtained by local judicial
processes or procedures;
(c) 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;
(d) When the original is a public record in the custody of a
public offi cer or is recorded in a public office; and
(e) When the original is not closely-related to a controlling
issue.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Section 5. When original document is

unavailable.– When the original document has
been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced
in court, the offeror, upon proof of itsexecution
or existence and the cause of its unavailability
without bad faith on his or her part, may prove
its contents by a copy, or by recital of its
contents in some authentic document, or by the
testimony of witnesses in the order stated.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Section 6. When original document is in

adverse party’s custody or control. – If the
document is in the custody or under the control
of the adverse party, he or she must have
reasonable notice to produce it. If after such
notice and after satisfactory proof of its
existence, he or she fails to produce the
document, secondary evidence may be
presented as in the case of its loss.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Section 7. Summaries.– When the contents of

documents, records, photographs, or numerous
accounts are voluminous and cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time,
and the fact sought to be established is only the
general result of the whole, the contents of
such evidence may bepresented in the form of a
chart, summary, or calculation.
The originals shall be available for examination
or copying, or both, by the adverse party at a
reasonable time and place. The court may order
that they be produced in court.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Section 8. Evidence admissible when

original document is a public record. –
When the original of a document is in the
custody of a public offi cer or is recorded in
a public office, its contents may be proved
by a certified copy issued by the public offi
cer in custody thereof
SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Section 9. Party who calls for document

not bound to offer it. – A party who calls
for the production of a document and
inspects the same is not obliged to offer
it as evidence.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

Section 10. Evidence of written agreements. –

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, as between the parties and their
successors in interest, no evidence of such
terms other than the contents of the written
agreement.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

The term parol means something “oral” or

“verbal” but with reference to contracts, “parol
evidence” means extraneous evidence or
evidence aliunde.
PAROL EVIDENCE, EXCEPTIONS

However, a party may present evidence to modify,

explain or add to the terms of the written agreement
if he or she puts in issue in a verified pleading:
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in
the written agreement;
(b) The failure of the written agreement to express
the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto;
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the
execution of the written agreement.
The term “agreement” includes wills.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 11. Interpretation of a writing

according to its legal meaning . – The
language of a writing is to be interpreted
according to the legal meaning it bears in
the place of its execution, unless the parties
intended otherwise.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 12. Instrument construed so as to

give effect to all provisions . – In the
construction of an instrument[,] where there
are several provisions or particulars, such a
construction is, if possible, to be adopted as
will give eff ect to all.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 13. Interpretation according to

intention; general and particular provisions.– In
the construction of an instrument, the intention
of the parties is to be pursued; and when a
general and a particular provision are
inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the
former. So a particular intent will control a
general one that is inconsistent with it.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 14. Interpretation according to

circumstances. – For the proper construction of
an instrument, the circumstances under which it
was made, including the situation of the subject
thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown,
so that the judge may be placed in the position
of those whose language he or she is to
interpret.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 15. Peculiar signification of terms. –

The terms of a writing are presumed to have
been used in their primary and general
acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show
that they have a local, technical, or otherwise
peculiar signifi cation, and were so used and
understood in the particular instance, in which
case the agreement must be construed
accordingly.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 16. Written words control printed. –

When an instrument consists partly of
written words and partly of a printed form,
and the two [(2)] are inconsistent, the
former controls the latter.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 17. Experts and interpreters to be used

in explaining certain writings . – When the
characters in which an instrument is written are
diffi cult to be deciphered, or the language is
not understood by the court, the evidence of
persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or
who understand the language, is admissible to
declare the characters or the meaning of the
language.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 18. Of two constructions, which

preferred . – When the terms of an agreement
have been intended in a diff erent sense by the
diff erent parties to it, that sense is to prevail
against either party in which he or she supposed
the other understood it, and when diff erent
constructions of a provision are otherwise
equally proper, that is to be taken which is the
most favorable to the party in whose favor the
provision was made.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 19. Construction in favor of natural

right. – When an instrument is equally
susceptible of two [(2)] interpretations, one
[(1)] in favor of natural right and the other
against it, the former is to be adopted.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT

Section 20. Interpretation according to

usage.– An instrument may be construed
according to usage, in order to determine
its true character.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 19. Classes of documents.– For the purpose of their

presentation in evidence, documents are either public or
private.
Public documents are:
(a) The written official acts, or records of the sovereign
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public
officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign
country;
(b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public except
last wills and testaments;
(c) Documents that are considered public documents under
treaties and conventions which are in force between the
Philippines and the country of source; and
(d) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
documents required by law to be entered therein.
All other writings are private.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 20.Proof of private document[s].– Before

any private document offered as authentic is
received in evidence, its due execution and
authenticity must be proved by any of the following
means:
(a) By anyone who saw the document executed or
written;
(b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature
or handwriting of the maker[;] or
(c) By other evidence showing its due execution and
authenticity.
Any other private document need only be identified
as that which it is claimed to be.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 21. When evidence of authenticity of

private document not necessary.– Where a
private document is more than thirty (30) years
old, is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine, and is
unblemished by any alterations or circumstances
of suspicion, no other evidence of its
authenticity need be given.
(ANCIENT DOCUMENT)
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 22. How genuineness of handwriting proved.

– The handwriting of a person may be proved by any
witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such
person because he or she has seen the person write,
or has seen writing purporting to be his or hers upon
which the witness has acted or been charged, and
has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of
such person. Evidence respecting the handwriting
may also be given by a comparison, made by the
witness or the court, with writings admitted or
treated as genuine by the party against whom the
evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the
satisfaction of the judge
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 23. Public documents as evidence. –

Documents consisting of entries in public
records made in the performance of a duty by a
public officer are prima facie evidence of the
facts therein stated. All other public documents
are evidence, even against a third person, of
the fact which gave rise to their execution and
of the date of the latter.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 24. Proof of official record. – The

record of public documents referred to in
paragraph (a) of Section 19, when admissible for
any purpose, may be evidenced by an official
publication thereof or by a copy attested by the
officer having the legal custody of the record,
or by his or her deputy, and accompanied, if the
record is not kept in the Philippines, with a
certifi cate that such officer has the custody.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 25. What attestation of copy must

state.– Whenever a copy of a document or
record is attested for the purpose of evidence,
the attestation must state, in substance, that
the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a
specific part thereof, as the case may be. The
attestation must be under the official seal of
the attesting offi cer, if there be any, or if he or
she be the clerk of a court having a seal, under
the seal of such court.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 26. Irremovability of public record . –

Any public record, an official copy of which is
admissible in evidence, must not be removed
from the office in which it is kept, except upon
order of a court where the inspection of the
record is essential to the just determination of a
pending case.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 27. Public record of a private

document. – An authorized public record of a
private document may be proved by the original
record, or by a copy thereof, attested by the
legal custodian of the record, with an
appropriate certificate that such officer has the
custody.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 28. Proof of lack of record. – A written

statement signed by an officer having the
custody of an official record or by his or her
deputy that[,] after diligent search[,] no record
or entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in
the records of his or her office, accompanied by
a certifi cate as above provided, is admissible as
evidence that the records of his or her office
contain no such record or entry.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 29. How judicial record impeached. –

Any judicial record may be impeached by
evidence of: (a) want of jurisdiction in the court
or judicial officer[;](b) collusion between the
parties[;] or (c) fraud in the party offering the
record, in respect to the proceedings.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 30. Proof of notarial documents. – Every

instrument duly acknowledged or proved and
certified as provided by law, may be presented
in evidence without further proof, the
certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie
evidence of the execution of the instrument or
document involved.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 31. Alteration in document, how to explain.

– The party producing a document as genuine which
has been altered and appears to have been altered
after its execution, in a part material to the
question in dispute, must account for the alteration.
He or she may show that the alteration was made by
another, without his or her concurrence, or was
made with the consent of the parties affected by it,
or was otherwise properly or innocently made, or
that the alteration did not change the meaning or
language of the instrument. If he or she fails to do
that, the document shall not be admissible in
evidence.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 32. Seal.– There shall be no difference

between sealed and unsealed private documents
insofar as their admissibility as evidence is
concerned.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF
DOCUMENTS (Rule 132, Sec.19-33)

Section 33. Documentary evidence in an

unofficial language.– Documents written in an
unofficial language shall not be admitted as
evidence, unless accompanied with a translation
into English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of
proceedings, parties or their attorneys are
directed to have such translation prepared
before trial.
• recitations
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

• Testimonial or oral evidence is evidence

elicited from the mouth of a witness as
distinguished from real and documentary
evidence. It is sometimes called “viva voce
evidence which literally means “living voice”
or by word of mouth. In this kind of evidence,
a human being is called to the stand, is asked
questions, and answers the questions asked of
him. The person who gives the testimony is
called a “witness”.
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

Section 21. Witnesses; their qualifications.– All

persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can
make known their perception to others, may be
witnesses.
Religious or political belief, interest in the
outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime,
unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be a
ground for disqualification.
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

Section 22. Testimony confined to personal

knowledge.– A witness can testify only to those
facts which he or she knows of his or her
personal knowledge; that is, which are derived
from his or her own perception.
WHO CAN BE A WITNESS

• ALL persons who can perceive, and in

perceiving, can make known their perception
to others, may be a witness.
• Only to those facts which he or she knows of
his or her personal knowledge; that is, which
are derived from his or her own perception.
• Religious or political belief, interest in the
outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime
unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be
a ground for disqualification.
DISQUALIFICATION BY
REASON OF MARRIAGE

MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION RULE

Section 23. Disqualification by reason of
marriage. – During their marriage, the husband
or the wife cannot testify against the other
without the consent of the affected spouse,
except in a civil case by one against the other,
or in a criminal case for a crime committed by
one against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants.
MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION
RULE: REASONS

• There is identity of interest between husband

and wife;
• If one were to testify for or against the other,
there is a consequent danger of perjury;
• The policy of the law is to guard the security
and confidences of private life, even at the
risk of an occasional failure of justice and to
prevent domestic disunion and unhappiness;
and
• Where there is want of domestic tranquility
there is danger of punishing one spouse
through the hostile testimony of the other.
DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON
OF PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
Section 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged
communication[s] . – The following persons cannot
testify as to matters learned in confidence in the
following cases:
(a) The husband or the wife, during or after the
marriage, cannot be examined without the
consent of the other as to any communication
received in confidence by one from the other
during the marriage except in a civil case by one
against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the other or the latter’s
direct descendants or ascendants.
(MARITAL PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION)
MARITAL PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATION

ELEMENTS:
1. there must be a valid marriage between the
husband and wife
2. there is a communication received in
confidence by one from the other; and
3. the confidential communication was received
during the marriage

The law insures absolute freedom of

communication between the spouse by making it
privileged
DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON
OF PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
2. Attorney-Client Privilege
3. Physician-Patient Privilege
4. Priest/Minister-Penitent Privilege
5. Privilege Communications to Public Officers

The communication shall remain privileged,

even in the hands of a third person who may
have obtained the information, provided that
the original parties to the communication took
reasonable precaution to protect its
confidentiality.
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE

Rule 130, Section 24(b)- An attorney or person

reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to
engage in the practice of law cannot, without the
consent of the client, be examined as to any
communication made by the client to him or her, or
his or her advice given thereon in the course of, or
with a view to, professional employment, nor can an
attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or other
persons assisting the attorney be examined without
the consent of the client and his or her employer,
concerning any fact the knowledge of which has
been acquired in such capacity, except in the
following cases:
Cont.

(i) Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the services or advice of the

lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit
or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should have
known to be a crime or fraud;
(ii) Claimants through same deceased client. As to a communication
relevant to an issue between parties who claim through the same
deceased client, regardless of whether the claims are by testate or
intestate or by inter vivos transaction;
(iii) Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a communication relevant
to an issue of breach of duty by the lawyer to his or her client, or
by the client to his or her lawyer;
(iv) Document attested by the lawyer. As to a communication relevant
to an issue concerning an attested document to which the lawyer is
an attesting witness; or
(v) Joint clients. As to a communication relevant to a matter of
common interest between two [(2)] or more clients if the
communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained or
consulted in common, when off ered in an action between any of
the clients, unless they have expressly agreed otherwise
PHYSICIAN-PATIENT PRIVILEGE

Rule 130, Section24(c)-A physician, psychotherapist

or person reasonably believed by the patient to be
authorized to practice medicine or psychotherapy
cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the
patient, be examined as to any confidential
communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or
treatment of the patient’s physical, mental or
emotional condition, including alcohol or drug
addiction, between the patient and his or her
physician or psychotherapist. This privilege also
applies to persons, including members of the
patient’s family, who have participated in the
diagnosis or treatment of the patient under the
direction of the physician or psychotherapist.
Cont.

A “psychotherapist” is:
(a) A person licensed to practice medicine
engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of a
mental or emotional condition, or
(b) A person licensed as a psychologist by the
government while similarly engaged.
PRIEST/MINISTER-PENITENT
PRIVILEGE

Rule 130, Section 130(d)- A minister, priest or

person reasonably believed to be so cannot,
without the consent of the affected person, be
examined as to any communication or
confession made to or any advice given by him
or her, in his or her professional character, in
the course of discipline enjoined by the church
to which the minister or priest belongs.
PRIVILEGE COMMUNICATIONS TO
PUBLIC OFFICERS

Rule 130, Section 24(e)- A public officer cannot

be examined during or after his or her tenure as
to communications made to him or her in
official confidence, when the court finds that
the public interest would suffer by the
disclosure.
TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE

PARENTAL AND FILIAL PRIVILEGE

Section 25. Parental and filial privilege. – No
person shall be compelled to testify against his
or her parents, other direct ascendants,
children or other direct descendants, except
when such testimony is indispensable in a crime
against that person or by one parent against the
other.
TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE

Section 26 . Privilege relating to trade secrets.

– A person cannot be compelled to testify about
any trade secret, unless the non-disclosure will
conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. When
disclosure is directed, the court shall take such
protective measure as the interest of the owner
of the trade secret and of the parties and the
furtherance of justice may require.
HEARSAY RULE

Section 37. Hearsay.– Hearsay is a statement

other than one made by the declarant while
testifying at a trial or hearing, offered to prove
the truth of the facts asserted therein. A
statement is (1) an oral or written assertion or
(2) a non-verbal conduct of a person, if it is
intended by him or her as an assertion. Hearsay
evidence is inadmissible except as otherwise
provided in these Rules.
Cont.

A statement is not hearsay if the declarant

testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to
cross-examination concerning the statement,
and the statement is (a) inconsistent with the
declarant’s testimony, and was given under oath
subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial,
hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition;
(b) consistent with the declarant’s testimony
and is offered to rebut an express or implied
charge against the declarant of recent
fabrication or improper influence or motive; or
(c) one of identification of a person made after
perceiving him or her.
HEARSAY EVIDENCE

• Sec. 36, Rule 130 states that a witness can

testify only to those facts which he knows of
his personal knowledge; that is, which are
derived from his own perception, except as
otherwise provided in these rules.

• Evidence is called hearsay when its probative

force depends, in whole or in part, on the
competency and credibility of some persons
other than the witness by whom it is sought to
produce it.
cont..

• Hearsay evidence is not allowed because the witness

cannot be effectively cross-examined on the matters he
testified to.
• The admission of hearsay evidence would be a violation
of the constitutional provision that the accused shall
enjoy the right to confront the witnesses testifying
against him and to cross-examine them.
Elements of hearsay evidence:
• 1. there must be an out-of-court statement. (oral or
written); and
• 2. the statement is repeated and offered by the witness
in court to prove the truth of the matters asserted by
the statement.
INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT
STATEMENTS

• The ban on hearsay evidence does not cover

independently relevant statements, or those
statements which are relevant independently
of whether they are true or not.
• They are admissible because the statement
itself is either the very fact in issue or a
circumstantial evidence of a fact in issue.
• Ex. Newspaper account is admissible only to
prove that there was a publication and merely
the tenor of the news, but not its truth.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

The following are the exceptions to the hearsay evidence:

• 1. Dying declarations
• 2. Declarations against interest
• 3. Act or declaration against pedigree
• 4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
• 5. Common reputation
• 6. Part of the res gestae
• 7. Entries in the course of business
• 8. Commercial list and the like
• 9. Learned treaties
• 10. Testimony or deposition at a former trial
DYING DECLARATION

Section 38. Dying declaration. – The declaration

of a dying person, made under the consciousness
of an impending death, may be received in any
case wherein his or her death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and
surrounding circumstances of such death.
Cont.

• The declaration of a dying person, made under the

consciousness of an impending death, may be
received in any case wherein his death is the
subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and
surrounding circumstances of such death. (Sec. 38
Rule 130).

• Rationale: No person who knows of his impending

death would make a careless or false accusation. A
dying declaration is entitled to the highest respect.
The culprit would go free if the victim’s dying
declarations were excluded.
Cont..

ELEMENTS OF DYING DECLARATION:

1. that the declaration is one made by a dying person;
2. that the declaration was made by said dying person
under the consciousness of his imminent death
3. that the declaration refers to the cause and
circumstances surrounding the death of the declarant
and not of anyone else;
4. that the declaration is offered in a case where the
declarant’s death is the subject of inquiry;
5. the declarant is competent as a witness had he
survived;
6. the declarant should have died.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 39. Statement of decedent or person of unsound

mind. – In an action against an executor or administrator
or other representative of a deceased person, or against a
person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against
the estate of such deceased person or against such person
of unsound mind, where a party or assignor of a party or a
person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted testifi es on a
matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased
person or before the person became of unsound mind, any
statement of the deceased or the person of unsound mind,
may be received in evidence if the statement was made
upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or the
person of unsound mind at a time when the matter had
been recently perceived by him or her and while his or her
recollection was clear. Such statement, however, is
inadmissible if made under circumstances indicating its
lack of trustworthiness.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 40. Declaration against interest. – The

declaration made by a person deceased or unable to
testify against the interest of the declarant, if the
fact asserted in the declaration was at the time it
was made so far contrary to the declarant’s own
interest that a reasonable person in his or her
position would not have made the declaration unless
he or she believed it to be true, may be received in
evidence against himself or herself or his or her
successors in interest and against third persons. A
statement tending to expose the declarant to
criminal liability and offered to exculpate the
accused is not admissible unless corroborating
circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of
the statement.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 41. Act or declaration about pedigree. – The

act or declaration of a person deceased or unable to
testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person
related to him or her by birth[,] adoption, or
marriage or, in the absence thereof, with whose
family he or she was so intimately associated as to
be likely to have accurate information concerning his
or her pedigree, may be received in evidence where
it occurred before the controversy, and the
relationship between the two [(2)] persons is shown
by evidence other than such act or declaration. The
word “pedigree” includes relationship, family
genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when
and the places where these facts occurred, and the
names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of
family history intimately connected with pedigree.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 42. Family reputation or tradition

regarding pedigree. – The reputation or tradition
existing in a family previous to the controversy,
in respect to the pedigree of any one of its
members, may be received in evidence if the
witness testifying thereon be also a member of
the family, either by consanguinity[,] affinity, or
adoption. Entries in family bibles or other family
books or charts, engraving on rings, family
portraits and the like, may be received as
evidence of pedigree.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 43. Common reputation. – Common

reputation existing previous to the controversy,
as to boundaries of or customs affecting lands in
the community and reputation as to events of
general history important to the community, or
respecting marriage or moral character, may be
given in evidence. Monuments and inscriptions
in public places may be received as evidence of
common reputation.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 44. Part of the res gestae. – Statements

made by a person while a startling occurrence is
taking place or immediately prior or subsequent
thereto[,] under the stress of excitement caused
by the occurrence with respect to the
circumstances thereof, may be given in
evidence as part of the res gestae . So, also,
statements accompanying an equivocal act
material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance, may be received as part of the res
gestae
PARTS OF RES GESTAE

• Statements made by a person while a startling

occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or
subsequent thereto with respect to the
circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence
as part of res gestae. So, also, statements
accompanying an equivocal act material to the
issue, and giving it a legal significance, may be
received as part of res gestae (Sec. 42 Rule 130)

• Use of res gestae is limited to two matters: (1)

spontaneous statements and (2) verbal acts.
SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS

Spontaneous statements (spontaneous exclamations

or excited utterances) to be admitted in evidence
must have the following characteristics:
1. that there is startling event or occurrence taking
place;
2. that while the event is taking place or
immediately prior to or subsequent thereto, a
statement has been made;
3. the statement were made before the declarant
had the time to contrive or devise a falsehood;
and
4. that statements relate to the circumstances of
the startling event or occurrence
When all these conditions are met, we have a
spontaneous statement constituting an exception to
the rule barring hearsay statements.
Illustration:

• Dencio barged into the house of Marcela, ties her to a

chair and robbed her of assorted pieces of jewelry and
money. Dencio then brought Candida, Marcela’s maid to a
bedroom where he raped her. Marcela could hear
Candida crying and saying “Huwag, maawa ka sa akin”.
After raping Candida, Densio left the house with the loot.
Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to the police
station and told the police officer that Dencio barged
into the house of Marcela and robber her. Candida also
told the police that despite her pleas, Dencio had raped
her. The policeman noticed that Candida was hysterical
and on the verge of collapse. During trial, Candida can no
longer be located.
• QUESTION: If the prosecution presents the police officer
to testify on what Candida told him, would such
testimony of the policeman be hearsay?
Cont.

ANSWER:
As a rule, the testimony would be hearsay if
offered to prove the truth of the statements of
Candida, but as an exception to the hearsay
rule, it is admissible. The statements made by a
person while a startling occurrence is taking
place, or immediately prior or subsequent
thereto with respect to the circumstances
thereof, may be given in evidence as part of the
res gestae. The statements made by Candida to
the police officer fall within the res gestae rule.
VERBAL ACTS

The rule defines a verbal act as a statement

accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue,
and giving it a legal significance. To be admissible,
the following requisites must be present:
1. the principal act to be characterized must be
equivocal;
2. the equivocal act must be material to the issue;
3. the statement must accompany the equivocal
act; and
4. the statement gives a legal significance to the
equivocal act.
Illustration

• The statement “I will hit you with this” as he

swung the bat at the victim. The statement does
not explain the act in the physical injuries case.
Because of the nature of the case, the
accompanying words will not add a new meaning to
it.
• However, where indictment is attempted homicide
where intent to kill is an element, the swinging of
the bat may be ambiguous as to whether or not it
was swung with or without intent to kill. The
utterance accompanying the act may explain the
nature of the act. Thus, if the accused, while
swinging at the victim said “Adios Amigo, see you
in hell” the statement may help explain the
purpose of the act of the accused.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

• Section 45.
• Records of regularly conducted business activity.
• – A memorandum, report, record or data
• compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made by
writing, typing, electronic,
• optical or other similar means at or near the time of or from transmission
or supply of information by a
• person with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular course or conduct
of a business activity, and such
• was the regular practice to make the memorandum, report, record, or
data compilation by electronic,
• optical or similar means, all of which are shown by the testimony of the
custodian or other qualifi ed
• witnesses, is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 46. Entries in official records. – Entries

in official records made in the performance of
his or her duty by a public offi cer of the
Philippines, or by a person in the performance
of a duty specially enjoined by law, are prima
facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 47. Commercial lists and the like. –

Evidence of statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation contained in a
list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to prove
the truth of any relevant matter so stated if
that compilation is published for use by persons
engaged in that occupation and is generally used
and relied upon by them therein.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 48. Learned treatises. – A published

treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of
history, law, science, or art is admissible as
tending to prove the truth of a matter stated
therein if the court takes judicial notice, or a
witness expert in the subject testifies, that the
writer of the statement in the treatise,
periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his or
her profession or calling as expert in the
subject.
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 49. Testimony or deposition at a former

proceeding. – The testimony or deposition of a
witness deceased or out of the Philippines or
who cannot, with due diligence, be found
therein, or is unavailable or otherwise unable to
testify, given in a former case or proceeding,
judicial oradministrative, involving the same
parties and subject matter, may be given in
evidence against the adverse party who had the
opportunity to cross-examine him or her
EXCEPTIONS: HEARSAY RULE

Section 50. Residual exception. – A statement not

specifically covered by any of the foregoing exceptions,
having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of
trustworthiness, is admissible if the court determines that
(a) the statement is off ered as evidence of a material
fact; (b) the statement is more probative on the point for
which it is offered than any other evidence which the
proponent can procure through reasonable eff orts; and
(c) the general purposes of these Rules and the interests
of justice will be best served by admission of the
statement into evidence. However, a statement may not
be admitted under this exception unless the proponent
makes known to the adverse party, sufficiently in advance
of the hearing, or by the pre-trial stage in the case of a
trial of the main case, to provide the adverse party with a
fair opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent’s
intention to offer the statement and the particulars of it,
including the name and address of the declarant.
OPINION RULE

Section 51. General rule . – The opinion of a witness is not

admissible, except as indicated in the following sections.
Section 52. Opinion of expert witness. – The opinion of a witness on
a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience, training or
education, which he or she is shown to possess, may be received in
evidence.
Section 53. Opinion of ordinary witnesses. – The opinion of a
witness, for which proper basis is given, may be received in
evidence regarding –
(a) The identity of a person about whom he or she has adequate
knowledge;
(b) A handwriting with which he or she has suffi cient familiarity;
and
(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he or she is
sufficiently acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his or her impressions of the
emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
OPINION EVIDENCE

As a rule, opinion evidence is not admissible, except:

OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS – the opinion of expert
witness on a matter requiring special knowledge,
skill, experience or training which he is shown to
possess, may be received in evidence
OPINION OF ORDINARY WITNESS – the opinion of a
witness for which proper basis is given may be
received in evidence regarding: (1) the identity of a
person about whom he has adequate knowledge (2) a
handwriting which he has sufficient familiarity (3) the
mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently
acquainted (4) his impressions of the emotion,
behavior, condition or appearance of a person
WEIGHT TO BE GIVEN TO EXPERT
WITNESS
Rule 133, Section 5. Weight to be given opinion of
expert witness, how determined. –In any case where the
opinion of an expert witness is received in evidence, the
court has a wide latitude of discretion in determining the
weight to be given to such opinion, and for that purpose
may consider the following:
(a) Whether the opinion is based upon sufficient facts or
data;
(b) Whether it is the product of reliable principles and
methods;
(c) Whether the witness has applied the principles and
methods reliably to the facts of the case; and
(d) Such other factors as the court may deem helpful to
make such determination.
CHARACTER EVIDENCE

Section 54. Character evidence not generally

admissible; exceptions.– Evidence of a person’s
character or a trait of character is not
admissible for the purpose of proving action in
conformity therewith on a particular occasion,
Cont.

• Character is the aggregate of the moral qualities

which belong to and distinguish an individual
person.

• Character evidence is, as a rule, not admissible.

Character is generally irrelevant in determining
a controversy because the evidence of a person’s
character or trait is not admissible to prove that
a person acted in conformity with such character
or trait in a particular occasion.
EXCEPTIONS: CHARACTER
EVIDENCE
(a) In Criminal Cases:
(1) The character of the offended party may be proved if it
tends to establish in any reasonable degree the
probability or improbability of the offense charged;
(2) The accused may prove his or her good moral
character[,] pertinent to the moral trait involved in the
offense charged. However, the prosecution may not
prove his or her bad moral character unless on rebuttal.

(b) In Civil Cases:

Evidence of the moral character of a party in a civil case is
admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character
involved in the case.
Cont.

(c) In Criminal and Civil Cases:

Evidence of the good character of a witness is not
admissible until such character has been impeached.
In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait
of character of a person is admissible, proof may be
made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony
in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination,
inquiry is allowable into relevant specifi c instances
of conduct.
In cases in which character or a trait of character of
a person is an essential element of a charge, claim
or defense, proof may also be made of specific
instances of that person’s conduct.
• recitations
RULE 132:
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE

OPEN COURT EXAMINATION

Sec. 1, Rule 132. The examination of witnesses
presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in
open court, and under oath or affirmation.
Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or
the question calls for a different mode of answer,
the answers of the witness shall be given orally.

This method allows the court the opportunity to

observe the demeanor of the witness and also
allows the adverse party to cross-examine the
witness
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

WITNESS MUST TAKE EITHER AN OATH OR

AFFIRMATION

An oath is an outward pledge made under an

immediate sense of responsibility to God or a
solemn appeal to the Supreme Being in
attestation of the truth of some statement
An affirmation is a substitute for an oath and is
a solemn and formal declaration that the
witness will tell the truth
Cont..

Section 2. Proceedings to be recorded. – The entire

proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the
questions propounded to a witness and his or her
answers thereto, and the statements made by the
judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses
with reference to the case, shall be recorded by
means of shorthand or stenotype or by other means
of recording found suitable by the court.
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made
by the offi cial stenographer, stenotypist or recorder
and certified as correct by him or her, shall be
deemed prima facie a correct statement of such
proceedings
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A
WITNESS
Obligation: A witness has an obligation to answer
questions, although his answer may tend to establish a
claim against him
Rights:
1. not to give an answer that will tend to subject him to a
penalty for an offense;
2. to be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
questions and from harsh or insulting demeanor;
3. not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
4. not to be detained longer than the interest on justice
requires; and
5. not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his
reputation, unless it is the very fact at issue or to a
fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed
ORDER IN THE EXAMINATION OF
AN INDIVIDUAL WITNESS

Section 4. Order in the examination of an

individual witness.– The order in which an
individual witness may be examined is as
follows:
(a) Direct examination by the proponent;
(b) Cross-examination by the opponent;
(c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
(d) Re-cross[-]examination by the opponent.
Cont.

Section 5. Direct examination. – Direct examination

is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party
presenting him or her on the facts relevant to the
issue.

Section 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and

extent.– Upon the termination of the direct
examination, the witness may be cross-examined by
the adverse party on any relevant matter, with
sufficient fullness and freedom to test his or her
accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest
or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important
facts bearing upon the issue.
Cont.

Section 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose and

extent.– After the cross-examination of the witness has
been concluded, he or she may be re-examined by the
party calling him or her to explain or supplement his or
her answers given during the cross-examination. On re-
direct examination, questions on matters not dealt with
during the cross-examination may be allowed by the court
in its discretion.

Section 8. Re-cross[-]examination. – Upon the conclusion

of the re-direct examination, the adverse party may re-
cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his or her
re-direct examination, and also on such other matters as
may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
ORDER OF EXAMINATION

1. Direct Examination – this is the examination in

chief of a witness by the party presenting him in the
facts relevant to the issue. It is actually a procedure
for obtaining information from one’s own witness in
an orderly fashion

2. Cross-Examination – this is the examination of

the witness by the adverse party after said witness
has given his testimony on direct examination.
Purpose of cross examination are (1) to bring out
facts favorable to counsel’s client not established by
the direct testimony; and (2) to enable counsel to
impeach or to impair the credibility of the witness
Cont..

3. Re-Direct Examination – this examination is

conducted after the cross examination off the
witness. The party who called the witness on
direct examination may re-examine the same
witness to explain or supplement his answers
given during the cross examination. It may also
be an opportunity to rehabilitate a witness
whose credibility has been damaged.

4. Re-Cross Examination – here the adverse

party may question the witness on matters
stated in his re-direct examination
Cont.

Section 9. Recalling witness.– After the

examination of a witness by both sides has been
concluded, the witness cannot be recalled
without leave of the court. The court will grant
or withhold leave in its discretion, as the
interests of justice may require.
TYPES OF QUESTIONS

1. Leading – it is one where the answer is already supplied by

the examiner into the mouth of the witness
2. Misleading – a question which cannot be answered without
making an unintended admission
3. Compound– a question which calls for a single answer to
more than one question
4. Argumentative– a type of leading question which reflects the
examiners interpretation of the fact
5. Speculative – a question which assumes a disputed fact not
stated by the witness as true
6. Conclusionary – a question which acts for an opinion which
the witness is not qualified to answer
7. Cumulative – a question which has already been answered
LEADING AND MISLEADING
QUESTIONS
Section 10. Leading and misleading questions.– A question which
suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party
desires is a leading question. It is not allowed, except:
(a) On cross-examination;
(b) On preliminary matters;
(c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible
answers from a witness who is ignorant, a child of tender years,
is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an offi cer, director, or
managing agent of a public or private corporation[,] or of a
partnership or association which is an adverse party.

A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet

testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which he or she has
previously stated. It is not allowed.
RULE ON IMPEACHING A WITNESS

Section 11. Impeachment of adverse party’s

witness.– A witness may be impeached by the
party against whom he or she was called, by
contradictory evidence, by evidence that his or
her general reputation for truth, honesty, or
integrity is bad, or by evidence that he or she
has made at other times statements inconsistent
with his or her present testimony, but not by
evidence of particular wrongful acts, except
that it may be shown by the examination of the
witness, or record of the judgment, that he or
she has been convicted of an offense.
Cont.

Section 12. Impeachment by evidence of

conviction of crime. – For the purpose of
impeaching a witness, evidence that he or she
has been convicted by final judgment of a crime
shall be admitted if (a) the crime was
punishable by a penalty in excess of one (1)
year; or (b) the crime involved moral turpitude,
regardless of the penalty.
However, evidence of a conviction is not
admissible if the conviction has been the
subject of an amnesty or annulment of the
conviction.
Cont.

Section 13. Party may not impeach his or her own witness.
– Except with respect to witnesses referred to in paragraphs
(d) and (e) of Section 10 of this Rule, the party presenting
the witness is not allowed to impeach his or her credibility.
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so
declared by the court upon adequate showing of his or her
adverse interest, unjustifi ed reluctance to testify, or his or
her having misled the party into calling him or her to the
witness stand.
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness
who is an adverse party, may be impeached by the party
presenting him or her in all respects as if he or she had been
called by the adverse party, except by evidence of his or her
bad character. He or she may also be impeached and cross-
examined by the adverse party, but such cross-examination
must only be on the subject matter of his or her
examination-in-chief.
Cont.

Section 14. How witness impeached by

evidence of inconsistent statements. – Before
a witness can be impeached by evidence that he
or she has made at other times statements
inconsistent with his or her present testimony,
the statements must be related to him or her,
with the circumstances of the times and places
and the persons present, and he or she must be
asked whether he or she made such statements,
and if so, allowed to explain them. If the
statements be in writing[,] they must be shown
to the witness before any question is put to him
or her concerning them.
EXCLUSION AND SEPARATION OF
WITNESS
Section 15. Exclusion and separation of witnesses.
– The court, motu proprio or upon motion, shall
order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear
the testimony of other witnesses. This rule does not
authorize exclusion of (a) a party who is a natural
person, (b) a duly designated representative of a
juridical entity which is a party to the case, (c) a
person whose presence is essential to the
presentation of the party’s cause, or (d) a person
authorized by a statute to be present.
The court may also cause witnesses to be kept
separate and to be prevented from conversing with
one another, directly or through intermediaries, until
all shall have been examined.
Cont. Rule 132

Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum.–

A witness may be allowed to refresh his or her memory
respecting a fact by anything written or recorded by
himself or herself, or under his or her direction, at the
time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter,
or at any other time when the fact was fresh in his or her
memory and he or she knew that the same was correctly
written or recorded; but in such case, the writing or
record must be produced and may be inspected by the
adverse party, who may, if he or she chooses, cross-
examine the witness upon it and may read it in evidence.
A witness may also testify from such a writing or record,
though he or she retains no recollection of the particular
facts, if he or she is able to swear that the writing or
record correctly stated the transaction when made; but
such evidence must be received with caution.
Cont. Rule 132

Section 17. When part of transaction, writing

or record given in evidence, the remainder
admissible. – When part of an act, declaration,
conversation, writing or record is given in
evidence by one party, the whole of the same
subject may be inquired into by the other, and
when a detached act, declaration, conversation,
writing or record is given in evidence, any other
act, declaration, conversation, writing or record
necessary to its understanding may also be given
in evidence.
Cont. Rule 132

Section 18. Right to inspect writing shown to

witness. –Whenever a writing is shown to a
witness, it may be inspected by the adverse
party.
OFFER AND OBJECTIONS

Section 34. Offer of evidence. – The court shall

consider no evidence which has not been formally
offered. The purpose for which the evidence is off
ered must be specifi ed.

Section 35. When to make offer. – All evidence

must be offered orally.
The offer of the testimony of a witness in evidence
must be made at the time the witness is called to
testify.
The offer of documentary and object evidence shall
be made after the presentation of a party’s
testimonial evidence.
Cont.

Section 36. Objection. – Objection to offer of

evidence must be made orally immediately after
the offer is made.
Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack
of a formal offer must be made as soon as the
witness begins to testify. Objection to a
question propounded in the course of the oral
examination of a witness must be made as soon
as the grounds therefor become reasonably
apparent.
The grounds for the objections must be
specified.
WHEN TO MAKE AN OFFER OF
EVIDENCE

• TESTIMONY OF A WITNESS – offer must be

made at the time the witness is called to
testify
• OBJECT AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE – shall
be offered after the presentation of a party’s
testimonial evidence.
• The court shall consider no evidence which has
not been formally offered. The purpose for
which the evidence is offered must be
specified.
WHEN TO OBJECT TO THE OFFER
OF EVIDENCE

• Objection to evidence (object and

documentary) offered orally must be made
immediately after the offer is made.
• Objection to the testimony of a witness for
lack of a formal offer must be made as soon as
the witness begins to testify
• Objection to a question propounded in the
course of the oral examination of a witness
shall be made as soon as the grounds therefore
shall become reasonably apparent.
CONTINUING OBJECTION

Section 37. When repetition of objection

unnecessary. – When it becomes reasonably
apparent in the course of the examination of a
witness that the questions being propounded are
of the same class as those to which objection
has been made, whether such objection was
sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary
to repeat the objection, it being sufficient for
the adverse party to record his or her continuing
objection to such class of questions.
RULING ON THE OBJECTION

Section 38. Ruling.– The ruling of the court must be

given immediately after the objection is made,
unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to
inform itself on the question presented; but the
ruling shall always be made during the trial and at
such time as will give the party against whom it is
made an opportunity to meet the situation presented
by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection
need not be stated. However, if the objection is
based on two [(2)] or more grounds, a ruling
sustaining the objection on one [(1)] or some of
them must specify the ground or grounds relied
upon.
STRIKING OUT OF ANSWER

Section 39. Striking out of answer. – Should a

witness answer the question before the adverse
party had the opportunity to voice fully its
objection to the same, or where a question is
not objectionable, but the answer is not
responsive, or where a witness testifies without
a question being posed or testifies beyond limits
set by the court, or when the witness does a
narration instead of answering the question, and
such objection is found to be meritorious, the
court shall sustain the objection and order such
answer, testimony or narration to be stricken off
the record.
TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE

Section 40. Tender of excluded evidence.– If

documents or things offered in evidence are
excluded by the court, the offeror may have the
same attached to or made part of the record. If
the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may
state for the record the name and other
personal circumstances of the witness and the
substance of the proposed testimony.
BURDEN OF PROOF AND
BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
Rule 131, Section 1. Burden of proof and burden of
evidence . – Burden of proof is the duty of a party to
present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his or her claim or defense by the amount
of evidence required by law. Burden of proof never
shifts.

Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present

evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a fact in
issue to establish a prima facie case. Burden of
evidence may shift from one party to the other in
the course of the proceedings, depending on the
exigencies of the case.
 EVIDENCE vs PROOF

• Evidence – the means to arrive at a conclusion.

Under the rules, evidence is defined as the means,
sanctioned by the rules, for ascertainment in a
judicial proceeding, the truth respecting a matter
of fact

• Proof – the result of introducing evidence. The

establishment of requisite degree of belief in the
mind of the judge as to the facts in issue. It refers
to the accumulation of evidence sufficient to
persuade the trial court.
PRESUMPTIONS

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.
KINDS:
1. Conclusive – when the presumption becomes
irrebuttable upon the presentation of the evidence
and any evidence tending to rebut the presumption
is not admissible.
2. Disputable – if it may be contradicted or overcome
by other evidence
PRESUMPTIONS: CONCLUSIVE

Section 2. Conclusive presumptions. –The following

are instances of conclusive presumptions:
(a) Whenever a party has, by his or her own
declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and
deliberately led another to believe a particular
thing true, and to act upon such belief, he or she
cannot, in any litigation arising out of such
declaration, act or omission, be permitted to
falsify it; and
(b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of
his or her landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of landlord and
tenant between them.
PRESUMPTIONS: DISPUTABLE

Section 3. Disputable presumptions. – The following

presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be
contradicted and overcome by other evidence:
(a) That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
(b) That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
(c) That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his
or her voluntary act;
(d) That a person takes ordinary care of his or her concerns;
(e) That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if
produced;
(f) That money paid by one to another was due to the
latter;
(g) That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the
latter;
Cont.

(h) That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been

paid;
(i) That prior rents or installments had been paid when a
receipt for the later one is produced;
(j) That a person found in possession of a thing taken in
the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker and the
doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a
person possesses, or exercises acts of ownership over, are
owned by him or her;
(k) That a person in possession of an order on himself or
herself for the payment of the money, or the delivery of
anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing
accordingly;
(l) That a person acting in a public office was regularly
appointed or elected to it;
Cont.

(m) That official duty has been regularly performed;

(n) That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or
elsewhere, was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
(o) That all the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before
the court and passed upon by it; and in like manner that all matters within
an issue raised in a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before the
arbitrators and passed upon by them;
(p) That private transactions have been fair and regular;
(q) That the ordinary course of business has been followed;
(r) That there was a sufficient consideration for a contract;
(s) That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient
consideration;
(t) That an indorsement of a negotiable instrument was made before the
instrument was overdue and at the place where the instrument is dated;
(u) That a writing is truly dated;
(v) That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular
course of the mail;
Cont.

(w) That after an absence of seven [(7)] years, it being unknown whether or not the
absentee still lives, he or she is considered dead for all purposes, except for those of
succession. The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his or
her succession until after an absence of ten [(10)] years. If he or she disappeared after
the age of seventy- five [(75)] years, an absence of five [(5)] years shall be sufficient in
order that his or her succession may be opened.
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of the
estate among the heirs:
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft which is missing,
who has not been heard of for four [(4)] years since the loss of the vessel or
aircraft;
(2) A member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed hostilities, and has
been missing for four [(4)] years;
(3) A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and whose
existence has not been known for four [(4)] years; and
(4) If a married person has been absent for four [(4)] consecutive years, the spouse
present may contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has a well-founded belief
that the absent spouse is already dead. In case of disappearance, where there is a
danger of death[, under] the circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of
only two [(2)] years shall be suffi cient for the purpose of contracting a subsequent
marriage. However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present must
institute summary proceeding[s] as provided in the Family Code and in the rules for
declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the eff ect
of reappearance of the absent spouse[;]
Cont.

(x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing

acquiesced in was conformable to the law or fact;
(y) That things have happened according to the ordinary course of
nature and ordinary nature habits of life;
(z) That persons acting as copartners have entered into a contract of
copartnership;
(aa) That a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and
wife have entered into a lawful contract of marriage;
(bb) That 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 a void marriage, has been obtained by their joint eff orts,
work or industry[;]
(cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are
not capacitated to marry each other and who have acquired
property 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[;]
Cont.

(dd) That if the marriage is terminated and the mother

contracted another marriage within three hundred [(300)]
days after such termination of the former marriage, these
rules shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary:
(1) A child born before one hundred eighty (180) days
after the solemnization of the subsequent marriage is
considered to have been conceived during [the
former] marriage, [provided] it be born within the
three hundred [(300)] days after the termination of
the former marriage; and
(2) A child born after one hundred eighty (180) days
following the celebration of the subsequent marriage
is considered to have been conceived during such
marriage, even though it be born within the three
hundred [(300)] days after the termination of the
former marriage
Cont.

(ee) That a thing once proved to exist continues as long as is

usual with things of that nature;
(ff ) That the law has been obeyed;
(gg) That a printed or published book, purporting to be
printed or published by public authority, was so printed or
published;
(hh) That 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;
(ii) That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to
convey real property to a particular person has actually
conveyed it to him or her when such presumption is
necessary to perfect the title of such person or his or her
successor in interest;
Cont.

(jj) That except for purposes of succession, when two [(2)] persons
perish in the same calamity, such as wreck, batte, or conflagration,
and it is not shown who died first, and there are no particular
circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is
determined from the probabilities resulting from the strength and
the age of the sexes, according to the following rules:
1. If both were under the age of fifteen [(15)] years, the older is
deemed to have survived;
2. If both were above the age of sixty [(60)], the younger is
deemed to have survived;
3. If one is under fifteen [(15)] and the other above sixty [(60)],
the former is deemed to have survived;
4. If both be over fi fteen [(15)] and under sixty [(60)], and the sex
be different, the male is deemed to have survived, if the sex be
the same, the older; and
5. If one be under fifteen [(15)] or over sixty [(60)], and the other
between those ages, the latter is deemed to have survived;
Cont.

(kk) That if there is a doubt, as between two (2)

or more persons who are called to succeed ach
other, as to which of them died first, whoever
alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall
prove the same; in the absence of proof, they
shall be considered to have died at the same
time.
NO PRESUMPTION OF
LEGITIMACY OR ILLEGITIMACY

Section 4. No presumption of legitimacy or

illegitimacy. – There is no presumption of
legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child born after
three hundred (300)]days following the
dissolution of the marriage or the separation of
the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or
illegitimacy of such child must prove his or her
allegation.
PRESUMPTIONS IN CIVIL ACTIONS

Section 5. Presumptions in civil actions and

proceedings. – In all civil actions and
proceedings not otherwise provided for by the
law or these Rules, a presumption imposes on
the party against whom it is directed the burden
of going forward with evidence to rebut or meet
the presumption.
If presumptions are inconsistent, the
presumption that is founded upon weightier
considerations of policy shall apply. If
considerations of policy are of equal weight,
neither presumption applies.
PRESUMPTION AGAINS AN
ACCUSED

Section 6. Presumption against an accused in

criminal cases. – If a presumed fact that
establishes guilt, is an element of the off ense
charged, or negates a defense, the existence of
the basic fact must be proved beyond
reasonable doubt and the presumed fact follows
from the basic fact beyond reasonable doubt.
• recitations
RULE 133: WEIGHT AND
SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE

Quantum of evidence – the totality of evidence

presented for consideration.

Quantum of proof – refers to the degree of

proof required in order to arrive at a conclusion.
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE

Section 1. Preponderance of evidence, how determined.

–In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof must
establish his or her case by a preponderance of evidence.
In determining where the preponderance or superior
weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, the court
may consider all the facts and circumstances of the case,
the witnesses’ manner of testifying, their intelligence,
their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which
they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they
testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony,
their interest or want of interest, and also their personal
credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear
upon the trial. The court may also consider the number of
witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily
with the greater number.
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE
DOUBT

Section 2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt. –In

a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an
acquittal, unless his or her guilt is shown beyond
reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable
doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as,
excluding possibility of error, produces absolute
certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or
that degree of proof which produces conviction
in an unprejudiced mind.
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Section 6. Substantial evidence. – In cases filed

before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a
fact may be deemed established if it is
supported by substantial evidence, or that
amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to justify a
conclusion.
EQUIPOISE RULE/
EQUIPONDERANCE DOCTRINE

• The doctrine refers to a situation where the

evidence of the parties are evenly balanced. In
criminal case, the equipoise rule provides that
where the evidence is evenly balanced, the
constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the
scales in favor of the accused.

• When moral certainty as to culpability hangs in

balance, acquittal on reasonable doubt inevitably
becomes a matter of right.
POWER OF THE COURT TO STOP
FURTHER EVIDENCE

Section 7. Power of the court to stop further

evidence. –The court may stop the introduction
of further testimony upon any particular point
when the evidence upon it is already so full that
more witnesses to the same point cannot be
reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive. This power shall be exercised with
caution.