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

Evidence – (Wigmore) Any knowable fact or group of facts, not a legal or a logical principle, and considered with a view to its being offered
before a legal tribunal for the purpose of producing a persuasion, on the part of the tribunal, as to the truth of a proposition, not of law or
logic, on which the determination of the tribunal is to be asked.

Axioms of Wigmore on the Admissibility of Evidence

1. None but facts having rational, probative value are admissible (Axiom of Relevancy)
2. All facts having rational, probative value are admissible, unless specifically excluded by the rules (Axiom of Competency).

Concept
It must not be excluded by law
It seeks judicial truth not actual truth

Purpose:
To ascertain the truth respecting a matter of fact in a judicial proceeding

Principle of Uniformity
Sec. 2. Rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearing

Why should the rules of evidence be applied uniformly?

So that evidence will also be interpreted uniformly in different courts

Actual truth vs. Legal truth

Thing not proven in court Thing proven in court
Arrived at even before Arrived at after analyzing
analyzing evidence evidence

In general, where does the rules of evidence apply?

In general, the rules of evidence is applied only in judicial proceedings.

Rules shall not apply to:

1. Election cases
2. Land registration
3. Cadastral
4. Naturalization
5. Insolvency proceedings
6. Other cases which the law may provide

Should the rules of evidence be strictly adhered in a proceeding before the Mayor’s office?

No. Being an administrative proceeding, the rules of evidence need not be strictly adhered to in a proceeding before the municipal Mayor.

Are admin bodies bound by the technical rules of evidence?

No. Administrative bodies are not bound by technical rules of evidence

May the civil service, in conducting investigation, admit documents as evidence even if not authenticated?

Yes. Civil service in conducting investigation need not follow technical rules of evidence and may admit documents even if not authenticated

Must evidence be formally submitted for it to be admissible in a naturalization case?

No. In naturalization case, evidence need not be formally submitted for it to be admissible in evidence

May the NLRC, in its appellate jurisdiction, admit evidence not formally offered before the Labor Arbiter?

Yes. In Labor cases, the NLRC (in case of appeal) may admit evidence not formally offered in the Labor Arbiter. Such does not constitute
grave abuse of discretion

May the NLRC validly dispense with the best evidence rule in its discretion?

Yes. In Labor cases, the NLRC may not apply the best evidence rule when a photocopied document is sufficient for examination
Is personal hearing required in trying labor cases?

No. In a Labor case, mere submission of pleadings or position papers is sufficient to reach a decision

Evidence required of administrative bodies – Substantial evidence

Proof vs. Evidence

Probative effect of evidence Means by which a fact is proved

Who has the exclusive right to create or amend rules of evidence? May it be vested?

The SC has such right. The SC has no right to vest such vested right.

Requisites for admissibility of evidence (axioms of evidence):

1. Relevance
2. Not excluded by the rules (Competence)
Evidence in Crim law vs. Evidence in Civil law
Quantum of evidence – proof Quantum of evidence –
beyond reasonable doubt preponderance of evidence
Presumed innocent until proven No presumption as to innocence
guilty
Effect of compromise – Effect of compromise – no
admission of guilt admission

Instances when presentation of evidence may be dispensed with:

1. When there is no question of fact in the case (Thus, any party may file a motion for judgment on the pleadings)
2. When presentation of evidence is dispensed with by the parties (by their agreement)
3. When the plaintiff fails to tender an issue
4. When the court takes judicial notice (evidence is already within the knowledge of the court)
Test for relevance of evidence
1. It is a test of logic
2. There must be a relation between the fact in issue and offered evidence

Relevance on credibility of witness

1. Witness must be credible, such credulity is relevant to his testimony
2. Credibility is tested thru cross-examination

May the prosecution win on basis that the defense failed to present a strong defense against their allegation?

No. This is based on the principle that the prosecution must win on strength of evidence and not on the weakness of defense.

Factum probandum – fact (or proposition) to be established

Factum probans – material evidencing the fact (or proposition) to be established

Eg. In a hacking case with a bolo, the factum probandum is homicide; while, the factum probans are the elements of homicide, to wit:
1. That a person is killed
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying circumstances
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide or infanticide

Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus (false in one, false in all)

If the testimony of a witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with an intention to deceive, the jury may disregard all the witness
testimony.

Requisites for Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus to apply:

1. Witness must be shown to have willfully falsified the truth

2. Existence of prior positive statement on a material point
3. A subsequent testimony counters or is contrary to such prior statement

Eg. In a homicide case of hacking with a bolo, if the witness says that he was in the incident when, in fact, he was actually not, all his other
testimonies as a witness may be disregarded under the principle of falsus in uno falsus in omnibus.

Alibi; Frame-up; Self-defense

Alibi-crumbles when effected by positive identification of witness Alibi is a negative evidence

What must be established in order that alibi may prosper?

1. Presence of accused in another place at the time of commission of offense

2. Physical impossibility for him to be at the scene Frame-up and self-defense like alibi are treated similarly Why is

frame-up inherently weak?

Principle of regularity of duties of public officers It is easily made or concocted

Why is self-defense also a weak defense?

Affirmative defense Also easily concocted

What are the common reasons for delay in reporting of crime?

Self-preservation
Self-denial (in rape cases)

Positive vs. Negative Evidence

When witness affirms that When witness states that facts
certain facts exist does not exist
Not a weak form of evidence Weak form of evidence
Has greater probative value Lesser probative value than
affirmation
May not be corroborated Needs to be corroborated
 In case of contradictions, given In case of contradictions, not
greater weight given greater weight

Irrelevant – not logical evidence

Incompetent – evidence excluded by law
Inadmissible – evidence which does not satisfy the requisites for admissibility
Immaterial – evidence which proves other facts not in issue

Admissibility vs. Credibility

Court is bound to receive (if Worthy of belief (if credible)
admissible)
Does not guaranty credibility

How is a child’s testimony treated in proceedings?

Youthfulness – badge of truth

Minor inconsistensies of child

Strengthens his testimony

Exclusionary rule – evidence which are product of laws or rules, thus excluded and not admitted

Extrinsic policy – evidence may not be admitted due to other things or considerations which must be upheld that is outside the case.

Admissibility vs. Probative value

Whether evidence is considered Whether evidence proves issue
Depends on relevance and Depends on tendency to
competence convince and persuade

Multiple Evidence Admissibility

Evidence may be admissible for 2 or more purposes (Eg. to prove credibility of witness and to prove issue)

It may also be admissible for a purpose but not for other purposes

*Conditional Evidence Admissibility

Certain evidence is presented initially but it does not yet prove a fact in issue but it may be admitted subject to the condition that its
relevance would be proved in the future. (Eg. In a case of double sale wherein a later buyer is presented before the earlier buyers in proving
the existence of double sale)
Curative Admissibility
Court will allow inadmissible evidence to be able to counter a previously offered evidence of an opponent which is inadmissible. It exists when
despite objection of a party, the court still admitted an inadmissible evidence; thus, there must be an objection. (Eg. In a case of reckless
imprudence of a driver, if the prosecution is allowed to prove the past negligence of the driver, the driver should be allowed to show evidence
of his diligence)

Corroborative evidence – supplements that already given to strengthen it

Cumulative evidence – evidence of the same kind or character

Circumstantial evidence (in contrast to direct) – indirectly proves the fact in issue by making inference from other established facts

Positive evidence – evidence affirms facts

Negative evidence – evidence states that facts does not exist

Prima facie evidence (presumptive) – evidence that establishes a fact but not conclusive of its existence or supports a judgment until
contradictory evidence is produced in its rebuttal.

Conclusive evidence – preponderant evidence that may not be disputed and must be accepted by a court as a definitive proof of a fact

Equiponderance (equipoise) of evidence rule – it states that where the evidence of the parties is evenly balanced, the balance of the scale of
justice shall be tilted in favor of the defendant.

Collateral matters
In general, it is a matter not relevant to the fact sought to be established, thus, not admissible:
Exception: if it tends to establish the probability or improbability of the fact (Eg. in proving credibility of witness)

Give some examples of collateral matter.

Fingermark, footprint, and bat left in a homicide case or the resemblance of a child to his father in a case for legal support

Anti-Wiretapping Law
 Evidence obtained in violation of the above shall not be admissible in: (1) judicial, (2) quasi-judicial, (3) legislative, and (4)
administrative hearing or investigation
 Mere existence of such communication is inadmissible
 Does not include recording of open and public communications
 Extends to recording of personal conversations
 Does not include tape recording during altercation because such is not private communication
 Does not include listening to telephone extension lines for such was excluded by legislation
 A non-recorder of such information may also be held liable if proven that he communicated the same, in any form, whether in part or
in whole
 Liability extends to persons who permit the act of wire- tapping
What are the cases when evidence obtained in violation of Anti- Wiretapping Law is inadmissible?

In criminal, civil and administrative proceedings

What are the cases when evidence obtained in violation of Anti- Wiretapping Law may be admissible?

When it is sui generis in other cases such as in impeachment and legislative investigation

What are the forms of the evidence excluded by the Anti- Wiretapping Law?

1. Recordings
2. Its substances, and
3. Its meaning
4. It also extends to the transcriptions

In general, when is the recorded message under Anti- Wiretapping Law illegally obtained?

1. When obtained without consent of the parties, and

2. When what is recorded is a private communication

Requisites before a photo or video recording may be used as evidence under the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act:
 1. The person who obtained the photo or video is a peace officer
2. With written order of the court to use the record
3. The photo or video recording shall be used as evidence in the civil or criminal prosecution of the crime of photo or video
voyeurism

In what instances is the photo or video recording, obtained in violation of the requirement for admissibility under the Anti- Photo
and Video Voyeurism Act, not admissible?

1. Judicial
2. Quasi-judicial
3. Legislative, or
4. Administrative hearing or investigation

Who are the persons liable under the anti-wiretapping law?

1. Person who participated in recording

2. Person who transcribed
3. Person who permitted wiretapping
4. Person who used the communication, whether in part or in whole

Human Security Act

 Law enforcers are allowed to intercept and record communications of: (1) persons suspected, charged or outlawed as terrorists,
and (2) subversive groups who are outlawed because of terrorism
 To be allowed to intercept and record, a written order from the CA must first be procured
Requisites for CA’s written order:
1. Probable cause of commission of terrorism
2. Probable cause that evidence is in the communication
3. No other means to acquire evidence
  CA’s authorization shall not exceed 30 days renewable
for another 30 days

What may be the form of report or recording by the law

enforcer pursuant to Human Security Act?

Any device, whether electronic or not

Illegal Searches and Seizures

 Illegal object found in the possession of a person who
is not committing a crime, thus, not committing it in
flagrante delicto, is inadmissible as evidence
 Warrantless arrest cannot be justified where no crime
is being committed
 Elements of Illegal Possession of Drugs:
1. Possession of prohibited drugs
2. Possession not authorized by law
3. Accused freely and consciously possessed the
said drug
 There is animus possidendi in the following cases:
1. When accused was not at home but drugs were
found in his bedroom
2. When illegal drugs were found concealed in
accused’s bedroom
3. When illegal drugs were found inside the drawer
in the bedroom
 There is presumption of knowledge and possession
when drugs and paraphernalia is found in house or
building occupied
 Criminal intent is not necessary in illegal possession
of drugs because such is mala prohibita

Courts policy in the admission of evidence

Liberal construction of the rules of evidence so as not to frustrate

substantial justice
Judicial Notice and Admissions

Why do Court’s take judicial notice of some matters?

So that the submission of evidence on some matters may be dispensed with rendering an abbreviation of the trial

Matters which take judicial notice (mandatory)

1. Existence and territorial extent of States

2. Political history
3. Forms of government
4. Symbols of nationality
5. Law of nations
6. Admiralty and maritime courts
7. Official acts of executive and judicial departments
8. Laws of nature
9. Measure of time
10. Geographical division

Judicial notice is discretionary when it is of:

1. Public or common knowledge

2. Matter is settled beyond reasonable doubt
3. Ought to be known by Courts or is within the Courts jurisdiction

Judicial notice, when hearing necessary:

1. When requested by a party

2. When decisive of a material issue

Test for notoriety

There is notoriety when:

1. It is of common knowledge (Eg. Filipina’s natural shyness)
2. It is a matter settled beyond reasonable doubt, (Eg. Discoveries in science and technical definitions) or
3. It is within the Court’s jurisdiction (Eg. laws passed within court’s jurisdiction in which its proponent expressly states that such law
shall be taken with judicial notice)

How is doubt in judicial notice resolved?

In case of doubt in judicial notice, it shall be resolved against the person taking the notice.

Is judicial notice synonymous to judicial knowledge?

No. This is because hearing is still required when a matter is not under mandatory or discretionary judicial notice.

May judicial notice be taken after trial?

Yes. Judicial notice may be taken during or after trial (or when pending appeal)?

What is processual presumption (doctrine of processual presumption)?

It is the presumption that, in the absence of proof, the foreign law is the same as the law of the forum.

Is there judicial notice of foreign law?

No. There is no judicial notice of foreign law, except, foreign international law.

Must the Court take judicial notice of international law?

Yes. Under the principle of integration under the constitution, the Philippine adopts the generally accepted principle of international law as
part of the laws of the land.

May MTC and MCTC take judicial notice of local ordinances?

Yes. Provided that such ordinance has already taken effect, it is within the Court’s jurisdiction and that the ordinance expressly states
judicial notice

May the RTC take judicial notice of local ordinances within its jurisdiction?

No. In general, RTC cannot take judicial notice of such ordinance, except when the matter is appealed to it from the lower court.

In general, when do laws or ordinances take effect?

Memorandum or ordinances shall officially take effect after at least 15 days after publication. Otherwise, the same is not yet official.

May the CA take judicial notice of municipal ordinances?

Such matter is under discretionary judicial notice of Court. (NOTE: judicial notice of ordinances is not mandatory to RTC, CA or SC)

May there be judicial notice of the increase in rent of lease? How about the rate of increase?

There may be judicial notice of increase in rent but not its rate.

May MTC and MCTC judges take notice of matters they have acted upon as notaries public ex officio?

Yes. MTC and MCTC judges may take notice of matters they have acted upon as notaries public ex officio.

*May there be automatic judicial notice of minority?

No. Hearing and submission of evidence of minority must be submitted before the court can take judicial notice of such matter.

Proof of foreign law

1. An official publication thereof, or

2. A copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record

Hix died with a will allegedly executed in accord with the formalities of West Virginia Law. To prove the existence of said foreign law
the proponent of the will presented in evidence a copy of said law found in a book in our National Library. The corresponding
certificate was signed by the Director of the National Library. Has the existence of said law been properly proved?

No. The legal requisites for proof of a written foreign law have not been properly complied with. There was no proof that the book referred
to was an official publication of the State of West Virginia; there was no certification of the officer having custody of the
original; finally, there was no proof that said alleged law was still in force at the time of the execution of the will.

Proof of foreign unwritten law or custom

1. Oral testimony of expert witnesses

2. Printed and published books of report of decisions of the country involved

To prove Chinese law, the proponents of a will presented in evidence written answers of the Chinese Consul-General. Has the existence
of said unwritten law been proved?

No. Firstly, because the witness should have been presented for the purpose of confrontation and cross-examination; and secondly, because, a
Chinese Consul-General is not necessarily an expert on the matter.

T/F. Court may take judicial notice of anything during trial.

True. During trial, the Court has the power to take judicial notice of anything.

T/F. After trial or while on appeal, the Court can still take judicial notice of anything.

False. After trial or while pending appeal, the Court can only take judicial notice of matters material to the issue

What is the general effect of judicial admission?

The person who made the admission cannot anymore contradict his own admission.

What is the general function of judicial notice?

It serves as a waiver of proof

Requisites of Judicial Notice:

1. Act of admission of fact

2. Made before or during trial but not when decision is already final and executory
3. No form required

Elements of Judicial Admission:

1. Made by a party
2. Made during trial
3. Made in any form (No prescribed form)

Example of judicial admission: Admission in pleadings (in complaint or answer)

Is there an implied admission when a party fails to particularly deny the genuineness and due execution of a document?

Yes. A party in this case is, thereby, precluded from arguing that the document is a forgery because the genuineness of the document has been
impliedly admitted by his failure to deny the same under oath.

Can an admission in one case be admitted in another case?

No. Under Sec 3 of Rule 26, any admission made pursuant to the request for admission is for the purpose of the pending action only.
The admission shall not be considered as one for any other purpose nor may the same be used against him in any other proceeding.

Effect of filing amended complaint:

1. The same is not part of the record

2. Amended complaint supersedes the first When is there an implied judicial admission? When based on

actionable document

When is a document actionable?

A document is actionable when an action or defense is grounded upon such written instrument or document. These documents need not be
attached to or stated in the complaint as these are evidentiary in nature. It must be denied or questioned under oath.
What is the effect of failure to answer when a motion for bill of particulars or written interrogatories is served by the adverse party?

The contents of such interrogatories shall be deemed admitted by the party

When does admission (judicial) start to be accepted?

At the pre-trial

*What is the purpose of pre-trial?

Nature and Purpose of Pre-trial:

1. Possibility of amicable settlement
2. Simplification of issues
3. Necessity of amendment of pleadings
4. Possibility of obtaining stipulation or admission of facts
5. Limitation of number of witnesses
6. Advisability of prelim reference of issues to commissioner
7. Propriety of rendering judgment on pleadings should a valid ground be found to exist
8. Necessity of suspending the proceedings
9. Other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action

Are admissions during pre-trial judicial admissions?

Yes. Whether in civil or criminal case, an admission during the pre- trial stage is a judicial admission.

*Must admission during pre-trial be reduced in writing?

Yes. In criminal proceedings. No. In civil proceedings.

Admission vs. Confession

Act, declaration or omission of Acknowledgement of guilt
relevant fact
When person declares that he When a person declares that he
shot for self-defense shot someone
Includes confession (broader) Included in admission (specific
type of admission)
Does not authorize conviction Authorizes conviction
Admission vs. Declaration against interest
Admissible whether declarant is Declarant must be dead or
dead or alive unable to testify
Made at anytime even after/ Made before controversy arises
during trial
Need not be against one’s Made against one’s
pecuniary/moral interest pecuniary/moral interest
Admissible only against parties Admissible even against 3rd
persons
Not an exemption to any rule Exemption to hearsay rule

Effects of Admission

1. Declarations made by a party may be used against him but not in his favor
2. Based on notion that: no man would make any declaration against himself, unless true

In general, a person who judicially admits a fact cannot challenge such judicially admitted fact, what is the exception?

The exception is when there (1) palpable mistake in the admission or (2) there was no admission made.

Classification of Admission and Confession

1. Express admission vs. Implied admission

Can there be an implied confession?

No. Confessions cannot be inferred. It is always express.

2. Judicial admission vs. Extrajudicial admission

Can confession be judicial or extrajudicial?

Yes. Confessions can be made in and outside the court.

3. Principle of Adoptive admission – where it appears that a party clearly and unambiguously assented to or adopted the statement of
another, evidence of those statements is admissible against him.

Instances of Adoptive Admission

1. Where a party expressly agrees to oral statement of another

2. Where a party hears a statement and later on essentially repeats it
3. When a party utters acceptance upon assertion of another
4. When a party rebuts some points but ignores other points heard from another
5. When a party reads and signs a written statement made by another

Is mere extrajudicial confession of a person sufficient for conviction?

No. To be sufficient, it must be corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.

Corpus delicti – body of the crime or offense

Elements of corpus delicti:

1. Proof of occurrence
2. Same person’s criminal responsibility for the act

May corpus delicti be proven by circumstantial evidence?

Yes, but such must be compatible and convincing with the nature of the case

Does judicial confession need corpus delicti to be sufficient for conviction?

No. Unlike extrajudicial confession, judicial confession needs no corpus delicti to effect a conviction

Example of corpus delicti: In drugs cases, the corpus delicti is the illegal drugs

*Admission by silence:

Act made in the presence and within the observance of a party who says nothing when the act is such as naturally to call for action if not true
may be given in evidence

Does all form of silence imply an admission?

No. Silence during custodial investigation is not included in the phrase admission by silence.

Elements of silence by admission:

1. Accused heard and understood the statement

2. He was at the moment in liberty to make a denial
3. The statement was about a matter affecting his right
4. The facts of the statement were within his knowledge
5. The fact admitted from accused’s silence is material

Res Inter Alios Acta Rule

Things done between strangers ought not to injure those who are not parties thereto

2 Branches:
1. Rights of a party cannot be injured by the act of another
2. Evidence of previous conduct at one time is not admissible to prove that a person did the same act at another time

T/F. Res Inter Alios Acta Rule generally applies to extrajudicial confession.

True. Therefore, the rule cannot be invoked in judicial proceedings.

Vicarious admissions:

Are those made by a declarant authorized by the party to make the statement, or by a servant or agent, if it concerns a matter within the scope
of the servant.

Exception to Res Inter Alios Acta Rule (1st Branch) (forms of Vicarious admission):
1. Admission by co-partner or agent
2. Admission by co-conspirator
3. Admission by privies
NOTE: For the exception to apply, mere declaration is not
sufficient, there must be other independent evidence supporting
agency, partnership, conspiracy, or other privity of relationship. It
is either documentary or testimonial evidence.

What is the effect, with regards, admission of a plea of guilty

later withdrawn?

It is not acceptable as evidence of admission. (Same effect in case

of unaccepted plea of guilty to a lesser offense)

Is an offer to pay, in case of criminal cases, by the accused of

the victim’s Medical expenses an act of admission and be
evidence of guilt?

No. Such act is called Good Samaritan rule.

Good Samaritan Rule:

It states that 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 injured party.

Are subsequent remedial measures in negligence case a proof of

admission?

No, because to constitute such as an admission would discourage

establishments to improve their facilities

Propensity evidence (sameness of evidence) – evidence that tends

to show that what a person has done at one time is probative of the
contention that he has done a similar act at another time.

What are the purposes wherein evidence of similar act may be

admissible?

1. Specific intent
2. Knowledge
3. Identity
4. Plan
5. System
6. Scheme
7. Habit
8. Custom
9. Usage, and the like

When is evidence of similar acts usually relevant?

Where the action is based on fraud and deceit

May propensity evidence be used in prosecuting sexual abuse

cases?

Yes. In PP vs. Munoz, the Court admitted the fact that the accused,
had, before the rape case, impregnated his sister in law. This is one
exception to the prohibition against admission of propensity
evidence. In criminal action in which the defendant is an accused
of molestation, evidence of the defendant’s commission of another
offense of molestation is admissible as evidence.
Object and Documentary Evidence What are the kinds of evidence?

1. Object (real or autoptic proference)

2. Documentary
3. Testimonial, and
4. Corroborating

Object as Evidence – are those addressed to the senses of the court.

When may an evidence be exhibited, examined or viewed by the court?

Where object is relevant

May the perception of a witness be object evidence?

No. This is because real or object evidence is not a verbal description of something.

Examples of real or object evidence:

1. Knife used to slash victim’s throat
2. Ring actually stolen
3. Bullet extracted from chest, or
4. Blood splattered on the wall

May object evidence be intangible?

No. Object evidence consists of tangible things.

May a human being be a form of object evidence?

Yes. It may be an object evidence where for instance racial characteristics is in issue or in a stabbing incident wherein the absence of scar may
convince the court that the witness is untrue to his testimony.

May sole object evidence provide an end to a case?

Yes. Pursuant to OJ Simpson case, wherein Simpson tried the glove used by the murderer which does not fit. In such case, Simpson was
acquitted.

T/F. Object evidence is visual alone.

False. It covers the entire range of human senses: seeing, hearing, taste, smell and touch.

*In case of conflict between testimonial and object evidence, which one should prevail?

Object evidence. It has a higher rank in the hierarchy of trustworthy evidence over testimonial evidence.

What are the requisites for admissibility of object evidence?

1. Relevance
2. Authentication
3. Authenticated by competent witness, and
4. Formally offered in evidence

What must the object evidence pass in order that it will not be excluded by the Rules?
Test of authentication. To authenticate the object, it must be shown that the object is the very thing that is either the subject matter of the
lawsuit or the very one involved to prove an issue in the case.

Who shall authenticate object evidence?

Witness. This is because an object evidence cannot speak for itself for it to be presented in the court.

What provides for the foundation of all types of evidence?

Testimonial evidence of a witness. To be able to authenticate, a witness must have actual and personal knowledge of the exhibit he is
presenting for admission.
What is the effect to testimonial evidence of physical evidence which bears similarity with the former?

The testimony becomes worthy of belief because the testimony of the witness is supported by object evidence.

How is competence of object evidence tested?

Thru authentication of object evidence

What is the problem in presenting object evidence that commonly lies in showing that the object sought to be admitted is in fact the
real thing and not a mere substitute?

Laying the foundation

May the right against self-incrimination be invoked against object evidence?

No. The right against self-incrimination is the prohibition of the use of physical or moral compulsion, to extort communications from a
person. It does not apply where evidence sought is object evidence.

How is object evidence classified?

1. Unique evidence – objects that have readily identifiable marks. Eg. 45 caliber pistol
2. Objects made unique – objects that are made readily identifiable. Eg. Kitchen knife with engraved initials
3. Non-unique objects – Objects with no identifying marks and cannot be marked. Eg. Drops of blood, drugs

What must be established in order that a non-unique object evidence may be considered competent evidence?

Chain of custody. It refers to the link of people who actually handled or had custody of the object. The testimony of each link need not be
presented. As long as one of the chains testifies and his testimony negates the possibility of tampering and that the integrity of the evidence
is preserved, his testimony alone is adequate to prove the chain of custody.

What is the purpose of chain of custody?

To guaranty integrity of physical evidence

*Discuss chain of custody in illegal drug cases.

It means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous
drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure or confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping
to presentation in court.

What is the procedure to be followed in custody and handling of drugs?

The apprehending team after seizure shall:

1. Inventory and photograph the drugs
2. In the presence of the accused or person from whom such is confiscated (or his representative or counsel)
3. With a representative from the (a) media, (b) DOJ, and (c) any elected public official
4. Those in (2) and (3) shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and shall be given copies thereof

*Does not compliance with the requirements set forth by Sec 21 of RA 9165 regarding the procedure of chain of custody of illegal drugs
automatically render the illegal drugs inadmissible as evidence for being incompetent?

No. Pursuant to PP vs. Rivera, non-compliance with these requirements under justifiable circumstance, as long as the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer or team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures
of and custody over said items. But take note that mere statement that the integrity and evidentiary value of the evidence is not enough. It must
be accompanied by proof.

Is demonstrative evidence the actual thing?

No. It is not the actual thing. It only represents the real thing. Eg. Map, diagram, photograph, model

What are the requisites for photograph evidence (and other electronic evidence) to be admissible?

1. It shall be presented, displayed and shown to the court, and

2. It shall be identified, explained or authenticated by either
(i) the person who made the recording, or by (ii) some other person competent to testify to the accuracy thereof

Does the rule on photographs also apply to motion pictures?

Yes. In such case, courts require detailed testimony as to the qualification of the operator, a detailed description of the equipment used, and the
conditions under which the photograph and motion picture is taken.

Do the Rules require that the authentication process of motion picture or tape recording be made by a person who is actually involved
in the said recording?

No. It can be done by some other person as long as he is someone who can testify as to its accuracy.

When may diagrams, models, and maps be used as demonstrative evidence?

They are used when indicating relative locations or positions of objects and persons.

When may x-ray be used as a demonstrative evidence?

They are used when involving personal injury cases to show the location and extent of the injury.

Who may authenticate x-rays?

X- ray technician or physician may testify on the competence of the person taking it, the procedure in taking and that the x-ray picture is
showing the person involved in the case.

Is reenactment of material events by a witness a form of demonstrative evidence?

Yes. Other demonstrative evidence are scientific tests, demonstrations and experiments. It is used to help illustrate the testimony of witness.

What are ephemeral electronic evidence?

These forms of communication refer to telephone conversations, text messages, chatroom sessions, streaming audio, and other forms of
electronic communication.

Is the admission of text messages as evidence a violation of the right to privacy of a person?

No. Such stand is unavailing for it is a form of evidence under the Rules.

How shall a recorded telephone conversation be proven?

It shall be proven in the same way as photographs, motion pictures and tape recordings.

What is view when applied to object or scene as evidence?

It is the act of going out of the courtroom to observe places and objects. (ocular inspection or autoptic proference)

Is view a part of the trial?

Yes. Since it is a part of the trial wherein evidence is being admitted, the inspection, even if made inside or outside the courtroom, must be
made in the presence of the parties or at least with previous notice to them. Thus, it is an error for the judge to go alone on a view without the
previous knowledge of the parties.

What is DNA as described by the Supreme Court?

DNA or deoxyribonucleic acid is a molecule that encodes the genetic information in all living organisms. A person’s DNA is the same in
each cell and it does not change throughout the person’s lifetime. Take note that no two individuals have the same DNA, with the notable
exception of identical twins.

Is the taking of DNA evidence a violation of the right against self-incrimination?

No. The right against self-incrimination is the prohibition of the use of physical or moral compulsion, to extort communications from a
person. It does not apply to DNA evidence.

*What are the Vallejo guidelines in using DNA evidence?

The following must be answered in the court to validly admit a DNA evidence:
 1. How the samples were collected
2. How they were handled
3. The possibility of contamination of the samples
4. The procedure followed in analyzing the samples
5. Whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in conducting the tests, and
6. The qualification of the analyst who conducted the test

*May the lack of DNA evidence be also a means of acquitting an accused?

Yes. Pursuant to PP vs. Janson, the accused who was charged with rape was acquitted due to the lack of DNA evidence posing doubt in who the
malefactor was.

May death bar the conduct of DNA testing?

No. Pursuant to Rogelio Ong vs. Diaz, the Court held that death cannot bar the conduct of DNA testing.

In what actions may DNA be offered as evidence?

1. Criminal actions
2. Civil actions, and
3. Special proceedings

How may an order for DNA testing be obtained?

1. By filing an application before the appropriate court of a person who has legal interest
2. For the order to issue, there must be showing that:
a. A biological sample exists that has relevance to the cause
b. The biological sample (i) was not previously subjected to DNA testing requested; or (ii) if it was previously subjected to DNA
testing, the results may require confirmation for good reasons
c. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique
d. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is relevant to the proper resolution of the case, and
e. The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting the accuracy and integrity of the DNA
testing

May the Court motu proprio order a DNA testing?

Yes. Sec 4, RDE

Is a court order always required before undertaking DNA testing?

No. RDE allows a testing without a prior court order if done before a suit or proceeding is commenced at the behest of any party including law
enforcement agencies. This also means that a litigation need not exist prior to DNA testing.

Is the order of the court granting a DNA testing appealable?

No. It is not appealable and is immediately executory. RDE provides that an order of the Court granting the DNA testing shall be immediately
executory and shall not be appealable.

What is the remedy against the court order of granting DNA testing?

Petition for certiorari; however, under Sec 5, any petition for certiorari therefrom, shall not, in any way, stay the implementation thereof,
unless a higher court issues an injunctive order.

Is there an automatic admission of DNA evidence obtained in the testing?

No. The grant of DNA testing application shall not be construed as an automatic admission into evidence of any component of the DNA
evidence. It means that the court will still have to evaluate the probative value of the proposed evidence before its admission.

What are those which should be considered in weighing the probative value of DNA evidence?

1. Chain of custody
2. DNA testing methodology
3. Forensic DNA laboratory (including accreditation and qualification of analyst), and
4. Reliability of testing result
*If a person has already been convicted under a final and executory judgment, may he still avail of DNA testing?

Yes. It is termed post-conviction DNA testing. It is available to the prosecution and to the person convicted by a final and executory
judgment, provided that:
a. A biological sample exists
b. Such sample is relevant to the case, and
c. The testing would probably result in the reversal of the judgment of conviction

Is a court order required for a post DNA testing?

No. Sec 6 RDE

What remedy is available to the convict if the results of the post DNA testing are favorable to him?

Petition for writ of habeas corpus. The court shall then conduct a hearing and in case the court finds, after due hearing, that the petition is
meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the judgment of conviction and order the release of the convict, unless his detention is justified for a
lawful cause. Petition for writ of habeas corpus may also be filed by the prosecution.

Is the DNA profile of a person open to public scrutiny?

No. Court order must first be obtained before it may be released for the same is confidential. As exception, the following are the persons who
may obtain a copy of the results of the DNA profile:
1. The person from whom the sample was taken
2. Lawyers representing parties in the case where DNA evidence is offered and presented or sought to be offered and presented
3. Lawyers of private complainant in a criminal action
4. Duly authorized law enforcement agencies, and
5. Other persons as determined by the court

What is the offense committed by the person/s who will violate the prohibition on public access to DNA profile?

Indirect contempt
T/F. Paraffin tests have been considered as inconclusive by the Court.

True. This is due to the declaration of scientific experts. The test can only establish the presence or absence of nitrates and nitrites and cannot
alone determine whether the source of the nitrates or nitrites was the discharge of a firearm. Thus, paraffin tests are merely corroborative
evidence.

Is polygraph test or lie detector test results admissible as evidence in establishing guilt or innocence of an accused in a crime?

No. Courts uniformly reject the results of polygraph tests when offered in evidence for the purpose of establishing the guilt or innocence of an
accused of a crime because it has not yet attained scientific acceptance.

Is documentary evidence exclusively referring to writings?

No. It may also refer to other material like objects as long as the material contains letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of
written expression and offered as proof of their contents.

What are the two categories of documentary evidence?

1. Writings (eg. contracts, wills), and

2. Any other material containing modes of written expressions

How are documentary evidence defined by the Rules?

They are documents as evidence consists of writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of
written expressions offered as proof of their contents.

What is essential for the 2nd category of documentary evidence for it to be admitted as a documentary evidence?

It must be offered as evidence for its contents

Is a contract offered as evidence to show its existence a form of documentary evidence?

No. In such case, the contract is treated as a real or object evidence.

What is electronic evidence?

It refers to information by which a right is established or an obligation is extinguished, or by which a fact may be proved or affirmed, which is
received, recorded, transmitted, stored, processed, retrieved or produced electronically.

What are the purposes for which electronic evidence may be used?

1. To establish a right
2. To extinguish an obligation, or
3. To prove or affirm a fact

Is electronic evidence the functional equivalent of paper-based documents?

Yes. Thus, whenever a rule of evidence makes reference to the terms of a writing, a document, a record, an instrument, a
memorandum or any other form of writing such terms are deemed to include electronic evidence.

Who has the burden of proving the authenticity of an electronic evidence?

The person seeking to introduce the electronic evidence

How is an electronic evidence authenticated?

1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed the same
2. By evidence that the appropriate security procedures or devices as may be authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for the
authentication of electronic documents were applied to the document or
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge

NOTE: The above only applies to electronic private documents

*FURTHER NOTE: In Ang vs. Court of Appeals et. al, the Supreme Court ruled that the Rules on Electronic Evidence applies only to civil
actions, quasi-judicial proceedings and administrative proceeding, not to criminal actions.
What are the other rules which apply to electronic evidence?

1. Best evidence rule

2. Parol evidence rule, and
3. Hearsay rule

What are the requisites for admissibility of documentary evidence?

1. Relevance
2. Authentication
3. Authentication by competent witness, and
4. Document is formally offered as evidence

How is the theory of indivisivility applied in documentary evidence?

The theory states that when admitting documentary evidence, it shall be admitted as a whole and not only the parts sought to be
admitted.
Does the best evidence rule make the evidence place in the highest of the hierarchy of evidence?

No. The term best does not pertain to the degree of the evidence probative value. More accurately, it is the original document rule or the primary
evidence rule.

What is the rule that the best evidence rule denotes?

The rule requiring the production of the original writing is the rule that the above denotes. The theory therefore is that the copy of the original is
not as reliable as the latter because of possible inaccuracy in the process of copying and the danger of erroneous transmission of the original.

*What are the exceptions to the best evidence rule?

1. When the original has been lost, destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror
2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to
produce it after reasonable notice
3. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time
and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole, and
4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office

When is the instance when there is no reason to apply the best evidence rule?

When the issue does not involve the contents of a writing

Does the contention that there is lack of consideration and the signature in the note was not made in the personal capacity of the
respondent involve an issue with the contents of the writing?

No. They are defenses which do not question the precise wordings of the promissory note which should have paved the way for the application
of the best evidence rule.

Does the best evidence rule apply to a case where the issue is the execution or existence of a check and the circumstances of its
execution?

No. The best evidence rule does not apply in such case and testimonial evidence should be admissible.

Does the best evidence rule apply to a case where the issue is the reason for dishonor of a check?

Yes. Where the purpose of the prosecution is to prove the contents of a check, more specifically the names of the drawer and endorsee, the date
and amount and the dishonor thereof, as well as the reason for such dishonor, it is incumbent upon the prosecution to adduce in evidence the
original copy of the check to prove the contents thereof.

*What are the requisites for the best evidence rule to apply?

1. The subject matter must involve a document, and

2. The subject of the inquiry is the contents of the document
Does the best evidence rule apply when the document is merely collaterally in issue?

No. When the document involved in the inquiry is merely collaterally in issue, the best evidence rule does not apply. A document is
collaterally in issue when the purpose of introducing the document is not to establish its terms but to show facts that have no reference to its
contents like its existence, condition, execution or delivery.

What is the reason or purpose of the best evidence rule?

To prevent and detect fraud

May the best evidence rule be waived?

Yes. The rule may be waived by failure to object.

*How is the best evidence rule applied?

1. The first step is to determine the matter inquired into

2. If for one reason or another, the original cannot be presented in evidence. The second step comes into play:
(1) Find an adequate legal excuse for the failure to present the original, and (2) Presenting a secondary evidence sanctioned by the
rules of court.
NOTE: Thus, the rule is, present the original, except when you can justify its unavailability in the manner provided for by the rules of court

Does the phrase unavailability of the original as an exception to the best evidence rule include those original documents which are
beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court?

Yes. The document need not always be lost or destroyed. Further, it includes monuments and other immovable objects which cannot be
produced in court.

What are the requisites before secondary evidence may be presented in lieu of the original as exception to the best evidence rule?

1. The offeror must prove the execution and existence of the original document
2. The offeror must show the cause for its unavailability, and
3. The offeror must show that the unavailability was not due to his bad faith

Is it necessary that an absolute loss or absolute incapability of production of evidence be presented so the secondary evidence may be
presented in lieu of the original as an exception to the best evidence rule?

No. A reasonable probability of its loss is sufficient like by showing that there was a bona fide and diligent but fruitless search for the
document.

What is secondary evidence?

It refers to evidence other than the original document itself.

Does the fact that the original of the document is in the custody of the adverse party ipso facto authorize the introduction of
secondary evidence to prove its existence?
No. Such party must first prove that he has given reasonable notice to the adverse party and that the adverse party failed to produce the original
document despite notice.

What are the requisites before secondary evidence may be admitted in lieu of the original in case that it is in the custody of the adverse
party?

1. That the original exists

2. That said document is under the custody and control of the adverse party
3. That the proponent of the secondary evidence has given the adverse party reasonable notice to produce the original document, and
4. That the adverse party failed to produce the original document despite the reasonable notice

What are the requisites so that secondary evidence may be admitted in lieu of the original under the best evidence rule, in case it
consists of numerous accounts?

1. If the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents

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

What is the form/s of secondary evidence expected from a witness in case of original document in numerous accounts?

A witness may be allowed to offer a summary of a number of documents, or the summary itself may be admitted if the underlying documents
are so voluminous and intricate as to make an examination of all of them impracticable. They may also be presented in the form of charts or
calculations.

Why is secondary evidence allowed to be introduced as evidence in lieu of the original under the best evidence rule in case when the
document is a public record?

This is because public records are generally not to be removed from the places where they are recorded and kept.

*What is an original document?

a. The original of a document is one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry
b. When the document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same time, with identical contents, all such copies are equally
regarded as originals
c. When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being copied from another at or near the time of transaction, all the
entries are likewise equally regarded as originals

What are the requisites before a document may be considered as an original?

1. There must be entries made and repeated in the regular course of the business, and
2. The entries must be at or near the time of the transaction
Does the making of repeated copies of a pleading create original copies?

Yes. When a lawyer makes exact copies of the pleading, all of which are deemed original

Does the use of a carbon paper in making copies and also copying the signature in a document make the produced copies as
originals?

Yes. When carbon sheets are inserted between two or more sheets of paper with the writing and the signature on the first sheet being
reproduced in the sheets beneath by the same stroke of the pen or writing medium, all the sheets are deemed originals.

May the term original refer to object evidence under the Rules?

No. The term original does not refer to the original of the object evidence but an original of the documentary evidence.

What constitute as the original of an electronic evidence?

It is its printout or output readable by sight or other means. The copies of the printout or output readable by sight are also deemed originals
where the copies were executed at or about the same time with identical contents or is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the
original or from the same matrix, or by other means and which accurately reproduces the original.

Is a printout of a facsimile transmission an electronic data message or electronic document?

No. The Electronic Commerce Act of 2000 does not include a facsimile transmission and cannot be considered as electronic evidence. It is
not the functional equivalent of an original under the best evidence rule and is not admissible as electronic evidence.
What evidentiary rule has direct application to the law on contracts?

Parol evidence rule

May parol evidence rule be applied when an agreement is merely oral?

No. When the agreement is merely oral, the parol evidence rule should not be applied. The decision of the parties to reduce an agreement in
written form is critical to the application of the parol evidence rule. When they execute a written contract, the parol evidence rule ipso facto
comes into play.

What are the instances when parol evidence may be introduced?

Parol evidence may be introduced when in issue is a written agreement and a party puts in issue in his pleadings:
1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement
2. The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto
3. The validity of the written agreement, or
4. 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)

What is the general presumption of the Rules regarding written agreement?

Under the Rules, written agreement is already considered to contain all the things agreed upon.

In general, may parol evidence be admissible to explain, modify or add to written agreements?

No. Parol evidence is inadmissible for the following purposes.

What is the purpose of parol evidence rule?

To give certainty to written transactions, to preserve the reliability and the sanctity of written agreement

Can all forms of writing trigger the application of the parol evidence rule?

No. Not all writings will trigger the application of the parol evidence rule. For the rule to apply, the writing must embody the agreement.

Did the rule specify parol evidence shall only apply to public documents?

No. Thus, the forms of a public document cannot be contended for the application of parol evidence rule.

May the rule on parol evidence involve third party stranger affected by the document?

No. The rule does not bind suits involving strangers to the contract. Thus, a total stranger to the writing is not bound by the terms of the
agreement and may freely introduce extrinsic or parol evidence against the efficacy of the writing.
In case of wills, can other evidence of the will be presented which is outside of its contents?

No. There can therefore be no evidence of the terms of the will other than the contents of the will itself.

Is parol evidence admissible when presenting prior or contemporaneous stipulations?

No. The traditional rules limit the inadmissibility of parol evidence to prior or contemporaneous stipulations.

Is parol evidence admissible when presenting subsequent agreements?

Yes. Subsequent agreements are not barred by parol evidence rule.

Is parol evidence admissible when there exist an intrinsic ambiguity in the contract?

Yes. Evidence aliunde may be allowed to modify, explain, or add to the written agreement when an intrinsic or latent ambiguity exist in the
written agreement. Intrinsic ambiguity is one which is not apparent on the face of the document but which lies in the person or thing that is
the subject of the document or deed. On this type of ambiguity, the document is clear on its face but matters extraneous to the agreement
create an ambiguity.

Is parol evidence admissible when there exist an extrinsic ambiguity in the contract?

No. Where the ambiguity is patent or extrinsic, parol evidence will not be admitted even if the same is put in issue in the pleading. A patent
or extrinsic ambiguity is that which appears on the very face of the instrument, and arises from the defective, obscure or insensible language
used.

Is parol evidence admissible when there exist a mistake or imperfection in the written agreement?

Yes. Evidence aliunde may be justified when there is a mistake or imperfection in the written agreement.

What may be the remedy against the mistake or imperfection in the written agreement?

Action for reformation. The contract is to be reformed because despite the meeting of the minds of the parties as to the object and cause of
the contracts, the instrument which is supposed to embody the agreement of the parties does not reflect their true agreement by reason of
mistake, fraud, inequitable conduct or accident.

Is an action for reformation of contract proper where the consent of the party to a contract has been procured by means of fraud?

No. In such case what is defective is the contract itself because of vitiation of consent. The remedy is not to bring an action for reformation
but to file an action for annulment of the contract.

What are those forms which cannot be reformed?

1. Simple donations inter vivos, wherein no condition is imposed

2. Wills, or
 3. When the agreement is void

*Best evidence rule vs. Parol evidence rule

May parol evidence be waived?

Yes. It can be waived by failure to object.

Is authentication limited to documentary evidence introduced as evidence?

No. Not only documents but also objects introduced in evidence need to be authenticated.

What are the requirements for authentication of electronic documents?

The authentication of electronic document requires any of the following means:

1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed the same
2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures or security devices as may be authorized by the SC or by law for authentication
of electronic documents were applied to the document, or
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.

What is a document?

Document is defined as a deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by which something is proved, evidenced or set forth.

What are the classes of documentary evidence?

For the purpose of their presentation in evidence, documents are either (1) public or (2) private.

*What are public documents?

Public documents are:

1. 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;
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public; and
3. Public records kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be entered therein.

All other writings are private

In general, all documents acknowledged before a notary public is a public document, does this include last wills and testaments?

No. Documents acknowledged before a notary public are public documents except last wills and testaments which are private documents
even if notarized.
Are church registries of documents public documents?

No. Church registries of births, marriages, and deaths are no longer public writings, nor are they kept by a duly authorized public official.

T/F. Public document is admissible without further proof of its due execution and genuineness.

True. Public document is admissible without further proof of its due execution and genuineness.

Do notarized documents require authentication when being presented as evidence?

No. Notarized documents being public documents, do not require authentication, unlike private documents.

What presumption does a document acknowledged before a notary public enjoy?

A document acknowledged before a notary public is a public document that enjoys the presumption of regularity

What is the prima facie evidence of the execution of a document which is notarized by a notary public?

The certificate of acknowledgement is the prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document involved.

Define public documents as evidence

Sec. 23. Public documents as evidence. – Documents consisting of entries in a 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 third persons of the facts
which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter.

What may evidence the record of a public document?

The record of a public document may be evidenced by:

1. An official publication thereof; or
2. By a copy of a document attested by the officer having legal custody of the record ;by the attestation of his deputy, if the record is
not kept in the Philippines; if the record is not kept in the Philippines, the attestation must be accompanied by a certificate that such
officer has the custody; if the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, the certificate may be made by a secretary of
the embassy or legation, consul-general, vice-consul, or consular agent, or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office.
Why is certification and attestation of public records required
when being presented as evidence?

The certification and attestation are required because of the general

rule on the irremovability of public records.

Why is public record, generally, cannot be removed from the

records even if it is to be used as evidence?

The reason is public policy:

Sec. 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.

Only when may a public record not capable of being removed

from the records may be removed therefrom?

Upon order of a court where the inspection of the record is

essential to the just determination of a pending case.

*Is a notarized document by a notary public of a foreign

country a public document?

No. The Court held that a notary public in a foreign country is not
of those who can issue the certificate mentioned in Section 24 of
Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. The Court ruled that non-
compliance with Section 24 of Rule 130, will render the special
power of attorney inadmissible in evidence. Not being duly
established in evidence. (Same rule if notary public notarized a
document outside of his authority)
Testimonial Evidence

What is testimonial evidence?

Testimonial or oral evidence is evidence elicited from the mouth of a witness as distinguished from real and documentary evidence.
(Sometimes called viva voce evidence – living voice or by word of mouth)

Witness – the person who gives the testimony

What does competence mean when applied to a witness?

When applied to a witness, competence means that the witness is qualified to take the stand and testify. It means that he is fit or eligible to
testify on a particular matter in a judicial proceeding.

T/F. A witness is presumed to be competent unless otherwise proven.

True. The witness enjoys the presumption of competence under the rules unless rebutted by contrary evidence.

How does a party who desires to question the competence of witness question the same?

A party who desires to question the competence of a witness must do so by making an objection as soon as the facts tending to show
incompetency are apparent.

*Qualifications of a Witness:

1. He can perceive; and in perceiving

2. He can make known his perception to others:

To these we may add the following:

1. He must take either an oath or an affirmation
2. He must not possess the disqualification imposed by law or the rules.

What is the act required by the rules to be taken by the witness when taking the stand which is also essential to his qualification?

The rule clearly requires that the examination of a witness in a trial or hearing shall be done under oath or affirmation. The willingness to take
an oath or affirmation is an essential qualification of a witness.

What does the witness oath signify?

The oath of a witness signifies that he is swearing to the Creator to tell the truth and nothing but the truth and that if he does not, he will later
on answer for all the lies he is guilty.

Does the law require that the witness understands in detail the importance of the oath or affirmation?

No. It is not required that the understanding of the importance of an oath be a detailed one. It is enough that the witness understands and
believes that some earthly evil will occur to him after lying.

Ability to Perceive - it means that a witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge, ie. those which are
derived from his own perception.

Ability to Make Known the Perception of Others - the ability to make known the perception of the witness to the court involves two
factors: (a) the ability to remember what has been perceived; and
(b) the ability to communicate the remembered perception.

*Are deaf-mutes necessarily incompetent witnesses?

Deaf-mutes are not necessarily incompetent as witnesses. They are competent where they are: (1) can understand and appreciate the sanctity
of an oath; (2) can comprehend facts they are going to testify to; and (3) can communicate their ideas thru a qualified interpreter. (People v.
Tuangco)

Competency of witness v. Credibility of Witness

Refers to capacity to perceive Refers to believability of a
and communicate his perception witness
to others
 Includes absence of any Nothing to do with the law or
disqualifications imposed upon the rules
a witness
Does not inquire to the Inquire to the trustworthiness of
trustworthiness of witness witness

Discuss the weight of the findings of the trial court on the credibility of a witness

When it comes to the issue of credibility of the victim or the prosecution witnesses, the findings of the trial courts carry great weight and
respect, and generally, the appellate courts will not overturn the said findings. This is because trial judges enjoy the advantage of observing
the witness’ deportment and manner of testifying, the furtive glance, blush of conscious shame, hesitation, flippant or sneering tone,
calmness, sigh, or the scant of full realization of an oath – all of which are useful aids for an accurate determination of a witness’ honesty and
sincerity.

*Other Factors that Do not Affect the Competency of a Witness:

The following factors do not constitute a disqualification of a witness:

1. Religious belief
2. Political belief
3. Interest in the outcome of the case
4. Conviction of a crime, unless otherwise provided by law Eg. Those who have been convicted of falsification of a document, perjury
or false testimony are disqualified from being witness to a will.

Does the relationship of a witness with a party ipso facto render him a biased witness?

No. The relationship of a witness with a party does not ipso facto render him a biased witness in criminal cases where the quantum of
evidence is proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Same rule in civil cases where the quantum of evidence needed is preponderance of evidence)

Al was accused of raping Lourdes. Only Lourdes testified on how the crime was perpetrated. On the other hand, the defense
presented Al’s wife, son and daughter to testify that Al was with them when the alleged crime took place. The prosecution interposed
a timely objection to the testimonies on the ground of obvious bias due to the close relationship of the witnesses
with the accused. If you were the judge, how would you rule on the objection?

I would overrule the objection. Interest in the outcome of the case which also includes close relationship, is not a ground to disqualify a
witness.

Louise is being charged with the frustrated murder of Roy . The prosecution’s lone witness, Mariter, testified to having seen Louise
prepare the poison which she later surreptitiously pour into Roy’s wine glass. Louise sought the disqualification of Mariter as witness on
account of her previous conviction of perjury. Rule on Louise’s contention.

The contention of Louise has no legal basis. Basic is the rule that previous conviction is not a ground for disqualification of a witness; unless
otherwise provided by law. Mariter’s conviction is not sufficient to have her disqualified to testify. Her situation is one of the exceptions
provided by law.

*What are the requisites to validly disqualify a witness due to mental incapacity?

To be disqualified as a witness by reason of mental incapacity, the following must concur:

1. The person must be incapable of intelligently making known his perception to others; and
2. His incapability must exist at the time of his production for examination.

T/F. Mental incapacity of a witness at the time of perception of the events affect his competency as a witness.

False. Mental incapacity of a witness at the time of his perception of the events subject of the testimony does not affect his competency as long
as he is competent at the time he is produced for examination to make known his perception to others.

*What are the requisites to validly disqualify a witness due to immaturity?

To be disqualified as a witness by reason of immaturity the following must concur:

1. The mental maturity of the witness must render him incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which he is examined; and
2. He is incapable of relating his perception truthfully

T/F. Immaturity of a witness at the time of perception of the events affect his competency as a witness.

False. The incompetence of the witness must exist not at the time of his perception of the facts but at the time he is produced for examination,
and consists in his ability to intelligently make known what he has perceived.

Child Witness - he is any person who at the time of giving testimony is below the age of 18 years

May a person over 18 years old be sometimes considered as a child?

Yes. In child abuse cases, a child includes one over 18 years but is found by the court as unable to fully take care of himself or protect
himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or discrimination because of physical or mental disability or condition.

What is the presumption on the competency of a child witness?

Every child is presumed to be a competent witness. This is the presumption established by the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness.

What does a party seeking a competency examination of a child witness present when seeking the same?

A party who seeks competency examination must present proof of necessity of a competency examination.

Is competency examination of a child open to the public?

No. The competency examination of a child witness is not open to the public. Only the following are allowed to attend the examination:
1. The judge and necessary court personnel
2. The counsel for the parties
3. The guardian ad litem
4. One or more support person for the child, and
5. The defendant unless the court determines that competence can be fully evaluated in his absence.

May the counsel of the adverse party conduct a competency examination of a child?

No. The competency examination of the child shall be conducted only by the judge. If the counsels of the parties desire to ask questions, they
cannot do so directly. Instead, they are allowed to submit questions to the judge which he may ask the child in his discretion.

May issues related to the trial be raised in the competency examination of a child?
No. The questions shall not be related to the issues at the trial but shall focus on the ability of the child to remember, to communicate, to
distinguish between truth and falsehood and to appreciate the duty to testify truthfully.

When may the trial court order that the testimony of a child be taken by live-link television?

The court may order that the testimony of the child be taken by live- link television if there is a likelihood that the child would suffer trauma
from testifying in the presence of the accused, his counsel or the prosecutor as the case may be. The trauma must be of a kind which would
impair the completeness or truthfulness of the testimony of the child.

*Survivorship Disqualification Rule (Dead Man’s Statute)

It states that the parties or assignors of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, 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, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased
person became of unsound mind.

To what cases does the Dead Man’s Statute apply?

This rule applies only to a civil case or special proceeding

Elements of Dead Man’s Statute:

1. The defendant in the case is the executor or administrator or the representative of the deceased or the person of unsound mind;
2. The suit is upon a claim by the plaintiff against the estate of said deceased person or person of unsound mind
3. The witness is the plaintiff, or an assignor of that party, or a person in whose behalf the case is prosecuted; and
4. The subject of the testimony is as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person
became of unsound mind.

Maximo filed an action against Pedro, the administrator of the estate of the deceased Juan, for the recovery of a car which is part of the
latter’s estate. During the trial, Maximo presented witness Mariano who testified that he was present when Maximo and Juan agreed
that the latter would pay a rental of P20K for the use of Maximo’s car for one month after which Juan should immediately return the
car to Maximo. Pedro objected to the admission of Mariano’s testimony. If you were the judge, would you sustain Pedro’s objection?
Why?

The objection of Pedro should be sustained. The testimony is admissible because the witness is not disqualified to testify. Those disqualified
under the Dead Man’s Statute or the Survivorship Disqualification Rule are parties or assignors of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a
case is prosecuted. The witness is not one of those enumerated under the rules.

T/F. The Surviving Parties Rule bars Maria from testifying for the claimant as to what the deceased Jose had said to her, in a claim filed
by Pedro against the estate of Jose.

False. The rule bars only a party plaintiff, or his assignor or a person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted. Maria is merely a witness and is not
one of those enumerated as barred from testifying.

*Marital Disqualification Rule (Spousal Immunity Rule)

It means that during marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or 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.

The Spousal Immunity Rule is based on what intent of society?

The rule is based on society’s intent to preserve the marriage relations and promote domestic peace.

Does the prohibition under the Spousal Immunity Rule extend to both testimony which is adverse or for the affected spouse?

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

Does the Spousal Immunity Rule apply to both criminal and civil cases?
Yes. It also extends to both criminal and civil cases because the rule does not distinguish.

Does the Spousal Immunity Rule require that the spouse claiming the privilege against the testimony of the other be validly
married?

Yes. In order that the husband or wife may claim the privilege, it is essential that they be validly married. If they are not, there is no
privilege.

For the Spousal Immunity Rule to apply, is it necessary that the subject of the testimony came to the witness-spouse during the
marriage?

No. If the testimony for or against the other spouse is offered during the existence of the marriage, it does not matter if the facts subject of the
testimony occurred or came to the knowledge of the witness- spouse before the marriage. The affected spouse may still invoke the rule by
objecting to the testimony as long as the testimony is offered during the marriage.

Is the privilege waivable? How?

Yes. The Spousal Immunity Rule is waivable. The testimony is prohibited only over the objection of the affected spouse or the spouse
against whom the testimony is offered.

In Spousal Immunity Rule, who has the right to object to the competency of the testimony of the witness spouse?

It is the latter spouse who has the right to object to the competency of the spouse-witness.
Does the Spousal Immunity Rule also extend to production of documents by the witness-spouse?

Yes. The testimony covered by the marital disqualification rule not only consists of utterances by the witness-spouse against the affected
spouse but also the production of documents against the latter.

Exception to the Marital Disqualification Rule

In the following instances, a spouse may testify for or against the other even without the consent of the latter:
1. In a civil case by one against the other; or
2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other, or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants

Is the exception to the Marital Disqualification Rule limited to injuries which amount to physical wrong?

No. In Cargill v. State, it is stated that the rule that the injury must amount to a physical wrong upon the person is too narrow. The better rule
is that, when an offense directly attacks or directly and virtually impairs the conjugal relations, it comes within the exception of the statute.

T/F. A witness-spouse can validly testify against the other in a civil case even if the civil case is instituted by a third person against the
latter spouse.

False. In order for a spouse to be allowed to testify against the other in a civil case, the case must be a civil case by one against the other.
T/F. A witness-spouse can validly testify against the other in a criminal case provided that the criminal act is committed against the
witness-spouse only and to no other third person.

False. The rule is different in a criminal case. In a criminal case, the privilege of one to testify against the other is not confined to crimes
committed by one against the other, but covers crimes committed by one against the direct descendants or ascendants of the latter like the
latter’s children or parents. However, crimes committed against a spouse’s collateral relatives like uncles, aunties, cousins or nephews and
nieces are not covered by the exception because they are neither direct descendants nor ascendants.

May a spouse testify in a trial where a spouse is a co-accused?

Yes. In People v. Quidato, Jr., the court ruled in the affirmative but likewise held that the testimony of the wife in reference to her husband
must be disregarded since the husband timely objected thereto under the marital disqualification rule. (So nag-apply din sa huli ang
disqualification )

Leticia was estranged from her husband Paul for more than a year due to his suspicion that she was having an affair with Manuel,
their neighbor. She was temporarily living with her sister in Pasig City.
For unknown reasons, the house of Leticia’s sister was burned, killing the latter. Leticia survived. She saw her husband in the vicinity
during the incident. Later, he was charged with Arson in an Information filed with the RTC.
During the trial, the prosecutor called Leticia to the witness stand and offered her testimony to prove that her husband committed
arson.
Can Leticia testify over the objection of her husband on the ground of marital privilege?

Leticia cannot testify. Sec 22 of Rule 130 bars her testimony without the consent of the husband during the marriage. The separation of
the spouses has not operated to terminate their marriage.

*Marital Privileged Communications - it means that the husband or 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.

What are the requirements for the application of the Marital Privilege Communication Rule?

The application of the rule requires the presence of the following 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.

XYZ, an alien, was criminally charged of promoting and facilitating child prostitution and other sexual abuses under RA 7610. The
principal witness against him was a Filipina wife, ABC. Earlier, she had complained that XYZ’s hotel was being
used as a center for sex tourism and child trafficking. The defense counsel for XYZ objected to the testimony of ABC at the trial of
the child prostitution case and the introduction of the affidavits she executed against her husband as a violation of espousal
confidentiality and marital privilege rule. It turned out that DEF, the minor daughter of ABC by her first husband who was a
Filipino, was molested by XYZ earlier. Thus, ABC had filed for legal separation from XYZ since last year.
May the court admit the testimony and affidavits of the wife, ABC, against her husband, XYZ, in the criminal case involving child
prostitution?

If the testimony and affidavit of the wife are evidence of the case against her husband for child prostitution involving her daughter, the
evidence is admissible. The marital privilege communication rule under Sec 24 of Rule 130 as well as the marital disqualification rule under
Sec 22 of Rule 130 do not apply to and cannot be invoked in a criminal case committed by a spouse against the direct descendants of the
other.
A crime committed by the husband against the daughter of his wife is considered a crime committed against the wife and directly attacks or
vitally impairs the marital relations.

*Marital Disqualification Rule v. Marital Privilege Rule

Includes facts, occurrences or Refer to confidential
information even prior to the communication between
marriage husband and wife during
marriage
The spouse affected by the The spouse affected by the
disclosure of facts can no longer disclosure of the information
invoke the rule once the may object even after the
marriage is dissolved dissolution of marriage
Requires that the spouse for or Applies whether the spouse is a
against whom the testimony is party or not
offered is a party to the action
C is the child of the spouses H and W. H sued his wife for judicial declaration of nullity of marriage under Art 36 of the Family Code.
In the trial, the following testified over the objection of W: C, H and D, a doctor of medicine who used to treat W. Rule on W’s
objection that H cannot testify against her because of the rule on marital privilege.

The objection should be overruled. The rule invoked by W, i.e., the rule on marital privilege, does not apply to a civil case by one against
the other. The suit between the spouses is a civil case against the other.
*Attorney-Client Privilege - An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client
to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can attoney’s secretary, stenographer, or
clerk be examined, without the consent of his client and his employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such
capacity.

*Requisites of Attorney-Client Privilege

1. Communication by client to attorney

2. Communication given in confidence
3. Communication given in the course of employment or with a view to professional employment

Does the privilege communication apply even if the counsel refuses the professional relationship?

Yes. The privilege is extended to communications made for the purpose of securing the services of counsel even if counsel later refuses the
professional relationship.

May there be an instance when the attorney-client privilege may be invoked against a non-lawyer?

Yes. There is authority to support the theory that it is enough if he reasonably believes that the person consulted is a lawyer, although in fact he
is not as in the case of a detective pretending to be a lawyer.

Is there an attorney-client relationship when a person asks a lawyer a question as a friend?

No. When a person consults an attorney not as a lawyer but merely as a friend, or a participant in a business transaction, the consultation would
not be one made in the course of a professional employment or with a view to professional employment as required by the rules, and if proven
to be so, would not be within the ambit of the privilege.

Is there a required form for the communication between attorney and client for the privilege to apply?

No. The communication may be oral or written but is deemed to extend to other forms of conduct like physical demonstration as long as
they are intended to be confidential.

Does the privilege extend to future acts of crime intended to be done by client?

No. It is commonly acknowledged that the privilege does not extend to communications where the client’s purpose is the furtherance of a future
intended crime or fraud.

Last-link doctrine – Non-privileged information, such as the identity of the client, is protected if the revelation of such information would
necessarily reveal privileged information.

Does the privilege apply when the communication of confidential information was made before the lawyer’s secretary?

Yes. The statements of the client need not have been made to the attorney in person. Those made to the attorney’s secretary, clerk or
stenographer for transmission to the attorney for the purpose of the
professional relationship or with a view to such relationship or those knowledge acquired by such employees in such capacity are covered
by the privilege.

What must be the character of the communication between the attorney and client for the privilege to apply?

Before the statements of the client and the advice of the attorney be deemed as privileged, the same should have been intended as
confidential.

Does the privilege apply in suits between attorney and the client?

No. The weight of authority supports the view that when the client and attorney become embroiled in a controversy between themselves, as
in an action filed for payment of attorney’s fees or for damages against the negligence of the attorney, the privilege is removed from the
attorney’s lips.

Who can invoke the attorney-client privileged communication?

In relation to the attorney, the privilege is owned by the client. It is he who can invoke the privilege. If the client waives the privilege, no
one else, including the attorney can invoke it.

Does the privilege communication between attorney and client survive the death of the client?
Yes. The protection of the privilege will generally survive the death of the client. However, there had been cases where the privilege was not
made to apply in cases involving the validity or interpretation of the client’s will. Where there is an attack on the validity of the will,
communications made to the attorney on the drawing of the will, while confidential during the lifetime of the client are not intended to
require secrecy after his death.

A tugboat owned by Speedy Port Service, Inc. (SPS) sank in Manila Bay while helping tow another vessel, drowning 5 of the crew in
the resulting shipwreck. At the maritime board inquiry, the 4 survivors testified. SPS engaged Atty. Ely to defend against potential
claims and to due the company owning the other vessel for the damages to the tug. He also interviewed other persons, in some
instances making memoranda. The heirs of the 5 victims filed an action for damages against SPS. Plaintiff’s counsel sent written
interrogatories to Ely, asking whether statements of witnesses were obtained; if written copies were to be furnished; if oral, the exact
provisions were to be set forth in detail. Ely refused to comply, arguing that the documents and information asked are privileged
communication. Is the contention tenable? Explain.

No. The contention is not tenable. The documents and information sought to be disclosed are not privileged. They are evidentiary matters
which will eventually be disclosed during the trial. What is privileged under the rules is (a) the communication made by the client to the
attorney, or (b) the advice given by the attorney, in the course of, or with the view to professional employment. The information sought is
neither a communication by the client to the attorney nor is it an advice by the attorney to his client.

*Physician-Patient Privilege - A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of
the patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired in
attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and which would
blacken the reputation of the patient.

Does the physician-patient privilege apply to criminal cases?

No. The privilege applies to a civil case, whether the patient is a party or not. Further, the rule implies that the privilege cannot be claimed in a
criminal case because the interest of the public in criminal prosecution should be deemed important than the secrecy of the communication.

What is the rationale for the privilege communication between physician and patient?

The rationale for the privilege is to encourage the patient to freely disclose all the matters which may aid in the diagnosis in the treatment of a
disease or an injury.

The privileged communication between physician and patient can be claim by whom?

The patient is the one who may claim the privilege against the physician.

What are the forms of information which the physician cannot disclose with regard to his patient?

The information which cannot be disclosed refers to:

a. Any advice given to the client
b. Any treatment given to the client; and
c. Any information acquired in attending such patient provided that the advice, treatment or information was made or acquired in a
professional capacity and was necessary to enable him to act in the capacity; and
d. That the information sought to be disclosed would tend to blacken the reputation of the patient.

Must there be a contractual relationship between physician and patient for the privilege communication to be invoked?

No. It is opined that the rule does not require that the relationship between the physician and the patient be result of a contractual relationship. It
could be the result of a quasi-contractual relationship as when the patient is seriously ill and the physician treats him even if he is not in the
condition to give his consent as in this situation described in Art 2167 of the Civil Code.

Does the privilege communication between physician and patient apply to autopsies?

No. The results of autopsies may not be deemed covered by the privilege because autopsies are not intended for treatment.

Does the privilege communication between physician and patient survive the patient’s death?

Yes. The privilege survives the death of the patient. Thus, in Gonzales vs. CA, the SC, prevented the disclosure of medical findings that would
tend to blacken the reputation of the patient even after his death.

It is a general rule that for the privilege to apply, the physician must have been acting in his professional capacity, when is the
physician acting in his professional capacity?

The physician is acting in a professional capacity when he attends to the patient for either curative or preventive treatment.

Is the privileged communication between physician and patient waivable?

Yes. The privilege may be waived by the patient. (1) When there is disclosure by the patient of the information, there is, necessarily, a
waiver. (2) There could also be a waiver by operation of the law or the rules. Under the rules, the Court, in which the action is pending may,
in its discretion, order a party to submit to a physical or mental examination.

C is the child of the spouses H and W. H sued his wife for judicial declaration of nullity of marriage under Art 36 of the Family Code.
In the trial, the following testified over the objection of W: C, H and D, a doctor of medicine who used to treat W. Rule on W’s
objection that D cannot testify against her because of the doctrine of privilege communication.

D cannot testify over the objection of W where the subject of the testimony is the advice or treatment given by him or any information
which he may have acquired in attending to W in his professional capacity.

Priest/Minister-Penitent Privilege Communication - A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the person making the confession,
be examined as to any confession made to or any advice given to him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the
church to which the priest or minister or priest belongs.

Who has the power to invoke the privileged communication between priest and penitent?
The person making the confession (penitent) holds the privilege and the priest or minister hearing the confession in his professional capacity
is prohibited from making a disclosure of the confession without the consent of the person confessing.

Are all confessions made to the minister under the scope of the privilege?

No. Not every confession made to the minister or priest is privileged. The communication must be made pursuant to confessions of
sins.

Privileged Communications to Public Officers - A public officer cannot be examined during his term of office or afterwards, as to
communications made to him in official confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.

What is sought to be protected by the privileged Communications to public officers?

It is the interest of the public which is sought to be protected by the rule.

*Executive privilege; Presidential Communications Privilege - This is the power of the government to withhold information from the
public, the Courts, and the Congress. Here the Court acknowledged that there are certain types of information which the government may
withhold from the public like military, diplomatic and national security secrets.
*What are the matters in which the executive privilege applies?

1. Military
2. Diplomatic, and
3. Other National Security matters

Does the executive privilege extend to department heads and secretaries called by Congress?

No. Since Congress has the authority to inquire into the operations of the executive branch, it would be incongruous to hold that the power of
inquiry does not extend to executive officials who are the most familiar with and informed on executive operations. When Congress exercises
its powers of judicial inquiry, the department heads are not exempt by the mere fact that they are department heads. Accordingly, only one
executive official may be exempt from the power of inquiry of Congress – the President upon whom the executive power is vested and is
beyond the reach of Congress except thru the power of impeachment.

T/F. Appearance of Department heads in the question hour is mandatory and not merely discretionary on their part.

False. Appearances of Department heads in the question hour is discretionary on their part.

Can the department heads make use of the executive privilege to evade from the inquiries of Congress?

No. Privilege communication cannot be applied to appearances of department heads in inquiries in aid of legislation and congress is not bound
to respect the refusal of the department heads in such inquiry, unless a valid claim of privilege is subsequently made by the President herself or
by the Executive Secretary.

Are the offers made during international commercial transactions subject to the executive privilege?

Yes. The Court reiterated what it held in previous cases that the information on inter-government exchanges prior to the conclusion of treaties
and executive agreements may be subject to reasonable safeguards for the sake of national interest. The Court then declared that by applying the
principles it had previously adopted, the Court held that while the final text of JPEPA may not be left perpetually confidential since there is a
need to discuss the same before it is approved, the offers exchanged by the parties during the negotiations continue to be privileged even after
the JPEPA is published. Disclosing these exchanges could impair the ability of the Philippines to deal not only with Japan but with other foreign
governments in future negotiations. Reminding the parties of what it had declared in Chavez vs. PCGG, that while the constitutional right to
information on on-going negotiations before a final contract, such information does not cover recognized exceptions like privilege
communication, military and diplomatic secrets and similar matters affecting national interest.

Elements of Presidential Communications Privilege:

1. The protected communications must relate to a

quintessential and non-delegable presidential power;
2. The communication must be authored or solicited and received by a close advisor of the President or the President himself; and
3. The presidential communications privilege remains a qualified privilege that may be overcome by a showing of adequate need,
such that the information sought likely contains important evidence and by an appropriate investigating authority.

*Parental and Filial Privilege - Under the former rule, a parent cannot be compelled to testify against his child or direct descendants. Under
the latter rule, a child may not be compelled to testify against his parents or direct ascendants.

What is the rule under the family code that supports the filial privileged communication rule?

Under the Family Code, No descendant shall be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against his parents and grandparents. The exceptions
are:
1. When such testimony is indispensable in a crime committed against said descendant; or
2. In a crime committed by one parent against the other

C is the child of the spouses H and W. H sued his wife for judicial declaration of nullity of marriage under Art 36 of the Family Code.
In the trial, the following testified over the objection of W: C, H and D, a doctor of medicine who used to treat W. Rule on W’s
objection that C cannot testify against her because of the doctrine of parental privilege.

The contention is not tenable. W cannot invoke the privilege which belongs to the child. C may testify if he wants to although he may not be
compelled to do so. (Privilege is for C to invoke)

Other privileges not mentioned in the Rules:

1. Editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of the published news;
2. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted for;
3. Trade secrets;
4. Information contained in tax census returns; and
5. Bank deposits (others are)
6. Information at conciliation proceedings
7. Communication of suspicious transactions to AMLC
What are the testimonies which need not be necessarily given in open court?

1. Testimonies in Summary procedure

2. Testimonies in civil cases
3. Depositions made before a notary public
4. Testimonies of a party in behalf of another

Oath – it is an outward pledge made under an immediate sense of responsibility to God in attestation of the truth on some statement.

Affirmation – it is a substitute for an oath and is a solemn and formal declaration that the witness will tell the truth.

What is the effect of failure to take an oath or give an affirmation?

The testimony of the witness may be barred

In general, the answer of the witness to questions shall be answered orally, what are the exceptions?

1. The witness is incapacitated; or

2. The question calls for a different mode of answering

After the accused himself had testified in his defense in a murder case, the trial judge, over the objection of the fiscal, allowed the
defense counsel to file and merely submit the affidavits of the other witnesses of the accused in lieu of their direct testimony but subject
still to cross-examination by the prosecution. The fiscal thus filed with the SC a petition for certiorari and prohibition to nullify the
order of the trial court judge allowing such a procedure. Should said petition be granted?

Yes. The petition should be granted. The provisions of the Rules require that the examination of the witnesses shall be done in open court and
their answers be given orally, not in writing, unless the exceptions mentioned therein apply, to wit: (a) the witness is incapacitated to speak, or
(b) the questions calls for a different mode of answer. None of the exceptions apply to the case under consideration. The court, therefore, acted
in excess of jurisdiction amounting to lack of jurisdiction when it allowed the presentation of the affidavits without an oral examination of the
witness.

NOTE: Rule here is slightly modified at present due to the judicial affidavit rule

Rights of Witness

1. Not to give testimony that will subject him to penalty

2. To be protected from harsh questions
3. To be examined on matters pertinent to issue
4. Not to be detained longer than the Judge required
5. Not to give degrading testimonies to his reputation

May a witness under the witness protection program refuse to testify on the ground of his right against self-incrimination?

No. A witness admitted into the witness protection program cannot refuse to testify or to give evidence or produce books, documents, records, or
writings necessary for the prosecution of the offense or offenses for which he has been admitted on the ground of the right against self-
incrimination.
May a witness-accused refuse to take the witness stand?

Yes. If the witness is the accused, he may totally refuse to take the witness stand. Unlike a mere witness who cannot altogether refuse to
take the stand. Before he refuses to answer, he must wait for the incriminating question.

What must the counsel do in case a witness is subjected to intimidation, harassment and embarrassment?

Raise a timely objection on the question

Where shall the examination of a child witness be presented during his delivery of his testimony?

In open court, unless:

1. The witness is incapacitated; or
2. The question calls for a different mode of answering

When may the public be excluded from observing the act of testifying of a child witness?

The order shall be made if the court determines on the record that
1. To testify in open court would cause psychological harm to him, hinder the ascertainment of truth, or result in his inability to
 effectively communicate due to embarrassment, fear or timidity
2. When the evidence to be produced during trial is of such a character as to be offensive to decency or public morals

When may the child be accompanied by an interpreter?

Upon motion or motu proprio, when:

1. The child does not understand English or Filipino, or
2. Unable to communicate said language due to his developmental level, fear shyness, disability or other similar reason

In general, reports regarding a child shall be confidential and kept under seal. Except upon written request and order of the court,
a record shall be released to the following:
1. Members of the court staff
2. Prosecuting attorney
3. Defense counsel
4. Guardian ad litem
5. Agents of investigating law enforcement agencies; and
6. Other persons as determined by the court

What shall be the liability of a person who publishes or cause the publication of the information of an alleged child witness?

Liability to the contempt power of court (indirect contempt)

May a child be held liable for perjury?

No. The youthful offender who fails to acknowledge the case against him or to recite any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry
made to him for any purpose, shall not be held under any provision of law guilty of perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation.

Direct-examination – examination in chief of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue.
Cross-examination – This is the examination of a witness by the adverse party after said witness has given his testimony on direct
examination.

Cross-examination has 2 basic purposes:

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

Re-direct examination – This examination is conducted after the cross-examination of the witness.

Re-cross examination – This is the examination conducted upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination.

Will the death of the witness before the end of his cross- examination have the effect of the striking out of all his testimony?

No. If the witness dies before his cross-examination is over, his testimony on the direct may be stricken out only with respect to the testimony
not covered by the cross-examination.

Does the absence of a witness for furtherance of his cross examination warrant the striking out of all his testimony?

No. The absence of the witness is not enough to warrant striking out his testimony for failure to appear for further cross-examination where the
witness has already been sufficiently cross-examined, and the matter on which cross-examination is sought is not in controversy.

May recalling of a witness be made even without leave of court?

No. If the witness has been examined by both sides, the witness cannot be recalled without leave of court. Recalling a witness is a matter of
judicial discretion.

Leading questions - A leading question is one that is framed in such a way that the question indicates to the witness the answer desired by the
party asking the question. In the words of Sec 10 Rule 132, it is a question which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party
desires. (Question indicating an answer)

T/F. Leading question is generally allowed in direct and re- direct examination.

False. Leading questions are not appropriate in direct and re-direct examinations particularly when the witness is asked to testify about a major
element of the cause of action or defense.

T/F. Leading questions are allowed in cross and re-cross examination.

True. Leading questions are allowed in cross and re-cross examinations.

*What are the instances when leading questions may be allowed in direct or re-direct examination?

1. On preliminary matters
2. When the witness is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is feeble-minded, or a deaf-mute and there is difficulty in getting direct and
intelligible answers from such witness
3. When the witness is hostile witness, or
4. When the witness is an adverse party, or when a witness is an officer, director, managing agent of a corporation, partnership, or
association which is an adverse party.

T/F. Leading questions are not allowed when examining a child witness.

False. The court may allow leading questions in all stages of examination of a child under the condition that the same will further the interest
of justice.

The case is a collection case. The defendant contends that the debt has been paid. He calls a witness to testify to the fact of payment.

Q: While the plaintiff and the defendant were engaged in a conversation on the date and time you mentioned, did you see the
defendant deliver P50K to the plaintiff?

Is the question objectionable?

Yes. The question is objectionable on the ground that it is leading. Here, the examiner obviously wants the witness to directly testify that
money was delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff in his presence. The question could have been properly framed in this manner. “What
have you observed, if any, while the plaintiff and the defendant were engaged in a conversation?”

Misleading questions - A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that
which he has previously stated. It is not allowed in any type of examination.

Counsel: You testified that you and the accused were in a car bound for Baguio City. How fast were you driving?

Is the question objectionable?

Yes. This question is objectionable as misleading where there was no previous testimony from the witness that he was driving the car. The
question assumes a fact not yet in evidence.

Impeachment of a witness – it is basically a technique employed usually as part of the cross-examination to discredit a witness by attacking
his credibility.

Guidelines in impeaching a witness:

1. The impeachment of a witness is to be done by the party against whom the witness is called;
2. Subject to certain exceptions, the party producing the witness is barred from impeaching his own witness.
3. By exception to the immediately preceding rule, if the witness is unwilling or hostile, the party calling him may be allowed by the
court to impeach the witness. A party may also be allowed to impeach his own witness when said witness is an adverse party or is
an officer, director, or managing agent of a corporation, partnership, or association which is an adverse party.
4. It is improper for the party calling the witness to present evidence of the good character of his own witness. The same is allowed
only if the character of the witness has been impeached.

*What are the modes of impeaching a witness?

A witness may be impeached thru the following modes:
1. By contradictory evidence;
2. By evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty and integrity is bad; or
3. By evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present testimony. (Laying the predicate)
Illustration of Impeachment by contradictory evidence

Witness A testifies on direct that he was barely 5 meters away from where the accused D fired a shot at the victim, V. The defense counsel has
reliable information that at the time the shooting took place, Witness A was standing as a witness in a wedding of his friend, Witness B in a
place a hundred miles away. The defense counsel now asks:

Q: You testified that you were present when D shot V, is that right? A: Perfectly right, Sir!
Q: Isn’t it true that at the time of the alleged shouting of V by D, you were in a wedding of your friend miles and miles away?
A: That isn’t true sir, absolutely not.

Because Witness A denied his being in a friend’s wedding at the time of the incident, the defense counsel now has the chance to prove the
contrary by contradictory evidence. He can do so by calling Witness B or any other witness to testify on the whereabouts of Witness B on the
relevant date and time. An expert witness may likewise be contradicted by presenting another expert with contrary opinions.

Illustration of Impeachment by prior inconsistent statements

The case is a robbery case. The accused has Oriental features and is five feet and three inches tall. The prosecution witness is one who allegedly
saw the culprit come out of the crime scene.

Q: Mr. A, you testified on direct examination that the man you saw come out of the burglarized store had Oriental features and was a little over
five feet tall. Is that correct?
A: Yes, Sir.
Q: Are you certain of your description of the man? A: Very certain, Sir.
Q: And when was this?
A: On February 15, 2005, around 9:30 in the evening. That was the date and time of the burglary.
Q: Do you recall having seen SPO4 Morales outside the burglarized store at around 10:00 of the same day and night.
A: I do, Sir. He spoke to me that night and asked me what I saw.
Q: And that was only ten minutes from the time you saw the man. Is that correct?
A: That is correct, Sir.
Q: And at that time, everything was still fresh in your mind, right? A: You’re absolutely right, Sir.
Q: Do you recall telling SPO4 Morales that you cannot give an accurate description of the man who came out of the burglarized store because
he was wearing bonnet over his face, had a pair of gloves on and was wearing dark long sleeves.

At this point the witness gets boxed in, and his credibility starts crumbling no matter how he responds to the question asking him to affirm or to
deny the prior inconsistent statement. (Same rule as when the prior statement is made in writing)
What are the aspects in which the bad reputation of a witness for purposes of his impeachment may refer to?

Evidence of bad reputation for the purpose of impeachment should refer only to the following aspects:
1. For truth
2. For Honesty, or
3. For integrity
These are aspects of a person’s reputation that are relevant to his credibility. Thus, it would be improper for a witness to be impeached
because of his reputation for being troublesome and abrasive.

Illustration of Impeachment by showing bad reputation

Mr. W is called by the prosecution to testify that it was indeed the accused who picked the pocket of the victim when the latter incidentally
tripped by the sidewalk. The defense later presents Mr. D, a neighbor of Mr. W for 30 years, who testifies that Mr. W has a reputation in the
community for telling lies. The testimony of Mr. D is an impeaching testimony to discredit Mr. W. Mr. D, who has testified on the reputation
of Mr. W, may be cross-examined like any witness. He may be asked on cross-examination about the extent of his familiarity with the
witness who is being impeached, together with any prejudice and biases he may have against the witness or his stake and interest in the case.

May the party calling a witness present evidence of good character of the said witness?

No. The party calling a witness, cannot initiate proof of the said witness’ good character. This is because a witness is presumed to be truthful
and of good character, the party presenting him does not have to prove he is good because he is presumed to be one. It is only after his
character has been attacked, can he prove his being good. He must first be discredited before his reputation or character can be bolstered.
T/F. A witness-accused cannot present evidence of his good moral unless impeached by the adverse party.

False. The rule that bars evidence of the good character of the witness who has not yet been impeached has reference only to a mere witness.
It does not refer to an accused in a criminal case. In a criminal case, the accused may prove his good moral character relevant to the offense
charged even before his character is attacked.

The defense counsel asks a series of questions to show specific instances of misconduct of the prosecution witness:

Q: Do you know the prosecution witness? A: I do

Q: How did you come to know him?
A: 2 years ago, he robbed me of my wallet at gun point.
Q: Was the incident the first time you know the prosecution witness?
A: No, Sir.
Q: Why do you say so?
A: Prior to my being robbed by him, he stole the carabao of my neighbor.

Is this line of questioning objectionable?

Yes, it is. A witness cannot be impeached by evidence of particular wrongful acts. Just as a witness cannot testify on specific acts of
misconduct committed by the witness being impeached, the latter cannot also be examined on particular wrongful acts done by him. To do so
would be against the tenor of Sec 11 Rule 132.

What is the exception to the rule that a witness cannot be impeached by evidence of his particular wrongful act?

There is a particular wrongful act that is admissible in evidence – his prior conviction of an offense. This prior conviction of the witness is
shown thru either of 2 ways: (a) by his examination, i.e., by cross-examining him, or (b) by presenting the record of his prior conviction.

What is the Rule on Exclusion and Separation of Witnesses?

The judge may exclude a witness who at the time of exclusion is not under examination so that he may not hear the testimony of other
witnesses. The judge may cause the witnesses to be kept separate and to be prevented from conversing with one another until all shall have been
examined.

Character is the aggregate of the moral qualities which belong to and distinguish an individual person; the general result of one’s
distinguishing attributes.

Is character evidence admissible as evidence?

No. Character evidence is, as a rule, not admissible.

May the prosecution prove the bad moral character of the accused in its main evidence?

No. In a criminal case, the prosecution cannot prove the bad moral character of the accused in its evidence-in-chief (direct examination). It can
only do so in rebuttal.

When may the accused prove his good moral character in a case?

The accused may prove his good moral character when pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charge.

Is the accused prohibited from proving his good moral character as evidence?

No. While the prosecution if forbidden to present evidence of the bad moral character of the accused, unless in rebuttal, the general rule against
propensity evidence does not apply to the accused who is allowed to offer evidence of his good character.

May the good or bad moral character of the offended party be proved by the accused?

Yes. The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved by the accused if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree the
probability or improbability of the offense charged. This rule applies only to criminal cases and not to administrative cases.

What are the inadmissible evidence against the abused child under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness?
Under the sexual abuse shield rule under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, the following are not admissible in any criminal
proceeding involving alleged sexual child abuse:
1. Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior, and
2. Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim.

Exception: Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim is admissible to prove that a person other than the accused
was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence.

Is evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior of the child absolutely inadmissible as evidence?

No. Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim is admissible to prove that a person other than the accused was
the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence.

In general, the opinion of the witness is not admissible as evidence, what are the exceptions?

1. When opinion of an expert regarding his special knowledge, skill or training; or

2. When opinion of an ordinary witness regarding:
a. Identity of person about whom he has adequate knowledge
b. Handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity, and
c. Mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted

The witness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
Dencio barged into the house of Marcela, tied 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 pleading: Huwag!
Maawa ka sa akin! After raping Candida, Dencio fled from the house with the loot. Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to the
police station about a kilometer away and told Police Officer Roberto Maawa that Dencio had barged into the house of Marcela, tied
the latter to a chair and robbed her of jewelry and money. Candida also related to the police officer that despite her pleas, Dencio
had raped her. The policeman noticed that Candida was hysterical and on the verge of a collapse. Dencio was charged with robbery
with rape. During trial, Candida can no longer be located. If the police officer will testify that he noticed Candida to be hysterical
and on the verge of collapse, would such testimony be considered as opinion, hence, inadmissible?

No. The testimony would be admissible even if it would be an opinion. The opinion of an ordinary witness is admissible when such
testimony refers to his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
Hearsay Evidence Opinion Evidence

In general, the opinion of the witness is not admissible as evidence, what are the exceptions?

1. When opinion of an expert regarding his special knowledge, skill or training; or

2. When opinion of an ordinary witness regarding:
a. Identity of person about whom he has adequate knowledge
b. Handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity, and
c. Mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted

The witness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.

Why is opinion evidence generally not allowed?

Because the witness should testify on what he perceived and it is for the court to give an opinion on such perception

Dencio barged into the house of Marcela, tied 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 pleading: Huwag!
Maawa ka sa akin! After raping Candida, Dencio fled from the house with the loot. Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to the
police station about a kilometer away and told Police Officer Roberto Maawa that Dencio had barged into the house of Marcela, tied
the latter to a chair and robbed her of jewelry and money. Candida also related to the police officer that despite her pleas, Dencio had
raped her. The policeman noticed that Candida was hysterical and on the verge of a collapse. Dencio was charged with robbery with
rape. During trial, Candida can no longer be located. If the police officer will testify that he noticed Candida to be hysterical and on the
verge of collapse, would such testimony be considered as opinion, hence, inadmissible?

No. The testimony would be admissible even if it would be an opinion. The opinion of an ordinary witness is admissible when such testimony
refers to his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.

Is the court bound to accept expert opinion during trial?

No. Upon its discretion, the Court may call other expert witnesses. In examining an expert, hypothetical data must be presented to the witness
and said witness shall give his opinion on it. The said data must be hypothetical and not the actual case.

Hearsay Rule

What is the rule on hearsay evidence?

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 the rules.

What is the basis for excluding hearsay evidence?

The rule excluding hearsay testimony rests mainly on the ground that there is no opportunity to cross-examine the outside declarant.

What is the first hand knowledge rule?

It states that a witness can testify only on those matters to which he has personal knowledge

What is the result of non-objection to hearsay evidence?

Hearsay evidence if not objected to is admissible as evidence. However, even if admitted, it has no probative value.

When is evidence hearsay

The element of purpose had long been recognized in this jurisdiction. The SC admitted unsigned statement of accounts not to prove the truth
of its entries but for the purpose of showing the possessor’s good faith in making improvements on the property, and to show that such
improvements were made pursuant to a verbal contract that the leased property will eventually be sold to her.

The SC acknowledged that the ban on hearsay evidence does not include statements which are relevant independently of whether they are
true or not, like statements of a person to show, among others, his state of mind, mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will and
other emotions.

What is a statement as defined by the Federal Rules?

It is either an oral or written assertion or a nonverbal conduct intended by the person as an assertion.
Specific elements of hearsay evidence (As enumerated by the Federal Rules)

To constitute hearsay therefore, there must be:

1. An out of court statement, oral, written or non-verbal conduct, made by one other than the one made by the declarant or
witness testifying at the trial; and
2. The out of court statement must be offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the out of court statement.

What is the test for hearsay evidence?

The test is a test of purpose of statement in connection with the 2nd element, that is, the out of court statement must be offered to prove the
truth of the matter asserted in the out of court statement for the statement to become hearsay.

Why is hearsay evidence excluded by the rules?

1. Denies the accused right to confrontation

2. Speaker may misperceive, err into calling, falsify or misunderstood the truth
3. Depreciates the truth
4. Opportune fraud

What is double hearsay rule?

It is when a hearsay statement offered as evidence contains another hearsay statement.

What is multiple hearsay rule?

It is when a hearsay statement offered as evidence contains another hearsay statement which contains another hearsay statement.
What is a negative hearsay (hearsay by silence or evidence of non-complaint)?

It is the testimony by an in-court witness regarding the conduct or silence by other individuals outside of court. It can be sustained if, for
instance, it will be used to prove that the product of a manufacturer is not defective due to the fact that no complaints were received from other
buyers.

When is an out of court statement offered to prove a non- hearsay matter?

When the out of court statement is not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, it is said that the statement is offered for a non- hearsay
purpose. If it is offered to prove the truth of the statement, it is hearsay because it is offered to prove a hearsay purpose.

Is hearsay evidence limited to out of court statements?

No. It may be written, oral, in silence or thru actions.

May an erroneously admitted hearsay evidence become the basis of a decision?

No. Hearsay evidence may be admitted; however, it does not have sufficient probative value.

What is consent evidence?

It is evidence not objected to in court.

Hearsay evidence vs. Opinion evidence

Not based on one’s personal Based on personal knowledge of
perception but based on the witness based on his skill,
knowledge of others training or experience

Examples of Non-Hearsay Evidence:

1. Where a statement is not offered for the truth of the contents of the conversation, but only to show that it was made, then the
statement is not hearsay.
2. Statements relating to the state of mind of the declarant and statements relating to the state of mind of the listener.

Out-of-court statements offered to prove mental state of the declarant

Let us assume we have a special proceeding in court. Let’s say it is the probate of a testator’s will. Some heirs who felt aggrieved by the
dispositions in the will have raised the issue of the testator’s sanity. The will was purportedly executed on January 3 of the previous
year. A witness for the oppositor is on the witness stand to testify on the testator’s alleged incapacity.
Q: How long have you known the testator? A: For 20 years by the time he died, Sir.
Q: On January 3, 2008, what did you hear the testator say, if any?

Objection your honor! Hearsay! (Opposing Counsel objects) Court: Not so fast Panero. Witness may answer.

A: In the morning of January 3, he said, I am Joseph Stalin. At around 12 high noon, he told me, I am Theodore Roosevelt.
Right after the subscribing witnesses to his left, he brushed me
aside and said, They had no Idea I am Saddam Hussein. When I served him supper, he said, Those fools! They didn’t realize they
just met Alexander the Great!

Court: Objection overruled!

Are the statements of the testator to prove the truth of the assertions therein?

No. Certainly not. Obviously, out of court statements of the testator are not offered to prove that he is Joseph Stalin, Theodore Roosevelt,
Saddam Hussein and Alexander the Great rolled into one. They are offered for a non-hearsay purpose i.e., to prove by inference thru the
statement that the testator on the day the will was executed, was incapacitated by reason of a mental condition. From experience we know
that a person’s state of mind may be revealed by his actions or by what he says. The declarant’s words or conduct constitute circumstantial
evidence of his state of mind.

Out-of-court statement offered to prove its effect on the listener/hearer

The accused is a police officer who chanced upon the crime scene and arrested the complaining witness after he was fingered by a
witness to the felony. He is on the stand to testify on the circumstances surrounding the arrest.
Q: Sir, what were you doing on such and such place? A: I was on a routine patrol.
Q: What happened on such and such date on such and such time?
A: I saw people milling around something in the corner of ABC and XYZ Sts.
Q: What if any did you do?
A: I got out of my patrol car to see what was happening. Q: What if any did you see?
A: I saw a man lying face downward on the side of the street with blood all over his back.
Q: What happened next?
A: A man whispered to me. This happened two minutes ago and that guy sitting there pretending to be an onlooker is the culprit.

Objection! Hearsay!
Court: Objection overruled! Does the hearsay rule apply?

No. The testimony, This happened barely two minutes ago and that guy sitting there pretending to be an onlooker is the culprit, is not offered
to prove that (a) the incident occurred two minutes ago, or
(b) that the guy sitting and pretending to be an onlooker was the culprit. The testimony was offered to prove that an arrest was made as a
consequence of the out of court statement’s effect on the hearer. This effect was the reason for the arrest. This effect is relevant to justify the
apprehension of the complaining witness. Words offered to prove the effect on the hearer are admissible when they are offered to show their
effect on one whose conduct is at issue.

Out-of-court statement offered to prove that the statement was made

Prosecutor: What did you hear the witness say? Defense: Objection, question calls for hearsay testimony! Court: Not so fast!
Witness may answer.
Witness: The accused said while pointing to the victim: You are a thief! You stole my money! You are a liar!
Court: Objection overruled!

Is the testimony of the witness excludable as hearsay?

No. It is not. The testimony is not a hearsay. It is not offered to prove that the complaining witness is a thief or a liar. It is offered to prove the
tenor of the statement, i.e., that the statement was made. What is significant is the making of the statement. Beyond the mere fact that the words
were uttered, the statement proves nothing as to its averments because the out of court declarations relevance is independent of the truth of its
assertions.

Independently relevant (relative) statements – It states that a declarant’s statement may have relevance to an issue in a case from the mere
fact that the words were spoken or written, irrespective of the truth or falsity of the assertion. It is not hearsay and is therefore not barred by the
hearsay evidence rule.

A witness may be asked questions concerning what the accused told him that other persons were involved in the conspiracy if the purpose of
the testimony is not to prove that such persons were really involved in the conspiracy but only to prove what the accused had mentioned. (PP
vs. Cusi, Jr)

Newspaper accounts of an incident are hearsay if offered to prove the truth of the accounts but are not hearsay if offered for a purpose
other than the truth of the matter asserted. The newspaper account is admissible only to prove that there was a publication and merely the
tenor of the news, but not its truth. (Feria vs. CA)

Classification of independently relevant statements under Disierto vs. Estrada

First class:
1. Those statements which are the very facts in issue, and
2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the fact in issue.

Second class:
1. Statements of a person showing his state of mind, that is, his mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will and other
emotions;
2. Statements of a person which shows his physical condition, as illness and the like;
3. Statements of a person from which an inference may be made as to the state of mind of another, that is, knowledge, belief, motive,
good or bad faith, etc. of the latter.
4. Statements which may identify the date, place and person in question, and
5. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a witness.

The prosecution presented in evidence a newspaper clipping of the report to the reporter who was present during the press conference
stating that X admitted the robbery. Is the newspaper clipping admissible against X?

The newspaper clipping is admissible as non-hearsay if offered for the purpose of showing that the statement of X was made to a reporter
regardless of the truth or falsity of the statement. The admissibility depends now on whether the fact that the statement was made is relevant to
the case. If it is relevant, it is admissible as an independent relevant statement (a non-hearsay declaration). It would be hearsay if offered to
prove the truth that X was the robber.
*Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule:

1. Dying declarations
2. Declaration 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. Entries in official records
9. Commercial lists and the like
10. Learned treatises
11. Testimony or deposition at a former trial

*Dying declarations – 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.

What are the reasons for the admissibility of dying declarations?

1. Necessity – Because the declarant’s death renders it impossible his taking the witness stand, and it often happens that there is no
other equally satisfactory proof of the crime; allowing it, therefore, prevents a failure of justice.
2. Trustworthiness - Because the declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death and when every motive to
 falsehood is silenced and the mind is induced by the most powerful considerations to speak the truth.

The dying declaration exception was not available in rape, abortion, kidnapping, burglary cases or any civil case.

As long as the relevance is clear, a dying declaration may now be introduced in a criminal or civil action and the relevance is satisfied
where the subject of inquiry is the death of the declarant himself.

Under the rules, it is evident that a mere consciousness of death is not enough because everyone of us, at one time or another has become
conscious of death. The kind of death of which the declarant should be conscious of is a death that is impending. The declarant must be
conscious that death is near and certain, that death is near at hand, and what is said must have been spoken in the hush of its impending
presence.

The declarant’s belief that he is going to die soon may be shown circumstantially by the obvious fatal quality of the wound, by the
statements made to the victim by the physician that his condition is hopeless, or by some other circumstances. (PP vs. Silang Cruz)

If the declarant’s statement is made under consciousness of an impending death, a subsequent belief in recovery before his actual death
does not bar admissibility of his statement. (PP vs. Black)

The early case of US vs. Antipolo affirms that dying declarations are admissible in favor of the defendant as well as against him. Thus, a
dying declaration which avers that the firearm that injured the declarant was not discharged on purpose but only accidentally, is
admissible to prove the innocence of the accused.
Suppose that a man collapses on your front door, blood oozing from his back where a knife is prominently planted. You rush to help him
and you notice, the poor, hapless guy is your next door neighbor, Candido. You have long wanted to ask him whether or not he had
something to do with the death of Calixto, another neighbor six months ago. As he lay dying in your arms, you ask him the question and
in a weak voice, he whispers: It was not me… it was Frank Santos. In a couple of seconds he dies.

a. Is Candido’s statement admissible as a dying declaration against Frank Santos for the death of another neighbor?

No. This is because the declaration was neither about the cause nor the circumstances of the declarant’s death. It is not admissible because the
subject of the inquiry is the death of someone else.

b. What if instead of pointing to Frank, Candido declared that: Joaquin stabbed me! Haltingly and between gasps, he states he and
Joaquin had been robbing tourists in the area for the past 12 months, that a couple of hours ago they robbed a tourist of his money
worth P5K, that there was an argument between them while dividing the loot, and that as a consequence, Joaquin stabbed him in the
back. Despite his weakened state, he also states that he and Joaquin were also responsible for robbing the convenient store at the street
corner the day before. Would the other declarations other than “Joaquin stabbed me!” be admissible as dying declaration?

No. While the inclusion of the declaration that he was stabbed because of an argument while dividing the loot, may be argued to be part of the
circumstances surrounding the declarant’s death, other portions of the declaration like the admission that he and Joaquin had been robbing
tourists in the past and that they recently robbed a convenient store, do not come within the purview of the exception. They are distinct matters
to the killing.

*Elements of Dying Declaration

1. That the declaration is one made by a dying person

2. That the declaration was made by such dying person under a 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 the inquiry;
5. The declarant is competent as a witness had he survived
6. The declarant should have died.

Fallen by a bullet upon being fired at, Santos before expiring told Romero, a passerby who came to his rescue, I was shot by Pablo, our
neighbor.
May Romero’s testimony on what was told him by Santos be offered and admitted in evidence in the separate civil action for damages
brought by the heirs against Pablo Cruz?

Yes. The statement is admissible. A dying declaration, as in the facts in the case at bar, may be offered in a civil case provided that the cause
and circumstances of the death of the declarant are the subjects of the inquiry.

Rationale for the Admissibility of a Dying Declaration - No person who knows of his impending death would make a careless or false
accusation. A dying declaration is entitled to the highest respect.

Assailing a Dying Declaration

Although jurisprudentially considered as evidence of the highest order, it is submitted that the admissibility of a dying declaration, like any
admissible evidence, does not create a conclusive presumption of credibility of the admitted declaration.

The declarant himself may be impeached thru the normal methods provided for under the rules. For instance, the objector may show
that prior to the admitted declaration, the declarant had previously made a statement inconsistent with his supposedly dying declaration.

Courts have to apply to dying declarations the same rules applied in testing the credibility of testimony of a witness in court. No law
allows them to use a different criterion. One may even question the competency of the declarant himself who, like any other witness, may
also be impeached. If the declarant is incompetent under the rules if he were to appear in Court and in person, he would also be
incompetent as a dying declarant. Thus, if a court would adjudge him incompetent because of his insanity if he were alive, there is no
reason to consider him sane as a dying declarant.

Res gestae – Things done

Res Gestae under the Rules of Court

*Part of the 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 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.

We will observe that the use of res gestae in the Philippines is limited to two matters: (1) spontaneous statement, and (2) verbal acts.
Other parts of res gestae:

1. Presents sense of impression – when vehicle is running at a high speed and is swerving, the witness may have the impression that the
driver is drunk
2. Declaration of present state of mind – statement describes declarants present state of mind
3. Present physical condition – declaration of pain as described by witness

*Spontaneous Statements

Spontaneous statements (spontaneous exclamations or excited utterances) to be admitted in evidence must have the following
characteristic:
1. That there is a 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 statements were made before the declarant had the time to contrive or devise a falsehood;
4. That the statement relates to the circumstances of the startling event or occurrence, or that the statements must concern the
occurrence in question and its immediate attending circumstances.
The justification for the excited utterance exception is that a spontaneous declaration of an individual who has recently suffered an
overpowering and shocking experience is likely to be truthful.

A declaration by a deceased person concerning the circumstances of his death may not be considered a dying declaration if it cannot be
established that he uttered his statement while conscious of his impending death but the utterance of the victim made immediately after
sustaining injuries may be considered the incident speaking thru the victim. While it may not qualify as a dying declaration, it may
nonetheless be admitted in evidence as part of the res gestae. A declaration made spontaneously after a startling occurrence is deemed a part
of the res gestae when (1) the principal act, the res gestae, is a startling occurrence; (2) the statements were made before the declarant had
time to contrive or devise; and (3) the statements concern the occurrence in question and its immediately attending circumstances.

Dencio barged into the house of Marcela, tied 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 leading: Huwag! Maawa
ka sa akin! After raping Candida, Dencio fled from the house with the loot. Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to the police
station about a kilometer away and told police Officer Roberto Maawa that Dencio had barged into the house of Marcela, tied the latter
to a chair and robbed her of jewelry and money. Candida also related to the police that despite her pleas, Dencio had raped her. The
policeman noticed that Candida was hysterical and on the verge of collapse.
Dencio was charged with robbery with rape. During the trial, Candida can no longer be located.
If the prosecution presents Police Officer Roberto Maawa to testify on what Candida had told him, would such testimony of the
policeman be hearsay?

The testimony would be hearsay if offered to prove the truth of the statement of Candida, but an admissible hearsay as an exception to the
hearsay rule. Under the Rules of Court, 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. The statements made by Candida to
the Police Officer fall within the res gestae rule.
If the statement of Candida is offered merely to prove the tenor of the statement, i.e. what Candida told the Police Officer without regard to
whether the statement is true or not, it may be considered as an independently relevant statement and, thus, not hearsay.

*Verbal Acts

They are statement accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue and giving it a legal significance.

To be admissible under this category, 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.

Entries in the Course of Business (Business Records Rule)

Entries made at, or near the time of the transactions to which they refer, by a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in position to
know the facts therein stated, may be received as prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries in his professional capacity or in the
performance of duty or in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty.

This is commonly encountered in breach of contract suits and suits of collection of a sum of money.

Elements of Business Records Rule

1. Entries were made at, or near the time of the transactions referred to;
2. Such entries were made in the regular course of business;
3. The person making the entries was in the position to know the facts stated in the entries.
4. The person making the entries did so in his professional capacity, or in the performance of duty and in the regular course of
business; and
5. The person making the entry is now dead or unable to testify.

The Rules on electronic evidenced also expressly exempt business records from the hearsay rule.

It has been held that entries in the payroll, being entries in the ordinary course of business enjoy the presumption of regularity under Sec
43 of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court.

*Declarations 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 declarant’s own interest, that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the declaration
unless he believed it to be true, may be received against himself or in his successors in interest and against third persons.

The declaration contemplated by Rule 130 is a declaration against interest. If the declaration is favorable to the interest of the declarant,
it is a mere self-serving statement and does not fall as an exception to the hearsay rule.

Note that the declaration against interest made by the deceased, or by one unable to testify, is admissible even against the declarant’s
successor in interest or third persons.

Admission vs. Declaration against interest

Admissible whether declarant is Declarant must be dead or
dead or alive unable to testify
Made at anytime even after or Made before controversy arises
during trial
Need not be against one’s Made against one’s
pecuniary/moral interest pecuniary/moral interest
Admissible only against parties Admissible even against 3rd
persons
Not an exemption to any rule Exemption to hearsay rule

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 by birth or
marriage, may be received in evidence where it occurred before the controversy, and relationship between the two 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.

Elements of Declaration About Pedigree

1. The declarant is dead, or unable to testify;

2. That the declarant is related by birth or marriage to the person whose pedigree is in issue;
3. The declaration was made before the controversy; and
4. The relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration.

The declaration of Jose, already dead, prior to his death and prior to any controversy, that Juan is illegitimate son, is a declaration about
pedigree. Similarly, a statement from a mother while leaving, that her daughters Maria and Pedra were sired by the same father is
admissible.

Be it noted that the declaration about pedigree may be received in evidence if the relationship is shown by evidence other than the
declaration.

Family Relation or Tradition Regarding Pedigree

The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to a controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one of its members, may be received
in evidence if the witness testifying be also a member of the family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family bibles or family books
or charts, engraving or rings, family portraits and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree.

Common Reputation (Ancient document)

Common reputation existing previous to the controversy, respecting facts of public or general interest more than thirty years old, 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.

Entries in Official Records

Entries made in official records made in the performance of his duty by a public officer 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.

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 of persons
engaged in that occupation and is generally used and relied upon by them therein.

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 if a witness
expert on the subject testifies, that the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his profession, or calling
as expert in the subject.

Testimony or Deposition at a Former Proceeding

The testimony or deposition of a witness diseased or unable to testify, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
involving the same parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine
him.

Exception to the Hearsay Rule Under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness

A statement made by a child, in child abuse cases, describing any act or attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise admissible under the
hearsay rule, may be admitted in evidence in any criminal or non-criminal proceeding, although before such hearsay statement may be
admitted, certain requisites must concur:
1. The proponent shall make known to the adverse party the intention to offer such statement and its particulars to provide him a fair
opportunity to object;
2. If the child is available, the court shall, upon motion of the adverse party, require the child to be present at the presentation of the
hearsay statement for cross- examination of the adverse party;
3. When the child is unavailable (as when the child is diseased, suffers from physical infirmity, mental illness, loss of memory, or
because the child will be exposed to severe psychological injury), the fact of such circumstance must be proved by the proponent
and the hearsay testimony shall be admitted only if corroborated by other admissible evidence. (Sec. 28, Rule on Examination of a
Child Witness)
Burden of Proof, Quantum of Evidence and Presumptions A – Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence

Burden of Proof

(Onus probandi) Refers to the obligation of a party to the litigation to perform to the court that he is entitled to relief

Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law.

It is a basic rule that he who alleges must prove what is alleged. (Nikko Hotel Manila Garden v. Reyes)

Sec 1 of Rule 131, is the duty of a party to present evidence not only to establish a claim but also a defense.

In suits against a common carrier, the passenger plaintiff does not have the burden of proving the defendant carrier’s negligence since common
carriers are presumed to have been at fault, or to have acted negligently in case of death of or injuries to passengers (Art 1756, Civil Code). On
the contrary, under the same provision, the defendant has the burden of proof to show that it had observed the extraordinary diligence required
by law. The plaintiff has to show however, the existence of a contract and the breach of the contract of carriage. (Calalas v. CA)

The burden of proof that a debt was contracted lies with the
creditor-plaintiff. Ei incumbit probation qui dicit, non qui negat – he who asserts, not he who denies, must prove. If the defendant admits the
debt but defends by alleging that it has already been paid, waived or otherwise extinguished, he has the burden to prove the extinguishment of
the alleged obligation.

In an eminent domain case, the local government that seeks to expropriate private property has the burden of proving to show the existence of
compliance with the elements for the valid exercise of the right of eminent domain. This is because the burden of proof is on the party making
the allegations.

In termination cases, the burden of proof rests upon the employer to show that the dismissal is for a valid and just cause. Failure to do so would
necessarily mean that the dismissal was not justified, and, therefore, was illegal.

In Mobile Protective & Detective Agency v. Ompad, the Court held that should an employer interpose the defense of resignation, it is still
incumbent upon respondent company to prove that the employee voluntarily resigned.

In disbarment proceedings, the burden of proof rests upon the complainant, and for the court to exercise its disciplinary powers, the case against
the respondent must be established by clear, convincing and satisfactory proof. Indeed, considering the serious consequences of the disbarment
or suspension of a member of the Bar, the Supreme Court has consistently held that clearly preponderant evidence is necessary to justify an
imposition of the administrative penalty.

In an accident insurance, the insured’s beneficiary has the burden of proof in demonstrating that the cause of death is due to the covered peril.
Test for Determining where Burden of Proof Lies

The burden of proof rests with the party who wants to establish a legal right in his favor.

Where Burden of Proof is Fixed

The burden of proof is fixed by the pleadings. The claim of the plaintiff which he must prove, is spelled out in his complaint. The defendant’s
defenses which he must likewise prove are to be found in his answer to the complaint. The burdens of proof of both parties do not shift
during the course of the trial.

Burden of Evidence

To illustrate: In insurance cases, where a risk is excepted by the terms of a policy, loss from such a risk constitutes a defense which the
insurer may urge, since it has not assumed that risk, and from this it follows that an insurer seeking to defeat a claim has the burden of
proving that the loss comes within the purview of the exception or limitation set-up. If a proof is made of a loss apparently within a contract
of insurance, the burden is upon the insurer to prove that the loss arose from a cause of loss which is expected or for which it is not liable, or
from a cause which limits its liability. Consequently, it is sufficient for the insured to prove the fact of damage or loss. Once the insured
makes out a prima facie case in his favor, the duty or burden of evidence shifts to the insurer to controvert the insured’s prima facie case. It is
only when the insurer has sufficiently proven that the damage or loss was caused by an excepted risk that the burden of evidence shift back to
the insured who is then under a duty of producing evidence to show why such excepted risk does not release petitioner from any liability.

Distinguish burden of proof and burden of evidence

 Obligation of a party to present Duty of the party to go forward
evidence on the facts in issue with the evidence to overthrow
necessary to establish his claim any prima facie presumption
or defense by the amount of against him. (Shifts)
evidence required by law (Sec 1
Rule 130). (Does not shift)

Equipoise Rule or Equiponderance Doctrine

The equipoise doctrine is based on the principle that no one shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. (Sec 1,
Art III, Constitution)

The doctrine refers to a situation where the evidence of the parties are evenly balanced or there is doubt on which side the evidence
preponderates. In this case the decision should be against the party with the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and the evidence does not
suggest that the scale of justice should weigh in his favor the court should render a verdict for the defendant.

In a 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.

In labor cases, if doubt exists between the evidence presented by the employer and the employee, the scales of justice must be tilted in favor
of the latter.

Doctrine of In Dubio Pro Reo – It states that when moral certainty hangs on the balance, the scale shall tilt in favor of the accused
B – Quantum of Evidence - is the amount of evidence needed; the quality of proof is how reliable such evidence should be considered

Preponderance of Evidence

It means the greater or superior weight of evidence. It is the evidence that is more convincing and more credible than the one offered by the
adverse party.

In determining whether or not there is preponderance of evidence, the court may consider the following:
1. All the facts and circumstances of the case;
2. The witnesses’ manner of testifying, their intelligence, their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which they are testifying,
the nature of the facts to which they testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony;
3. The witnesses’ interest or want of interest, and also their personal credibility so far as the same may ultimately appear in the trial;
4. The number of witnesses, although it does not mean that preponderance is necessarily with the greater number.

To persuade by the preponderance of evidence is not to take the evidence quantitatively but qualitatively

Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt

It 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.

Well-entrenched in jurisprudence is the rule that the conviction of the accused must rest, not on the weakness of the defense, but on the strength
of the prosecution. The burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, not on the accused to prove his innocence.

Moral certainty is that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.

Reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems.

Substantial Evidence

It is that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. It applies to administrative
cases filed before administrative and quasi-judicial bodies.

Distinguish preponderance of evidence from substantial evidence

Quantum of Evidence in Petition for a Writ of Amparo

In a petition for a writ of amparo, the parties shall establish their claims by substantial evidence. (Sec 17, Rule on the Writ of Amparo)

Effect of Failure to Prove Administrative Liability on the Criminal Case

In Paredes v. CA, the accused argued that as his liability in the administrative case against him was not established by substantial evidence,
so will his criminal case necessarily fall, demanding as it does, a heavier quantum of proof, i.e., proof beyond reasonable doubt. To this
argument the SC declared:

The petition must fail.

It is indeed a fundamental principle that administrative cases are independent from criminal actions for the same act or omission. Thus, an
absolution from a criminal charge is not a bar to an administrative prosecution, or vice versa. One thing is administrative liability; quite
another thing is the criminal liability for the same act.

Criminal and administrative proceedings may involve similar operative facts; but each requires a different quantum of evidence.

Thus considering the difference in the quantum of evidence, as well as the procedure followed and the sanctions imposed in criminal and
administrative proceedings, the findings and conclusions in one should not necessarily be binding in the other. Notably, the evidence
presented in the administrative case may not necessarily be the same evidence to be presented in the criminal cases. The prosecution is
certainly not precluded from adducing additional evidence to discharge the burden of proof required in the criminal cases.

Conversely we have also ruled that the dismissal of the criminal case is not per se a bar to administrative sanctions. To paraphrase, dismissal
of the criminal case does not foreclose administrative action involving the same facts.

Clear and Convincing Evidence

Evidence is clear and convincing if it produces in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to the allegations sought to be
established.

An extradition proceeding being sui generis, the standard of proof required in granting or denying bail can neither be the proof beyond
reasonable doubt in criminal cases nor the standard of proof of preponderance of evidence in civil cases. While administrative in character,
the standard of substantial evidence used in administrative cases cannot likewise apply given the object of extradition law which is to prevent
the prospective extradite from fleeing our jurisdiction. In his separate opinion in Purganan, Chief Justice Puno proposed that a new standard
which he termed clear and convincing evidence should be used in granting bail in extradition cases. According to him, this standard should
be lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt but higher than preponderance of evidence. The potential extradite must prove by clear and
convincing evidence that he is not a flight risk and will abide with all the orders and processes of the extradition court.

Some Jurisprudential Pronouncements on Clear and Convincing Evidence

Although the decision may seem so erroneous as to raise doubts concerning a judge’s integrity, absent extrinsic evidence, the decision itself
would be insufficient to establish a case against the judge.

Bare allegations of bias and partiality of the judge are not enough in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption
that the judge will undertake his noble role to dispense justice according to law and evidence and without fear or favor.

Forgery cannot be presumed; hence, it was incumbent upon petitioner to prove it. Forgery should be proved by clear and convincing evidence,
and whoever alleges it has the burden of proving the same.

The presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties will stand if the defense failed to present clear and convincing evidence that
the police officers did not properly perform their duty or that they were inspired by an improper motive.

Evidentiary Weight of Electronic Evidence

In assessing the evidentiary weight of electronic evidence, certain factors may be considered, like:
1. The reliability of the manner in which it was generated, stored or communicated;
2. The reliability of the manner in which its originator was identified;
3. The integrity of the information and communication system;
4. The familiarity of the witness or the person who made the entry with the communication and information system;
5. The nature and quality of the information which went into the communication and information system; and
6. Other factors which the Court may consider (Sec 1, Rule 7, Rules on Electronic Evidence)

Concept of Presumptions

A presumption 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. A presumption is not evidence.

Example: D is the debtor of C, creditor for P1M payable in 12 equal monthly installments. If evidence is introduced that the installment
payment for December has been paid by the creditor, a presumption arises that previous installments have been paid. This is because under the
law, the receipt of a later installment of a debt, without reservation as to prior installments, shall give rise to the presumption that such
installments have been paid. (Art 1176, Civil Code)

Inference Distinguished from a Presumption

Factual conclusion that can Mandated by law and
rationally be drawn from other establishes a legal relation
facts between or among the facts

Thus, if X proposes marriage to Y, it may be inferred that X is in love with Y. This is a mere inference and has in fact no legal effect. There are
no legal relations established by the mere fact that one is in love. On the other hand, if X enters into a contract of sale of a car with Y, there
arises a presumption that the contract was entered into with a sufficient cause or consideration and although the cause is not stated in the
contract, it is presumed that it exists and is lawful,
unless the contrary is proven (Art 1354, Civil Code). The presumption involved has a definite legal effect.

Kinds of Presumptions

Presumption of law or presumption juris – is an assumption which the law requires to be made from a set of facts.

Presumption of fact or presumption hominis – it is when the assumption is made from the facts without any direction or positive
requirement of law.

The presumption that an accused is innocent of the crime charged until the contrary is proven is a presumption of law embodied in the
Constitution.

In case of death or injuries of passengers, common carriers are presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently.

Effect of a Presumption

A party in whose favor the legal presumption exists may rely on and invoke such legal presumption to establish a fact in issue.

Principle of cumulative evidence – it states that when the evidence being presented are similar in nature and kind, the Court, upon its
discretion, may order the suspension of presentation of evidence and give the counsel the caveat of deciding which among his numerous
evidence should be presented.

Presumptions Under the Rules of Court

A presumption may either be:
1. Conclusive (presumption juris et de jure) – it is when the presumption becomes irrebuttable upon the presentation of the evidence
and any evidence tending to rebut the presumption is not admissible
or
2. Disputable or rebuttable (presumption juris tantum) – it is when the presumption may be contradicted or overcome by other
evidence.

Conclusive Presumptions Under the Rules of Court

1. Estoppel in pais or estoppel by conduct – whenever a party has, by his own declaration, or omission, intentionally or deliberately led
another to believe a particular thing is true, and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration,
act or omission, be permitted to falsify it.
2. The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant
between them.

Conclusive presumption is based on the doctrine of estoppel

Estoppel

In relation to the party to be estopped, the essential elements are:

1. Conduct amounting to false representation or concealment of material facts; or at least calculated to convey the impression that the
facts are otherwise than, and inconsistent with, those which the party subsequently attempts to assert;
 2. Intent, or at least, expectation, that this conduct shall be acted upon by, or at least influence, the other party, and
3. Knowledge, actual or constructive, of the real facts.

In relation to the party claiming the estoppel, the essential elements are:
1. Lack of knowledge and of the means of knowledge of the truth as to the facts in question;
2. Reliance, in good faith, upon the conduct or statements of the party to be estopped;
3. Action or inaction based thereon of such character as to change the position or status of the party claiming the estoppel, to his
injury, detriment or prejudice.

Disputable Presumptions

A significant example of disputable presumption under the Rules of Court is the presumption that official duty has been regularly performed.
This presumption has been consistently recognized by jurisprudence in favor of police officers. Thus: Settled is the rule that in cases involving
violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act, credence is given to prosecution witnesses who are police officers for they are presumed to have
performed their duties in the regular manner, unless there is evidence to the contrary suggesting ill- motive on the part of the police officers or
deviation from the regular performance of their duties.

Examples of Disputable Presumptions

In a case, the SC applied the presumption that the 2 deceased have entered into a lawful contract of marriage. Several circumstances gave rise
to the presumption that a valid marriage existed between them. Their cohabitation of more than 50 years cannot be doubted. Their family and
friends knew them to be married. Their reputed status as husband and wife was such that even the original petition for letters of administration
filed referred to them as spouses.

When a mail matter is sent by registered mail, there exists a presumption that it was received in the regular course of mail. The facts to be
proved in order to raise the presumption are: (a) that the letter was properly addressed with postage prepaid; and (b) that it was mailed. While a
mailed letter is deemed received by the addressee in the ordinary course of mail, this is still merely a disputable presumption subject to
controversion, and direct denial of the receipt thereof shifts the burden upon the party favored by the presumption to prove that the mailed letter
was indeed received by the addressee.

Every statute has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality. This presumption is rooted in the doctrine of separation of powers which
enjoins upon the three coordinate departments of the Government a becoming courtesy for each other’s acts. The theory is that every law, being
the joint act of the Legislature and the Executive, has passed careful scrutiny to ensure that it is in accord with the fundamental law. This Court,
however, may declare a law, or portions thereof, unconstitutional, where a petitioner has shown a clear and unequivocal breach of the
Constitution, not merely a doubtful or argumentative one.

The absence of the logbook where marriage licenses are recorded is not conclusive proof of non-issuance of marriage license. It can also mean
that the logbook just cannot be found. In the absence of showing of diligent efforts to search for the said logbook, it cannot easily be accepted
that absence of the same also means non- existence or falsity of entries therein.

Art 164 of the Family Code is clear. A child who is conceived or born during the marriage of his parents is legitimate. The law requires that
every reasonable presumption be made in favor of legitimacy.

The so-called tender-age presumption under Art 213 of the Family Code may be overcome only by compelling evidence of the mother’s
unfitness. The mother is declared unsuitable to have custody of her children in one or more of the following instances: neglect,
abandonment, unemployment, immorality, habitual drunkenness, drug addiction, maltreatment of the child, insanity, or affliction with a
communicable disease. Here, the mother was not shown to be unsuitable or grossly incapable of caring for her minor child. All told, no
compelling reason has been adduced to wrench the child from the mother’s custody.

The law presumes that there is fraud of creditors when:

1. There is alienation of property by gratuitous title by the debtor who has not reserved sufficient property to pay his debts contracted
before such alienation; or
2. There is alienation of property by onerous title made by a debtor against whom some judgment has been rendered in any instance
or some writ of attachment has been issued. From the tenor of the law, the decision or attachment need not refer to the property
alienated and need not have been obtained by the party seeking rescission.

There is no presumption of compensability of an ailment as held in GSIS v. Nonoy.

This case originated from a claim for compensation, income and hospitalization benefits filed by the respondent before the petitioner due to
Rheumatic Heart Disease and Pulmonary Tuberculosis Minimal. The GSIS as affirmed by the Employees Compensation Commission, ruled
that Rheumatic Heart Disease is not a compensable ailment under PD 626, as amended; that the respondent failed to prove by substantial
evidence that the risk of contracting the said ailment had been increased by his working conditions; and, that respondent failed to show any
causal relation between his ailment and his working conditions.
Respondent appealed to the CA which held that the claim is meritorious and directed the payment of the same.
Tackling the issue of whether or not the respondent is entitled to compensation benefits under existing law due to the condition of
Rheumatic Heart Disease, the SC reversed the ruling of CA. The reversal was prompted by the failure of the facts to show that the
respondent discharged his burden of proof, under the measure of substantial evidence, that his working conditions increased the risk of
contracting Rheumatic Heart Disease. In particular, said the Court, the records show no medical information establishing the etiology of
Rheumatic Heart Disease that would enable this Court to evaluate whether there is causal relation between the respondent’s employment
and his illness.

Under Art 1602 of the Civil Code, a contract shall be presumed to be an equitable mortgage in any of the following cases:
1. When the price of a sale with the right to repurchase is unusually inadequate;
2. When the vendor remains in possession as lessee or otherwise;
3. When upon or after the expiration of the right to repurchase another instrument extending the period of redemption or granting
a new period is executed;
4. When the purchaser retains for himself a part of the purchase price;
 5. When the vendor binds himself to pay the taxes on
the thing sold;
6. In any other case where it may be fairly inferred that the
real intention of the parties is that the transaction shall
secure the payment of a debt or the performance of any
other obligation.

The settled rule is that in the absence of satisfactory explanation,

one found in possession of and who used a forged document is the
forger and therefore guilty of falsification. If a person had in his
possession a falsified document and he made use of it (uttered it),
taking advantage of it and profiting thereby, the clear presumption
is that he is the material author of the falsification. (Maliwat v. CA)

It is disputably presumed that a driver was negligent if he had been

found guilty of reckless driving or violating traffic regulations at
least twice within the next preceding 2 months. (Art 2184, Civil
Code)

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself) also
establishes a presumption of negligence against the defendant and
furnishes a substitute for a specific proof of negligence. The
doctrine can be invoked only when under the circumstances, direct
evidence is absent and not readily available. For the doctrine to
apply, the following must be satisfactorily shown:
1. The accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not
occur in the absence of someone’s negligence;
2. It is caused by an instrumentality within the
exclusive control of the defendant or defendants, and
3. The possibility of contributing conduct which would
make the plaintiff responsible is eliminated.

State the rules in presumptive deaths

2 Kinds of Presumed Death

1. Ordinary presumption because of ordinary absence

a. Disappears under normal condition - A person not
heard of for 7 years is presumed dead for all
purposes except for succession.
b. Presumed dead for purpose of succession after
10 years
c. Presumed dead for purpose of succession after 5
years in case he disappeared after the age of 75

2. Extraordinary presumption because of extraordinary

or qualified absence
a. Great probability of death of person because of (i)
lost of vessel or airplane and has not been heard of for
4 years, (ii) taking part in war and has been missing
for 4 years, and (iii) danger of death under other
circumstances and has been lost for 4 years
b. In circumstance (ii) and (iii) the death is presumed to
have happened on the day of disappearance but the
actual division of the inheritance shall take place
only after 4 years.

Absence of Presumption of Legitimacy or Illegitimacy

There is no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child

born after 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 allegation.
Offer of Evidence and Trial Objections

*Sec. 34. Offer of evidence. – The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence is
offered must be specified.

Sec. 35. When to make offer. – As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer must be made at the time the witness is called to testify.
Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after the presentation of a party’s testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless
allowed by the court to be done in writing.

Sec. 36. Objection. – Objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to a question propounded on the course of the oral examination of a witness shall be made as soon as the grounds therefore shall
reasonably become reasonably apparent.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within 3 days after notice of the offer unless a different period is allowed by the court.
In any case, the grounds for the objection must be specified.

Sec. 37. When repetition of objection unnecessary. – When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the examination of the witness that
the question 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 continuing objection to such
class of questions.

Sec. 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 one or some of them must specify
the ground nor grounds relied upon.

Sec. 39. Striking out an answer. – Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its objection
to the same, and such objection is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and order the answer given to be stricken off the
record.
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant or otherwise improper.

*Sec. 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.

Importance of Offer of Evidence

There is a need for a formal offer of evidence because without such offer, the court cannot determine whether the evidence is admissible or not.

While the CTA is not strictly governed by the technical rules of evidence, the presentation of the BIR evidence is not a mere procedural
technicality which may be disregarded considering that
it is the only means by which the CTA may ascertain and verify the truth of the claims of the BIR.

A document, or any article for that matter, is not evidence when it is simply marked for identification; it must be formally offered, and the
opposing counsel given an opportunity to object to it or cross- examine the witness called upon to prove or identify it.

There is a distinction between identification of a documentary evidence and its formal offer as an exhibit. The first is done in the course of
the trial and is accompanied by the marking of the evidence as an exhibit, while the second is done only when the party rests its case.

When Formal Offer of Evidence is not Required

Formal offer of evidence is not required in certain cases:

1. In a summary proceeding because it is a proceeding where there is no full-blown trial;
2. Documents judicially admitted or taken judicial notice of;
3. Documents, affidavits, and depositions used in rendering a summary judgment;
4. Documents and affidavits used in deciding quasi-judicial or administrative cases; and
5. Lost objects previously marked, identified, described in the record, and testified to by the witness who had been the subject of cross-
examination in respect to said objects.

There were instances however, when the Court allowed the admission of evidence not formally offered as in People v. Napat-a, where
evidence not formally offered was held to be allowable provided certain requirements are present;
a. The evidence must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded; and
b. The same must have been incorporated in the records of the case.

In one case, certain delivery receipts and invoices did not form part of respondent’s formal offer of evidence but the same formed part of
petitioner’s formal offer of evidence. Petitioner insist that since the said documents did not form part of the evidence formally offered by
respondent, the trial court and the CA had no legal basis to award interest and damages in his favor. The Court held that no error could be
ascribed to the lower courts because the delivery receipts and the sales invoices were nevertheless formally offered by the petitioner in
evidence. Hence, the documents may be considered by the court’s below.

X and Y were charged of murder. Upon application of the prosecution, Y was discharged from the information to be utilized as a
state witness. The prosecutor presented Y as a witness but forgot to state the purpose of his testimony much less offer it in evidence.
Y testified that he and X conspired to kill the victim but it was X who actually shot the victim. The testimony of Y was the only
material evidence establishing the guilt of X. Y was thoroughly examined by the defense counsel. After the prosecution rested its
case, the defense filed a motion for demurer to evidence based on the ground that the testimony of Y should be excluded because its
purpose is not initially stated and it was not formally offered in evidence. Rule on the motion for demurrer.

While under the Rules of Court, the Court shall not consider evidence which has not been formally offered, this is true only when the failure
to offer an evidence has been objected to. The
failure to object to the omission of the prosecutor and the cross- examination of the witness by the adverse party, taken together, constitute
a waiver of the defect.

When evidence is offered

As regards the testimony of the witness, the offer is to be made at the time the witness is called to testify.

As regards documentary and object evidence, they are offered after the presentation of the party’s testimonial evidence. The offer is orally made
unless allowed by the court to be in writing.

Objections to a documentary evidence shall be made after it is offered and the offer of such evidence shall be made after the presentation of a
party’s testimonial evidence.

A party is not deemed to have waived objection to admissibility of documents by his failure to object to the same when they were marked,
identified and then introduced during the trial, because objection to documentary evidence must be made at the time it is formally offered and
not earlier.

The mere fact that a document is marked as an exhibit does not mean that it has thereby already been offered as part of the evidence of the
party. However, where the accused fails to object to the admissibility of certain terms during their formal offer, he is deemed to have waived his
right against their admissibility.

Atty. Felipe Malang was the counsel for the plaintiff in an action to collect the alleged purchase price of a tractor. For his principal
defense, the defendant alleged that the true transaction between the parties was only a lease of the tractor, not a sale thereof, and
therefore, the defendant, being a mere lessee, was not liable for the alleged purchase price.
In the course of the trial, Atty. Malang asked his witnesses to identify certain documents which he marked as: Exhibit A, the delivery
receipt signed by the defendant acknowledging delivery of the tractor; Exhibits B, B-1, B-2 and B-3, duplicates of official receipts
issued by the plaintiff in favor of the defendant acknowledging payments by the defendant of various sums of money; and Exibit C, the
demand letter Atty. Malang sent to the defendant. After all of his witnesses had completed their respective testimony, Atty. Malang
made an offer of his documentary evidence as follows:
Purposes of Objections

1. First, objections are made to keep out inadmissible evidence that would cause harm to a client’s cause. The rules of evidence are not
self-operating and hence, must be invoked by way of an objection;
2. Objections are interposed to protect the record, i.e., to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered evidence in a way that if
the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon as a ground for a future appeal;
3. Objections may be made to protect a witness from being embarrassed on the stand or from being harassed by the adverse counsel;
4. Objections are interjected to expose the adversary’s unfair tactics like his consistently asking oblivious leading questions;
5. Objections may be made to give the trial court an opportunity to correct its own errors and at the same time warn the court that a
ruling adverse to the objector may supply a reason to invoke a higher court’s appellate jurisdiction, and
6. Objections are made to avoid a waiver of the inadmissibility of an otherwise inadmissible evidence.

General and Specific Objections

The last paragraph of Sec. 36, Rule 132 provides the grounds for the objection must be specified. The objection therefore, must be specific.
Hence, an objector must be explicit as to the legal ground he invokes. He cannot simply manifest that he is interposing and objecting. He has
to precisely state the exclusionary rule that would justify his opposition to the proffered evidence.

Formal and Substantive Objections

A formal objection is one directed to the alleged defect in the formulation of the question. Examples of defectively formulated questions:
ambiguous questions; leading and misleading questions; multiple questions; argumentative questions.

A substantive objection are objections made and directed against the very nature of the evidence, i.e., it is inadmissible either because it is
irrelevant or incompetent or both. Examples: parol; not the best evidence; hearsay; privileged communication; not authenticated; opinion; res
inter alios acta.
ATTY MALANG:
Your Honor, I am now ready to make an offer of my documentary evidence

Objections Must Be Timely

COURT: Proceed, Mr Counsel
ATTY. MALANG:
I offer in evidence Exhibits A, B-1, B-2, B- 3, and C, Your Honor
In order to be timely, the objection must be, made at the earliest opportunity. What the earliest opportunity means depends upon the
COURT: Counsel, do you have anything to say to
the offer of documentary evidence made by the plaintiff?
Did Atty. Malang commit any error in the manner by which he made an offer of the documentary evidence made by the plaintiff?
Reasons.

Yes. Atty. Malang committed errors in the manner by which he offered his documentary evidence.
Under the rules, when a party makes a formal offer of his evidence, he must state the nature or the substance of the evidence, and the specific
purpose for which the evidence is offered. Atty. Malang failed to do all these.
manner the evidence is offered.
a. If the evidence is offered orally, objection to the evidence must be made immediately after the offer is made.
b. An objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of the witness shall be made as soon as the grounds
therefore shall become reasonably apparent.
c. An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within 3 days after notice of the offer unless a different period is allowed by the
court.

When to Use a Motion to Strike

1. When the answer is premature

2. When the answer of the witness is irrelevant, incompetent or otherwise improper
 3. When the answer is unresponsive
4. When the witness becomes unavailable for examination thru no fault of the examining party, or
5. When the testimony was allowed conditionally and the condition for its admissibility was not
fulfilled

Consider this example where the grounds for objection are not manifested by the question. The witness is
examined by the prosecutor. The case is one for homicide and the information says the crime was committed in
Town A. The witness is presented to testify that he knows that it was indeed the accused who killed the victim.

Q: Do you know the victim? A: Yes, Sir.

Q: Do you also know the accused? A: I do, Sir.
Q: Where were you on the date and time when the killing of the victim happened?
A: I was in Town B, Sir
Q: How do you know it was the accused who killed the victim? A: A witness to the killing told me a
day after the incident
Opposing Counsel: I object, Your Honor! Hearsay! I move to strike out the answer and to disqualify the
witness from testifying on the details of the incident. It is obvious that he is incompetent for lack of personal
knowledge.

Waiver of objections, Belated objections

The rule is that evidence not objected may be deemed admitted and may be validly considered by the court in
arriving at its judgment. This is true even if by its nature, the evidence is inadmissible and would have surely
been rejected if it had been challenged at the proper time.

Where a continuing objection had been interposed on prohibited testimony, the objection is deemed waived
where the objecting counsel cross-examined the witness on the very matters subject of the prohibition. Also, the
acceptance of an incompetent witness in a civil suit, as well as the allowance of improper questions that may be
put to him while on the stand, is a matter within the discretion of the opposing litigant who may assert his right
by timely objection or he may waive it. Failure to object operates as a waiver. Once admitted, the testimony is in
the case for what it is worth, and the judge has no power to disregard it for the sole reason that it could have been
excluded if objected to, nor can he strike it out on his own motion.

What is a continuing objection?

It is an objection to certain questions or testimony during a trial which has been "over-ruled" by the judge, but
the attorney who made the objection announces he/she is "continuing" the objection to all other questions on the
same topic or with the same legal impropriety in the opinion of the attorney. Thus a "continuing" objection does
not require an objection every time the same question or same subject is introduced.

In a complaint for a sum of money filed before the MM Regional Trial Court, plaintiff did not mention or
even just hint at any demand for payment made on defendant before commencing suit. During the trial,
plaintiff duly offered Exh. A in evidence for the stated purpose of proving the making of extrajudicial
demand on defendant to pay said sum of money within 10 days from receipt, addressed to and served on
defendant some two months before suit was begun. Without objection from defendant, the court
admitted Exh. A in evidence. Was the admission of evidence correct?

Yes. The admission of evidence was correct. There was no objection when Exh. A was offered in evidence. It
could have been objected to on the ground that it is not related to an issue raised in the pleadings. However, it
is a basic rule that inadmissibility of an evidence may be waived.

Rulings on Objections

The object of the court must be given immediately after the objection is made except when the court desires to
take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented. However, the court must give its ruling
during the trial and at such time as will give a party an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the
ruling.

Distinguish formal offer of evidence from offer of proof

Refers either to the offer of Process by which a proponent
testimony of a witness prior to of an excluded evidence tenders
the latter’s testimony, or the the same. If what has been
offer of the documentary and excluded is testimonial
object evidence after a party has evidence, the tender is made by
presented his testimonial stating for the record the name
evidence and other personal
circumstances of the proposed
witness and the substance of his
proposed testimony. If the
evidence excluded is
documentary or of things, the
offer of proof is made by having
the same attached to or made
part of the record

Evidence on Motion –When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record the court may hear the matter
on affidavits or depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court may direct that the matter be
wholly or partially on oral testimony or depositions.

English Exchequer Rule - pursuant to which "a trial court's error as to the admission of evidence was
presumed to have caused prejudice and therefore, almost automatically required a new trial.

Harmless error rule - In dealing with evidence improperly admitted in trial, its damaging quality and its
impact to the substantive rights of the litigant should be examined. If the impact is slight and insignificant,
the error should be disregarded as it will not overcome the weight of the properly admitted evidence against
the prejudiced party.