Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Evidence Reviewer
Evidence Reviewer
Evidence
Preliminary Considerations
2.
proposition
Factum probans evidentiary fact or the fact by which
the factum probandum is to be established
azereth
page 1
3.
4.
5.
6.
substitutionary
evidence, that which is inferior to the primary
evidence and is permitted by law only when
the best evidence is not available
Positive and Negative Evidence
a.
Positive when a witness affirms that a fact
did or did not occur
determined
by
prevailing
exclusionary rules of evidence
Otherwise, waived
Conditional admissibility where the evidence at the
time it is offered appears to be immaterial or irrelevant
unless it is connected with the other facts to be
subsequently proved, such evidence may be received on
condition that the other facts will be proved thereafter,
otherwise the evidence will be stricken out
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Theories:
1.
American rule admission of such incompetent
evidence, without objection by the opponent
does not justify such opponent in rebutting it
by similar incompetent evidence
2.
English rule if a party has presented
inadmissible evidence. The adverse party may
resort to similar incompetent evidence
3.
Massachusetts rule adverse party may be
permitted to introduce similar incompetent
evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair
prejudice caused by the admission of the other
partys
To determine application:
1.
WON incompetent evidence was reasonably
objected to, and
2.
WON, regardless of the objection vel non, the
admission will cause a plain and unfair
prejudice to the party against whom it is
admitted
azereth
page 2
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
An admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the
course of the proceedings in the same case, does not
require proof. The admission may be contradicted only
by showing that it was made through palpable mistake
or that no such admission was made.
Admissibility of Evidence
Admissible unless:
1.
Made only for purposes of the first case
2.
Withdrawn with the permission of the
court
3.
Court deems it proper to relieve the party
Admissions in a pleading which have been withdrawn or
supersede by an amended pleading
Includes:
1.
Examination of the anatomy of a person or of
any substance taken therefrom
2.
Conduct
of
tests,
demonstrations,
or
experiments
3.
Examination of representative portrayals of the
object in question
Observations of the court may be amplified by
interpretations
afforded
by
testimonial
evidence,
especially be experts
Documents are considered object evidence if the purpose
is to:
1.
Prove their existence or condition or the nature
of the handwritings thereon
2.
Determine the age of the paper used or the
blemishes or alterations thereon
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Section 2 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
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
1. BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Section 3 ORIGINAL DOCUMENT MUST BE PRODUCED;
EXCEPTIONS
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than
the original document itself, except in the following
cases:
azereth
page 3
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
a.
b.
c.
d.
Secondary
evidence
cannot
inceptively
be
introduced as the original writing itself must be
produced in court
azereth
page 4
WHEN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
IS
UNAVAILABLE
When the original document has been lost or destroyed,
or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof
of its execution or existence and the cause of its
unavailability without bad faith on his part, may prove
its contents by a copy, or by a recital of its contents in
some authentic document, or by the testimony of
witnesses in the order stated.
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Section 8 PARTY WHO CALLS FOR DOCUMENT NOT
BOUND TO OFFER IT
A party who calls for the production of a document and
inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence
azereth
page 5
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
matter into writing, all their previous and contemporaneous
agreements on the matter are merged therein
Best Evidence
2
3
4
5
azereth
page 6
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
azereth
page 7
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Section 17 - OF TWO CONSTRUCTIONS, WHICH
PREFERRED
When the terms of an agreement have been intended in
a different sense by the different parties to it, that
sense is to prevail against either party in which he
supposed the other understood it, and when different
constructions of a provision are otherwise equally
proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable
to the party in whose favor the provision was made.
Section 18 - CONSTRUCTION IN FAVOR OF NATURAL
RIGHT
When an instrument is equally susceptible of two
interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the
other against it, the former is to be adopted.
2.
3.
Rules on interpretation
C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
1. QUALIFICATION
OF
WITNESSES
azereth
page 8
Marital Disqualification
Rule
Partial disqualification
Complete disqualification
Requisites:
1.
Witness offered for examination is a party plaintiff,
or the assignor of said party, or a person in whose
behalf a case is prosecuted
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
azereth
page 9
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Marital Privilege
Marital Disqualification
Can
only
apply
if
the
marriage is existing at the
time the testimony is offered
Requisites:
1.
There is an attorney-client relation
2.
Privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential
communication between them in the course of
professional employment
3.
Client has not given his consent to the disclosure of
the communication
Requisites:
1.
Physician is authorized to practice medicine, surgery
or obstetrics
2.
Information was acquired or the advice or treatment
was given by him in his professional capacity for the
purpose of treating or curing the patient
3.
Information, advice or treatment, if revealed, would
blacken the reputation of the patient
4.
Privilege is invoked in a civil case, whether the
patient is a party thereto or not
azereth
page 10
Requisites:
1.
It was made to the public officer in official
confidence
2.
Public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the
communication
Others
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
3. ADMISSIONS
AND
CONFESSIONS
Confessions
Involves
an
acknowledgement of guilt or
liability
Must be express
Otherwise
would
be
self-serving
and
inadmissible
Judicial admission one made in connection with a
judicial proceeding in which it is offered
Extrajudicial admission any other admission
Declarations Against
Interest
azereth
page 11
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Criminal cases involving criminal negligence or quasioffenses are allowed to be compromised, hence an offer
of settlement is not an admission of guilt
Offer to pay or the actual payment of medical bills by
reason of victims injuries not admissible to prove civil
or criminal liability
First branch of res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet
Exceptions: third person is a partner, agent, or has joint
interest with the party, or is a co-conspirator or a privy of
the party
azereth
page 12
Requisites:
1.
That the partnership, agency or joint interest is
established by evidence other than the act or
declaration
2.
That the act/declaration must have been within the
scope of the partnership, etc.
3.
Such act/declaration must have been made during
the existence of the partnership, etc.
Admissions made in connection with the winding up still
admissible
Admission by counsel admissible against client (agentprincipal)
Limitation:
1.
admission should not amount to a compromise
2.
admission should not amount to a confession
of judgment
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Except:
1.
If made in the presence of the coconspirator who expressly or impliedly
(tacit admission, Rule 130.32) agreed
therein
2.
Where the facts stated in the said
admissions are confirmed in the individual
extrajudicial confessions made by the coconspirators after their apprehension
3.
as a circumstance to determine the
credibility of a witness
4.
as circumstantial evidence to show the
probability
of
the
co-conspirators
participation in the offense
Requisites:
1.
There must be a relation of privity between the
party and the declarant
2.
The admission was made by the declarant, as
predecessor in interest, while holding title to the
property
azereth
page 13
3.
The admission is in relation to said property
Privity in estate may have arisen by succession, by acts
mortis causa or by acts inter vivos
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Section 32 - ADMISSION BY SILENCE
An act or declaration made in the presence and within
the hearing or observation of a party who does or says
nothing when the act or declaration is such as naturally
to call for action or comment if not true, and when
proper and possible for him to do so, may be given in
evidence against him.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Rule
133,
Section
3
EXTRAJUDICIAL
CONFESSION, NOT SUFFICIENT GROUND FOR
CONVICTION
An extrajudicial confession made by an accused,
shall not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless
corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
azereth
page 14
Section 33 CONFESSION
The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt
of the offense charged, or of any offense necessarily
included therein, may be given in evidence against him.
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Draculan vs. Donato (1978)
Where, before the statement containing the extrajudicial
confession of guilt was taken, the accused was asked whether
he was familiar with the provisions of Sec 20, Art IV, 1973
Constitution and he answered in the affirmative, and the
statement which he signed states that he had been apprised
of his constitutional rights with the warning that anything he
would say might be used against him in court, such
extrajudicial confession is admissible
People vs. Tampus (1980)
Where the verbal extrajudicial confession was made
without counsel, but it was spontaneously made by the
accused immediately after the assault, the same is admissible,
not under the confession rule, but as part of the res gestae
People vs. Felipe (1981)
Where the accused was merely told of his constitutional
rights and asked if he understood what he was told, but he
was never asked whether he wanted to exercise or avail
himself of such rights, his extrajudicial confession is
inadmissible
People vs. Broqueza (1988)
Where the extrajudicial confession of the accused while
under custodial investigation was merely prefaced by the
investigator with a statement of his constitutional rights, to
which he answered that he was going to tell the truth, the
same is inadmissible as his answer does not constitute a
waiver of his right to counsel and he was not assisted by one
when he signed the confession. His short answer does not
show that he knew the legal significance of what were asked
of him
Morales, Jr. vs. Enrile (1983)
The waiver of the right to counsel during custodial
investigation must be made with the assistance of counsel
azereth
page 15
Except if:
1) Co-accused impliedly adopted said confession
by not questioning its truthfulness
2) Interlocking confessions accused persons
voluntarily
and
independently
executed
identical confessions without conclusion,
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
3)
azereth
page 16
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
shop when 3 men approached him from behind and one of
them held him at gunpoint. Mayola and Balderas saw what
was happening and shouted for help. Mantung was taken to
the comfort room when he heard 2 gunshots and the shouts of
Mayola and Balderas stopped. The men took him out, pushed
him inside a red car and blindfolded him. Afterwards, he felt
the car stop and he was left alone by his captors. He then
seized the opportunity to escape. He saw that they stopped in
the pier so he mingled with the people and boarded a ship to
Cebu and from there went to Cotabato. He denied that pieces
of jewelry were recovered from him. He refuted the reports
saying he admitted to the killing of the victims in the press
conference. According to him, he did not tell anyone what
happened because he was confused and he did not know what
to do.
Issue1: WON Mantungs admission during the press
conference is admissible
Held1: Yes
Ratio1: The clippings of the news articles reporting Mantungs
confession is hearsay because their writers were not
presented to affirm the veracity of the reports. However,
Ricardo Diago, an employee of Cebuana Lhuiller present
during the press conference, was presented as rebuttal
witness to prove that Mantung indeed claimed responsibility
for the killings.
The constitutional procedures on custodial investigation do not
apply to a spontaneous statement, not elicited through
questioning by the authorities, but given in an ordinary
manner whereby accused orally admitted having committed a
crime. The rights under Sec 12 are guaranteed to preclude the
slightest use of coercion by the State as would lead the
accused to admit something false, not to prevent him from
freely and voluntarily telling the truth (People vs. Andan).
There is nothing to show that Mantungs admission was
coerced or made under duress.
Ladiana vs. People (2002)
Facts: Josue Ladiana, a police officer, was accused of killing
Francisco San Juan, a Barangay Captain. The case was filed in
the Sandiganbayan and Ladiana was found guilty of homicide.
The prosecution presented 5 witnesses:
1.
Caridad San Juan wife of the victim. She testified that
San Juan was the Barangay Captain of Brgy. Salac,
Lumban, Laguna. She said that she was in her house
when an unidentified woman came and told her that her
husband was killed by Ladiana. She also presented the
death certificate of her husband. (Cross) She admitted
that she did not witness the killing of her husband.
2.
PO2 Leopoldo Cacalda Jr. He recounted that somebody
whose name he could not recall reported to him about an
existing trouble in the scene of the incident. He
responded by going to the scene, accompanied by
another person. There, he saw the dead body of San
Juan. He gathered from the people milling around the
body that it was Ladiana who killed San Juan. He
immediately left to look for Ladiana. He later learned that
Ladiana surrendered to the police. (Cross) He testified
that he did not witness the incident. He also said that it
was the people around the incident who told him that
Ladiana already left. He also saw a stab wound on
Ladianas right bicep but he did not ask him how he got
it.
3.
Dr. Rogelio Javan performed the necropsy
4.
SPO2 Percival Gabinete his testimony was dispensed
with upon the admission of the defense that he was part
of the group that responded to the incident
5.
Mario Cortez retired Assistant Prosecutor of Laguna.
Prior to the conduct of examination-in-chief of Cortez,
defense counsel admitted to the authorship, authenticity,
and voluntariness of the execution of the counteraffidavit of Ladiana. In the counter-affidavit, Ladiana
admitted shooting Francisco but he allegedly did so in
self-defense as Francisco was then attacking Ladiana and
had in fact already inflicted a stab wound on the arm of
Ladiana. Cortez emphasized that he was not the one who
conducted the PI. He also said that he would not be able
to recognize the face of the affiant in the counteraffidavit but maintained that there was a person who
appeared and identified himself as Josue Ladiana before
him.
Defense filed a Demurrer to Evidence
azereth
page 17
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
5. TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE
2.
c.
azereth
page 18
d.
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
impending death and as long as no retraction was made
by the declarant before his death
azereth
page 19
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
4.
4.
Requisites:
1.
The actor or declarant is dead and unable to testify
2.
The act or declaration is made by the person related
to the subject by birth or marriage
3.
The relationship between the declarant or the actor
and the subject is shown by evidence other than
such act or declaration
azereth
page 20
Requisites:
1.
Witness testifying thereto must be a member, by
consanguinity or affinity, of the same family as the
subject
2.
Such tradition or reputation must have existed in
that family ante litem motam
Persons statement of date of birth and age declaration
of family tradition
Common Reputation
Admissible to prove:
Marriage
Moral character
Established by:
1.
Testimonial evidence of competent witness
2.
Monuments and inscription in public places
3.
Documents containing statements of reputation
Reputation opinion of him by others
Character inherent qualities of a person
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Res Gestae
Dying Declaration
Statement
may
precede,
accompany, or be made after
the
homicidal
act
was
committed
Trustworthiness
is
based
upon its being given under
the awareness of impending
death
azereth
page 21
Requisites:
1.
The person who made the entry must be dead or
unable to testify
2.
The entries were made at or near the time of the
transaction to which they refer
3.
The entrant was in a position to know the facts
stated in the entries
4.
The entries were made in his professional capacity
or in the performance of a duty, whether legal,
contractual, moral or religious
5.
The entries were made in the ordinary or regular
course of business or duty
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
2.
Commercial Lists
Section 45 - COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE
Evidence of statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list,
register, periodical, or other published compilation is
admissible as tending to prove the truth of any relevant
matter so stated if that compilation is published for use
by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally
used and relied upon by them therein.
Requisites:
1.
The court takes judicial notice thereof
2.
The same is testified to by a witness expert in the
subject
CA took judicial notice of the Ballantyne Scale of Values 8
Legal treatises also included
Requisites:
Estrada vs. Noble (CA, 49 OG 139)
azereth
page 22
Learned Treatises
1.
2.
7. OPINION RULE
Section 48 - GENERAL RULE
The opinion of witness is not admissible, except as
indicated in the following sections.
Section 49 - OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS
The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special
knowledge, skill, experience or training which he shown
to posses, may be received in evidence.
Section 50 - OPINION OF ORDINARY WITNESSES
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given,
may be received in evidence regarding
a.
The identity of a person about whom he has
adequate knowledge;
b.
A handwriting with which he has sufficient
familiarity; and
c.
The 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.
Generates doubt
Factors:
1.
Training and education
2.
Particular, first-hand familiarity with the facts
of the case
3.
Presentation of authorities or standards upon
which his opinion is based15
14
15
16
17
18
azereth
page 23
19
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Cesar vs. Sandiganbayan (1985)20
Where the supposed experts testimony would constitute
the sole ground for conviction and there is equally expert
testimony to the contrary, the constitutional presumption of
innocence must prevail
azereth
page 24
c.
Criminal cases
Civil cases
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Criminal cases
Burden of Proof
Burden of Evidence
azereth
page 25
Presumptions of Fact
Praesumptiones juris
Praesumptiones hominis
Discretion is vested in
tribunal as to drawing
inference
the
the
Types:
1.
Conclusive (juris et de
jure)
2.
Disputable
(juris
tantum or prima facie)
1) Conclusive Presumptions
Section 2 CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS
The following instances are conclusive presumptions:
a.
Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act,
or omission, intentionally and deliberately led
another to believe a particular thing 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;
b.
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.
2) Disputable Presumptions
Section 3 DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTION
The
following
presumptions
are
satisfactory
if
uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome
by other evidence:
a.
That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
b.
That an unlawful act was done with unlawful
intent;
c.
That a person intends the ordinary consequences
of his voluntary act;
d.
That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
p.
q.
r.
s.
t.
u.
v.
w.
azereth
page 26
x.
y.
z.
aa.
bb.
cc.
dd.
ee.
ff.
gg.
hh.
ii.
jj.
kk.
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Par (a)
azereth
page 27
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
presumption of death does not arise and the fact of death,
must, instead, be established by preponderance of evidence
Par (dd) taken from Art 259 of the Civil Code, in line
with Art 168 of the Family Code
Par (jj) requisites:
1.
Deaths occurred in a calamity
2.
There are no particular circumstances from which it
can be inferred that one died ahead of the other
Presentation of Evidence
Rule 132 Presentation of Evidence
A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 1 EXAMINATION TO BE DONE IN OPEN COURT
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or
hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or
affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to
speak, or the question calls for a different mode of
answer, the answers of a witness shall be given orally
Section 2 PROCEEDINGS TO BE RECORDED
The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including
the questions to be propounded to a witness and his
answer thereto, the statements made by the judge or
any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference
to the case, shall be recorded by means of shorthand or
stenotype or by other means of recording found
suitable by the court.
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by
the official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and
certified as correct by him shall be deemed prima facie
a correct statement of such proceedings.
May provide that affidavits and counteraffidavits may be admitted in lieu of oral
testimony
Testimony of witness should be elicited by questions of
counsel
azereth
page 28
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
b.
2.
Also, issue was raised during crossexamination, hence she did not
waive the right
Unless otherwise provided by law refers to
immunity statutes wherein the witness is
granted immunity from criminal prosecution
azereth
page 29
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Section 8 - RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION
Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the
adverse party may re-cross-examine the witness on
matters stated in his re-direct examination, and also on
such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its
discretion.
cross
examination shall only be on the subject of his
examination-in-chief
azereth
page 30
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
2.
Impeachment
is
incomplete
if
witness is not given the chance to
explain the discrepancy
3.
4.
In case of hostile/adverse
party/involuntary
witnesses can also be impeached by other modes
of impeachment
azereth
page 31
WHEN
WITNESS
MAY
REFER
TO
American jurisprudence:
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Private documents
documents
commercial
and
private
azereth
page 32
Rules of authenticity
In addition, American jurisprudence also gives:
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
azereth
page 33
Rule 39 Sec 1
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Death certificate
222
azereth
page 34
23
Also in People vs. Jalosjos (2001) and People vs. Fruna (2002)
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the court to
be done in writing.
Section 36 OBJECTION
Objection to evidence offered orally must be made
immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to a question propounded in the course of the
oral examination of a witness shall be made as soon as
the grounds therefor shall become reasonably apparent.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to
within three (3) days after notice of the offer unless a
different period is allowed by the court.
In any case, the grounds for the objections must be
specified.
Section 37 - WHEN REPETITION OF OBJECTION
UNNECESSARY
When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of
the examination of a 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.
Section 38 RULING
The ruling of the court must be given immediately after
the objection is made, unless the court desires to take a
reasonable time to inform itself on the question
presented; but the ruling shall always be made during
the trial and at such time as will give the party against
whom it is made an opportunity to meet the situation
presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection
need not be stated. However, if the objection is based
on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the
objection on one or some of them must specify the
ground or grounds relied upon.
Section 39 - STRIKING OUT 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.
Section 40 - TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
If documents or things offered in evidence are excluded
by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to
or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is
oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and
other personal circumstances of the witness and the
substance of the proposed testimony.
azereth
page 35
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Oliveros vs. Oliveros (106 Phil 369)24
The trial courts should permit all exhibits presented by
the parties, although not admitted, to be attached to the
records so that, in case of appeal, the appellate court may be
able to examine the same and determine the propriety of their
rejection
Baez vs. CA (1974)
Where documentary evidence was rejected by the trial
court and the offeror did not move that the same be attached
to the record, the same cannot be considered by the appellate
court
De Castro vs. CA (75 Phil 824)
Documents forming no part of the of proofs before the
appellate court cannot be considered in disposing of the case.
Prats & Co. vs. Phoenix Insurance Co. (52 Phil 807)
In a case of any intricacy it is impossible for a judge of
first instance, in the early stages of the development of the
proof, to know with any certainty whether testimony is
relevant or not; and where there is no indication of bad faith
on the part of the attorney offering the evidence, the court
may, as a rule, safely accept the testimony upon the
statement of the attorney that the proof offered will be
connected later
People vs. Diano (CA, 66 OG 6405)
Evidence submitted for one purpose may not be
considered for any other purpose
Sheraton-Palace hotel vs. Quijano (CA, 64 OG 9118)
A document or writing which is admitted not as
independent evidence but merely as part of the testimony of a
witness does not constitute proof of the facts related therein
azereth
page 36
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
People vs. Bande
An erroneous rejection or admission of evidence by the
trial court is not a ground for a new trial or reversal of the
decision if there are other independent evidence to sustain the
decision, or if the rejected evidence, if it had been admitted,
would not have changed the decision
Weight
and
Evidence
Sufficiency
of
azereth
page 37
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
People vs. Quilino (CA, 50 OG 68)
The failure of a party to present merely corroborative or
cumulative evidence does not give rise to any adverse or
unfavorable presumption
azereth
page 38
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
Or intense grief
Relationship of witness to the victim does not impair
his clear and positive testimony nor give it lesser credit
azereth
page 39
Factors:
1.
Witness opportunity to view the criminal at the
time of the crime
2.
Witness degree of attention at the time
3.
Accuracy of any prior description given by the
witness
4.
Level of certainty demonstrated by the witness
at the identification
5.
Length of time between the crime and the
identification
6.
Suggestiveness of the identification procedure
Res ipsa loquitur the fact of the occurrence of an injury,
taken with the surrounding circumstances, may permit
Preliminary Considerations
Evidence
an inference or raise a presumption of negligence or
make out a plaintiffs prima facie case and present a
question of fact for the defendant to meet with an
explanation
azereth
page 40
Reputation
or
cohabitation
merely
corroborative