1 VI.

EVIDENCE

A. General Principles 1. Concept of Evidence SECTION 1. Evidence defined- Evidence is the eans sanctioned !" these r#les$ of ascertainin% in a &#dicial proceedin% the tr#th respectin% a atter of fact.' (Sec.1 of Rule 128 of the Rules of Court) Dean Riano: Evidence is not an end itself but a means (. Scope of the )#les The rules of evidence in the Rules of Court are guided by the principle of uniformity. As a general policy, the rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings. (Sec. 2, Rule 128, Rules of Court). Sec. (. Scope. * The r#les of evidence shall !e the sa e in all co#rts and in all trials and hearin%s$ e+cept as other,ise provided !" la, or these r#les.' -. Evidence in Civil Cases Vers#s Evidence in Cri inal Cases Evidence in Civil Cases 1. The party having the burden of proof must prove his claim by a preponderance of evidence (Sec 1., Rule 133) Evidence in Cri inal Cases 1. The guilt of the accused has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. (Sec 2., Rule 133)

. an offer of compromise is not an . e!cept those involving "uasi# offenses admission of any liability, and is not $criminal negligence% or those allo&ed by admissible in evidence against the offeror la& to be compromised, an offer of (Sec. 27., Rule 130) compromise by the accused may be received in evidence as an admission of guilt (Sec. 27., Rule 130) '. the concept of presumption of innocence '. the accused en(oys the constitutional does not apply and generally there is no presumption of innocence. (Sec. 14, Art. presumption for or against a party e!cept , Constitution of the !hilippines) in certain cases provided for by la&

.. Proof Vers#s Evidence Proof 1. not the evidence itself. There is proof only because of evidence. )t is erel" the pro!ative effect of evidence and is the conviction or pers#asion of the ind res#ltin% fro a consideration of the evidence. (2" Am #ur 2$, %&i$ence, 2) . the effect of evidence because &ithout (. the edi# or eans !" ,hich a fact evidence there is no proof ('l(c)*s +(, is proved or disproved -iction(ry, .th %$., 10"4/ #ones on %&i$ence, 0 4). *are allegations unsubstantiated by evidence, are not e"uivalent to proof (-omin1o &. Ro2les, 4.3 SCRA 812) Evidence

/. 0act#

Pro!ans Vers#s 0act# 0act# Pro!ans

Pro!and# 0act# Pro!and#

1. the facts or material evidencing the fact or proposition to be established (3i1more , !rinciples of #u$ici(l !roof, .) . the probative or evidentiary fact tending to prove the fact in issue ('l(c)*s +(, -iction(ry, .th %$., .33) 4The totality of the evidence to prove the liability '.

1. the fact or proposition to be established

. the fact to be proved+ the fact &hich is in issue and to &hich the evidence is directed

'. in a certain case, may be affected by the (udicial admissions of a party

)f the f(ctum pro2(n$um ,signifies the fact or proposition to be established,then matters of (udicial notice, conclusive presumptions and (udicial admissions cannot "ualify as parts of the f(ctum pro2(n$um of a particular case, because such matters need not be established or

' proven. .. .. )n practical terms, it refers to elements of a cause of action from point of vie& of the plaintiff and elements of the defense from standpoint of the defendant. the the the the

/.

/. )n a criminal case, it includes all matters that the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt in order to (ustify conviction. $elements%

1. Ad issi!ilit" of Evidence a. )e2#isites for ad issi!ilit" of evidence ,Sec. -. Admissibility of evidence. * Evidence is ad issi!le ,hen it is relevant to the iss#e and is not e+cl#ded !" the la, of these r#les.' Thus, for evidence to be admissible, t&o elements must concur, namely: $a% the evidence is rele&(nt, and 3a+io of relevance4 $b% the evidence is not e5clu$e$ by the rules $competent%. 3a+io !. )elevanc" of evidence and collateral atters

of co petence4

Sec. .. Relevancy5 collateral matters. * Evidence #st have s#ch a relation to the fact in iss#e as to ind#ce !elief in its e+istence or non6e+istence. Evidence on collateral atters shall not !e allo,ed$ e+cept ,hen it tends in an" reasona!le de%ree to esta!lish the pro!a!ilit" or i pro!a!ilit" of the fact in iss#e.' 0nder 1ec. . of Rule 1 2, evidence to be relevant must h(&e such ( rel(tion to the f(ct in issue (s to in$uce 2elief in its e5istence or non6 e5istence. -e(n Ri(no7 RE3E4A5CE 6 relation of e&i$ence to issue

Test for Deter inin% the )elevanc" of Evidence *ecause of the definition of relevant evidence under 1ec . of Rule 1 2, it is obvious that relevance is a matter of relationship bet&een the evidence and a fact in

. issue. The determination of relevance is thus, a matter of inference and not of la&. The test &ould therefore, be one of logic, common sense, and e!perience. Collateral 7atters A matter is collateral &hen it is on a ,parallel or diverging line,- merely ,additional- or ,au!iliary- ('l(c)*s +(, -iction(ry. .th %$., 237). This term connotes an absence of a direct connection bet&een the evidence and the matter in dispute. c. 7#ltiple ad issi!ilit" 1. There are times &hen a proffered evidence is admissible for t&o or more purposes. . 1ometimes it is inadmissible for one purpose but admissible for another or vice versa. '. Evidence may also be admissible against one party but not against another. d. Conditional Ad issi!ilit" )t happens fre"uently enough that the relevance of a piece of evidence is not apparent at the time is offered, but the relevance of &hich &ill readily be seen &hen connected to other pieces of evidence not yet offered. The proponent of the evidence may as7 that the evidence be conditionally admitted in the meantime sub(ect to the condition that he is going to establish its relevancy and competency at a later time. )f the connection is not sho&n as promised, the court may, upon motion of the adverse party, stri7e out from the record the evidence that &as previously conditionally admitted. e. C#rative ad issi!ilit" The doctrine of curative admissibility allo&s a party to introduce other&ise inadmissible evidence to ans&er the opposing party8s previous introduction of inadmissible evidence if it &ould remove any unfair pre(udice caused by the admission of the earlier inadmissible evidence (A$(ms&. 'urlin1ton 8. R.R. Co., 89. S.3. 2$ 748, 7.1 :;o. App.1""3<). Thus, a party &ho first introduces either irrelevant or incompetent evidence into the trial cannot complain of the subse"uent admission of similar evidence from the adverse party relating to the same sub(ect matter (Common,e(lth &. Ale5(n$er, =y., . S.3.r$104, 10. :1"""< >uotin1 -un(,(y &. Common,e(lth, 23" =y. 199, 3" S.3.2$ 242, 243 :1"31</ Smith &. Common,e(lth, =y., "04 S.3.2$ 220, 222 :1"".<). Conversely, the doctrine should not be invo7ed &here evidence &as properly admitted. )t is submitted that in our (urisdiction, the principle of curative admissibility should not be made to apply &here the evidence &as admitted &ithout ob(ection because the

/ failure to ob(ect constitutes a &aiver of the inadmissibility of the evidence. )n our (urisdiction, inadmissible evidence not ob(ected to become admissible. f. Direct and Circ# stantial Evidence Direct Evidence Circ# stantial Evidence # evidence &hich if !elieved$ proves the # that evidence that indirectl" proves a e+istence of a fact in iss#e ,itho#t fact in iss#e thro#%h an inference &hich interference or pres# ption the fact finder dra&s from the evidence established (!eople &s 8(tito, 423 SCRA 9proves a fact &ithout the need to 917) ma7e an inference from another fact # &hen the court does not have to ma7e an # the court uses a fact from &hich an inference from one fact to arrive at assumption is dra&n conclusion %. Positive and Ne%ative Evidence Positive Evidence Ne%ative Evidence 1. &hen a &itness affir s in the stand 1. &hen the &itness states that an event that a certain state of facts does e+ist or did not occ#r or that the state of facts that a certain event happened alle%ed to e+ist does not act#all" e+ist #may li7e&ise refer to presence of something . %reater pro!ative val#e is given #may li7e&ise refer to absence of something . considered by the Court to be a ver" ,ea8 form of defense and can never overco e an affir ative or positive testi on" particularly &hen the latter comes from the mouth of a credible &itness

h. Co petent and Credi!le Evidence Co petent Evidence 1. one that is not e!cluded by la& in a particular case . )f the test of relevance is logic and common sense, the test of competence is the l(, or the rules. '. Competence, in relation to evidence in general, refers to eli1i2ility of (n e&i$ence to 2e recei&e$ (s such. Credi!le Evidence

Ad issi!le Evidence 1. not necessarily credible evidence #means that the evidence is of such a

; character that the court, pursuant to the rules of evidence, is bound to receive it or allo&ed it to be introduced at the trial . ?cre$i2ility@ refers to &orthiness of belief, that "uality &hich renders a &itness &orthy of belief #,believability'. Also, the competency of a &itness differs from his credibility. A &itness may be competent, and yet give incredible testimony+ he may be incompetent, and yet his evidence, if received, is perfectly credible. 9. :#rden of Proof and :#rden of Evidence SECTION 1. Burden of proof. * :#rden of proof is the d#t" of a part" to present evidence on the facts in iss#e necessar" to esta!lish his clai or defense !" the a o#nt of evidence re2#ired !" la,.' $Rule 1'1, Rules of Court% :#rden of Proof :#rden of Evidence 1. or ?onus pro2(n$i@, traditionally refers to the obligation of a party to the litigation to persuade the court that he is entitled to relief . duty of a party to present evidence to . duty of a party to go for&ard &ith the establish his claim or evidence by the evidence to overthro& the prim( f(cie amount of evidence re"uired by la&, &hich is evidence against him preponderance of evidence in civil cases 1. Does not shift and remains throughout the entire case e!actly &here the pleadings originally placed it . :enerally determined by the pleadings filed by the party 1. 1hifts from party to party depending upon the e!igencies of the case in the course of the trial . :enerally determined by the developments of the trial, or by the provisions of substantive la& or procedural rules &hich may relieve the party from presenting evidence on the facts alleged

;. Pres# ptions a. Concl#sive Pres# ptions # based on the doctrine of estoppel Sec. (. Conclusive presumptions. * The follo,in% are instances of concl#sive pres# ptions<

< 3a4=henever a part" has$ !" his o,n declaration$ act$ or o ission$ intentionall" and deli!eratel" led to another to !elieve a partic#lar thin% tr#e$ and to act #pon s#ch !elief$ he cannot$ in an" liti%ation arisin% o#t of s#ch declaration$ act or o ission$ !e per itted to falsif" it< 3!4The tenant is not per itted to den" the title of his landlord at the ti e of co ence ent of the relation of landlord and tenant !et,een the .' $1ec. , Rule 1'1 of the Rules of Court% !. Disp#ta!le Pres# ptions Sec. -. 3)#le 1-14 Disputable presumptions. * The follo,in% pres# ptions are satisfactor" if #ncontradicted$ !#t a" !e contradicted and overco e !" other evidence<
3a4 That a person is innocent of cri e or ,ron%5 3!4 That an #nla,f#l act ,as done ,ith an #nla,f#l intent5 3c4 That a person intends the ordinar" conse2#ences of his vol#ntar" act5 3d4 That a person ta8es ordinar" care of his concerns5 3e4 That evidence ,illf#ll" s#ppressed ,o#ld !e adverse if prod#ced5 3f4 That one" paid !" one to another ,as d#e to the latter5

3%4 That a thin% delivered !" one to another !elon%ed to the latter5 3h4 That an o!li%ation delivered #p to the de!tor has !een paid5 3i4 That prior rents or install ents had !een paid ,hen a receipt for the later one is prod#ced5 3&4 That a person fo#nd in possession of a thin% ta8en in the doin% of a recent ,ron%f#l act is the ta8er and the doer of the ,hole act5 other,ise$ that thin%s ,hich a person possess$ or e+ercises acts of o,nership over$ are o,ned !" hi 5 384 That a person in possession of an order on hi self for the pa" ent of the deliver" of an"thin%$ has paid the one" or delivered the thin% accordin%l"5 3l4 That a person actin% in a p#!lic office ,as re%#larl" appointed or elected to it5 3 4 That official d#t" has !een re%#larl" perfor ed5 3n4 That a co#rt$ or &#d%e actin% as s#ch$ ,hether in the Philippines or else,here$ ,as actin% in the la,f#l e+ercise of &#risdiction5 3o4 That all the atters ,ithin an iss#e raised in a case ,ere laid !efore the co#rt and passed #pon !" it5 and in li8e anner that all atters ,ithin an iss#e raised in a disp#te s#! itted for ar!itration ,ere laid !efore the ar!itrators and passed #pon !" the 5 one"$ or the

2
3p4 That private transactions have !een fair and re%#lar5 324 That the ordinar" co#rse of !#siness has !een follo,ed5 3r4 That there ,as a s#fficient consideration for a contract5 3s4 That a ne%otia!le instr# ent ,as %iven or indorsed for a s#fficient consideration5 3t4 That an endorse ent of ne%otia!le instr# ent ,as and at the place ,here the instr# ent is dated5 3#4That a ,ritin% is tr#l" dated5 3v4That a letter d#l" directed and ailed ,as received in the re%#lar co#rse of the ail5 ade !efore the instr# ent ,as overd#e

3,4 That after an a!sence of seven "ears$ it !ein% #n8no,n ,hether or not the a!sentee still lives$ he is considered dead for all p#rposes$ e+cept for those of s#ccession. The a!sentee shall not !e considered dead for the p#rpose of openin% his s#ccession till after an a!sence of ten "ears. If he disappeared after the a%e of sevent"6five "ears$ an a!sence of five "ears shall !e s#fficient in order that his s#ccession a" !e opened. The follo,in% shall !e considered dead for all p#rposes incl#din% the division of the estate a on% the heirs< 314 A person on !oard a vessel lost d#rin% a sea vo"a%e$ or an aircraft ,ith is issin%$ ,ho has not !een heard of for fo#r "ears since the loss of the vessel or aircraft5 3(4 A !een e !er of the ar ed forces ,ho has ta8en part in ar ed hostilities$ and has issin% for fo#r "ears5

3-4 A person ,ho has !een in dan%er of death #nder other circ# stances and ,hose e+istence has not !een 8no,n for fo#r "ears5 3.4 If a arried person has !een a!sent for fo#r consec#tive "ears$ the spo#se present a" contract a s#!se2#ent arria%e if he or she has ,ell6fo#nded !elief that the a!sent spo#se is alread" death. In case of disappearance$ ,here there is a dan%er of death the circ# stances hereina!ove provided$ an a!sence of onl" t,o "ears shall !e s#fficient for the p#rpose of contractin% a s#!se2#ent arria%e. >o,ever$ in an" case$ !efore arr"in% a%ain$ the spo#se present #st instit#te a s# ar" proceedin%s as provided in the 0a il" Code and in the r#les for declaration of pres# ptive death of the a!sentee$ ,itho#t pre&#dice to the effect of reappearance of the a!sent spo#se.chanro!les virt#a la, li!rar" 3+4 That ac2#iescence res#lted fro la, or fact5 a !elief that the thin% ac2#iesced in ,as confor a!le to the

3"4 That thin%s have happened accordin% to the ordinar" co#rse of nat#re and ordinar" nat#re ha!its of life5 3?4 That persons actin% as copartners have entered into a contract of copartneship5

=
3aa4 That a an and ,o an deportin% the selves as h#s!and and ,ife have entered into a la,f#l contract of arria%e5 3!!4 That propert" ac2#ired !" a an and a ,o an ,ho are capacitated to arr" each other and ,ho live e+cl#sivel" ,ith each other as h#s!and and ,ife ,itho#t the !enefit of arria%e or #nder void arria%e$ has !een o!tained !" their &oint efforts$ ,or8 or ind#str". 3cc4 That in cases of coha!itation !" a an and a ,o an ,ho are not capacitated to arr" each other and ,ho have ac2#ire properl" thro#%h their act#al &oint contri!#tion of one"$ propert" or ind#str"$ s#ch contri!#tions and their correspondin% shares incl#din% &oint deposits of one" and evidences of credit are e2#al.chanro!les virt#a la, li!rar" 3dd4 That if the arria%e is ter inated and the other contracted another arria%e ,ithin three h#ndred da"s after s#ch ter ination of the for er arria%e$ these r#les shall %overn in the a!sence of proof to the contrar"< 314 A child !orn !efore one h#ndred ei%ht" da"s after the sole ni?ation of the s#!se2#ent arria%e is considered to have !een conceived d#rin% s#ch arria%e$ even tho#%h it !e !orn ,ithin the three h#ndred da"s after the ter ination of the for er arria%e. 3(4 A child !orn after one h#ndred ei%ht" da"s follo,in% the cele!ration of the s#!se2#ent arria%e is considered to have !een conceived d#rin% s#ch arria%e$ even tho#%h it !e !orn ,ithin the three h#ndred da"s after the ter ination of the for er arria%e. 3ee4 That a thin% once proved to e+ist contin#es as lon% as is #s#al ,ith thin%s of the nat#re5 3ff4 That the la, has !een o!e"ed5 3%%4 That a printed or p#!lished !oo8$ p#rportin% to !e printed or p#!lished !" p#!lic a#thorit"$ ,as so printed or p#!lished5 3hh4 That a printed or p#!lished !oo8$ p#rportin% contain reports of cases ad&#d%ed in tri!#nals of the co#ntr" ,here the !oo8 is p#!lished$ contains correct reports of s#ch cases5 3ii4 That a tr#stee or other person ,hose d#t" it ,as to conve" real propert" to a partic#lar person has act#all" conve"ed it to hi ,hen s#ch pres# ption is necessar" to perfect the title of s#ch person or his s#ccessor in interest5 3&&4 That e+cept for p#rposes of s#ccession$ ,hen t,o persons perish in the sa e cala it"$ s#ch as ,rec8$ !attle$ or confla%ration$ and it is not sho,n ,ho died first$ and there are no partic#lar circ# stances fro ,hich it can !e inferred$ the s#rvivorship is deter ined fro the pro!a!ilities res#ltin% fro the stren%th and the a%e of the se+es$ accordin% to the follo,in% r#les< 1. If !oth ,ere #nder the a%e of fifteen "ears$ the older is dee ed to have s#rvived5

1@
(. If !oth ,ere a!ove the a%e si+t"$ the "o#n%er is dee ed to have s#rvived5 -. If one is #nder fifteen and the other a!ove si+t"$ the for er is dee ed to have s#rvived5 .. If !oth !e over fifteen and #nder si+t"$ and the se+ !e different$ the is dee ed to have s#rvived$ if the se+ !e the sa e$ the older5 ale

/. If one !e #nder fifteen or over si+t"$ and the other !et,een those a%es$ the latter is dee ed to have s#rvived. 3884 That if there is a do#!t$ as !et,een t,o or ore persons ,ho are called to s#cceed each other$ as to ,hich of the died first$ ,hoever alle%es the death of one prior to the other$ shall prove the sa e5 in the a!sence of proof$ the" shall !e considered to have died at the sa e ti

@. Ai!eral Constr#ction of the )#les of Evidence 1. 3i7e all other provisions under the Rules of Court, the rules of evidence must be liberally constued (Sec.9, Rule 1, Rules of Court). Rules of >rocedure are mere tools intended to facilitate rather than to frustrate the attainment of (ustice. A strict and rigid application must al&ays be esche&ed if it &ould subvert their primary ob(ective of enhancing substantial (ustice. >rocedural rules must be liberally interpreted and applied so as not to frustrate substantial (ustice. (Aui(m2(o&. CA, 4.4 SCRA 17). ?o&ever, to (ustify rela!ation of the rules, a satisfactory e!planation and a subse"uent fulfilment of the re"uirements have al&ays been re"uired ('(rcen(s &. Bom(s, 4.4 SCRA ."3). . The Rules on Electronic Evidence shall li7e&ise be construed liberally (Sec. 2, Rule 2, Rules on %lectronic %&i$ence). 1B. C#ant# of Evidence 3=ei%ht and S#fficienc" of Evidence4

a. Proof !e"ond reasona!le do#!t Sec. (. (Rule 133 !roof beyond reasonable doubt. " In a cri inal case$ the acc#sed is entitled to an ac2#ittal$ #nless his %#ilt is sho,n !e"ond reasona!le do#!t. Proof !e"ond reasona!le do#!t does not ean s#ch a de%ree of proof$ e+cl#din% possi!ilit" of error$ prod#ces a!sol#te certaint". 7oral certaint" onl" is re2#ired$ or that de%ree of proof ,hich prod#ces conviction in an #npre&#diced ind.' !. Preponderance of evidence Sec. 1. (Rule 133 !reponderance of evidence# $o% determined. " In civil cases$ the part" havin% !#rden of proof #st esta!lish his case !" a preponderance of evidence. In deter inin% ,here the preponderance or s#perior

11 ,ei%ht of evidence on the iss#es involved lies$ the co#rt a" consider all the facts and circ# stances of the case$ the ,itnessesD anner of testif"in%$ their intelli%ence$ their eans and opport#nit" of 8no,in% the facts to ,hich there are testif"in%$ the nat#re of the facts to ,hich the" testif"$ the pro!a!ilit" or i pro!a!ilit" of their testi on"$ their interest or ,ant of interest$ and also their personal credi!ilit" so far as the sa e a" le%iti atel" appear #pon the trial. The co#rt a" also consider the n# !er of ,itnesses$ tho#%h the preponderance is not necessaril" ,ith the %reater n# !er.' preponderance of evidence' 6 the term is a "uantum of evidence applicable to civil cases+ means the ,greater or superior &eight of evidence-+ the evidence that is more convincing and more credible than the one offered by the adverse party 6 means that the evidence adduced by oneside is, as a &hole, superior to or has greater &eight than that of the other (C(2(1(t Drill &. -;C6 Er2(n !roperty -e&eloper, nc., 4.4 SCRA 9.3/ '! &. Reye, D.R. 8o.1.7177, Fe2ru(ry 11, 2008) 6 means evidence &hich is more convincing to the court as &orthy of belief than that &hich is offered in opposition thereto (Repu2lic &. '(utist(, D.R. 8o. 19"801, Septem2er 11, 2007). In deter inin% ,hether or not there is preponderance of evidence$ the co#rt a" consider the follo,in%< $a% all the facts and circumstances of the case, $b%the &itnessesA manner of testifying, their intelligence, their means and opportunity of 7no&ing the facts to &hich they are testifying, the nature of the facts to &hich they testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony, $c% their interest or &ant of interest, and also their personal credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear upon the trial $d% the number of &itnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily &ith the greater number (Sec.1, Rule 133) c. S#!stantial evidence 6 This degree of evidence applies to administrative cases, i.e., those filed before administrative and "uasi# (udicial bodies and &hich re"uires that in order to establish a fact, the evidence should constitute the amount of relevant evidence &hich a reasonable mind might accept as ade"uate to support a conclusion.

1 Sec. /. 3)#le 1--4 Substantial evidence. " In cases filed !efore ad inistrative or 2#asi6&#dicial !odies$ a fact a" !e dee ed esta!lished if it is s#pported !" s#!stantial evidence$ or that a o#nt of relevant evidence ,hich a reasona!le ind i%ht accept as ade2#ate to &#stif" a concl#sion.' d. Clear and convincin% evidence 1. Evidence is clear and convincing if it produces in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to allegations sought to be established+ )t is intermediate, being more than preponderance, but not to the e!tent of such certainty as is re"uired beyond reasonable doubt as in criminal cases. ('l(c)*s +(, -iction(ry, .th %$., 227) . The Court in Do&*t of Con1)on1 Speci(l A$ministr(ti&e Re1ion &. Gl(li(, #r. (D. R. 8o. 1.397., April 1",2007), e!plained this "uantum of evidence, thus: , !!! )n his separate opinion in !ur1(n(n, then Associate Bustice, no& Chief Bustice Reynato 1. >uno, proposed that a ne& standard &hich he termed ,clear and convincing evidence- should be use in granting bail in e!tradition cases. Accor$in1 to him, this st(n$(r$ shoul$ 2e lo,er th(n proof 2eyon$ re(son(2le $ou2t 2ut hi1her th(n prepon$er(nce of e&i$ence. 5!!-

:. E#dicial Notice and E#dicial Ad issions 1. =hat Need Not :e Proved # Budicial notice is based on the ma!im ,&hat is 7no&n need not be proved,- hence, &hen the rule is invo7ed, the court may dispense &ith the presentation of evidence on (udicially cogniCable facts. (. 7atters of E#dicial Notice a. 7andator" # no motion or hearing is necessary for the court to ta7e (udicial notice of a fact because this is a matter &hich ought to ta7e (udicial notice of The follo&ing are matters sub(ect to mandatory (udicial notice: $i.% the e!istence and territorial e!tent of states, $ii.% the political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality,

1' $iii% the la& of nations, $iv.% the admiralty and maritime courts of the &orld and their seals, $v.% the political constitution and history of the >hilippines, $vi.% the official acts of legislative, e!ecutive and (udicial departments of the >hilippines, $vii.% the la&s of nature, $viii.% the measure of time, and $i!.% the geographical divisions. !. Discretionar" Sec. (. 3)#le 1(@4 &udicial notice# %$en discretionary. * A co#rt a" ta8e &#dicial notice of atters ,hich are of p#!lic 8no,led%e$ or are capa!le to #n2#estiona!le de onstration$ or o#%ht to !e 8no,n to &#d%es !eca#se of their &#dicial f#nctions.' The principles of discretionary (udicial notice &ill apply &here the follo&ing re"uisites are met: $a% The matter must be one of common 7no&ledge $b% The matter must be settled beyond reasonable doubt $if there is any uncertainty about the matter, then evidence must be adduced%+ and $c% The 7no&ledge must e!ist &ithin the (urisdiction of the court ('er1et &. St(te HG)l( Crim< 824 !2$ 394/ 2" Am #ur 2$, %&i$ence, 02. 1""4/ St(te !rosecutors &.;uro, 293 SCRA .0.) The principal guide in determining &hat facts may be assumed to be (udicially 7no&n is that of notoriety. ?ence, it can be said that (udicial notice is limited to facts evidenced by public records and facts of general notoriety. Doreover, a (udicially noticed fact must be one not sub(ect to a reasonable dispute in that it is either: $1% generally 7no&n &ithin the territorial (urisdiction of the trial court+ or $ % capable of accurate and ready determination by resorting to sources &hose accuracy cannot reasonably be "uestionable.

1. Budicial notice under 1ec. of Rule 1 = rests on the &isdom and discretion of the court. The po&er to ta7e (udicial notice must be e!ercised &ith caution and care must be ta7en that the re"uisite notoriety e!ists. Any reasonable doubt on the matter sought to be (udicially noticed must be resolved against the ta7ing of (udicial notice. (St(te !rosecutors &. ;uro, 239 SCRA .0.). -. E#dicial Ad issions a. Effect of &#dicial ad issions 1pecifically, under Sec..$ )#le 1(@ of the Rules of Court, the follo&ing are the effects of (udicial admissions: $i% They do not re"uire proof+ and $ii% They cannot be contradicted because they are conclusive upon the party ma7ing it. !. >o, &#dicial ad issions a" !e contradicted The above rule ho&ever, admits of t&o e!ceptions, namely: $1% upon sho&ing that the admission &as made through p(lp(2le mist()e, or $ % &hen it is sho&n that no such admission &as made. .. E#dicial Notice of 0orei%n Aa,s$ Aa, of Nations and 7#nicipal Ordinance a. E#dicial Notice of 0orei%n Aa,s i. )t is &ell#settled in our (urisdiction that our courts cannot ta7e (udicial notice of foreign la&s. !!! )n general, and in the absence of statutory re"uirement to the contrary, the courts of the forum &ill not ta7e (udicial notice of the la& prevailing in another country (2" Am #ur %&i$ence, 0119). Eoreign la&s must be alleged and proved. )n the absence of proof, the foreign la& &ill be presumed to be the same as the la&s of (urisdiction hearing the case under the doctrine of processu(l presumption (8orth,est Grient Airlines &s CA, 241 SCRA 1"2).

1/ !!! ii. Fhere the foreign la& is &ithin the actual 7no&ledge of the court such as &hen the la& is generally 7no&n, had been ruled upon in previous cases before it and none of the parties claim other&ise, the court may ta7e (udicial notice of the foreign la& (!C ' &. %scolin, .9 SCRA 299). iii. Fhen the foreign la& is part of a published treatise, periodical or pamphlet and the &riter is recogniCed in his profession or calling as e!pert in the sub(ect, the court, it is submitted, may ta7e (udicial notice of the treatise containing the foreign la& (Sec. 49, Rule 130). !. E#dicial Notice of the Aa, of Nations Fhen the foreign la& refers to the la& of nations, said la& is sub(ect to a mandatory (udicial notice under Sec$ 1 of )#le 1(@. 0nder the >hilippine Constitution, the >hilippines adopts the generally accepted principles of international la& as part of the land (Sec.2, Art , Constitution of the !hilippines). *eing parts of the la& of the land, they are therefore, technically in the nature of local la&s and hence, are sub(ect to a mandatory (udicial notice under Sec.1 of )#le 1(@. c. E#dicial Notice of 7#nicipal Ordinances 1. Dunicipal trial courts must ta7e (udicial notice of municipal ordinances in force in the municipality in &hich they sit. (E.S. &. 'l(nco, 37 !hil 129). . A CE) $no& RTC%, should also ta7e (udicial notice of municipal ordinances in force in the municipalities &ithin their (urisdiction but only &hen so re"uired by la&. '. The CA may ta7e (udicial notice of municipal ordinances because nothing in the Rules prohibits it from ta7ing cogniCance of an ordinance &hich is capable of un"uestionable demonstration

1; (D(lle1o &.!eople, 8 SCRA 813).

C.

O:EECT 3)EAA4 EVIDENCE 1. Nat#re of O!&ect Evidence ,Gb(ects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court. Fhen an ob(ect is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be e!hibited to, e!amined or vie&ed by the court.- $1ec 1 of Rule 1'@% a. Gb(ect as real evidence is e!actly &hat its name suggests. )t is the real thing itself. $i.e. 7nife used to slash a victim8s throat, (e&elry stolen, car used in robbery etc% b. )t appears directly to the senses of the court. c. Dean Riano8s lecture: i. ,evidence is used depending on its offer. Fhether it is ob(ect or documentary depends on the reason and purpose &hy it is offered.ii. *est evidence rule, parole evidence and hearsay rule do 5GT apply in ob(ect evidence. d. Gb(ect evidence is not visual alone. )t covers the entire range of human senses: hearing, taste, smell, and touch. e. Fhere the physical evidence runs counter the testimonial evidence, the physical evidence should prevail $*>) vs Reyes :.R. 1/<1<<, Eeb. 11, @@2% (. )e2#isites for Ad issi!ilit" The admissibility of the ob(ect li7e other evidence re"uires that the ob(ect be both rele&(nt (n$ competent. a. the evidence must be relevant b. the evidence must be authenticated - To authenticate the ob(ect, it must be sho&n that the ob(ect is the very thing that is either the sub(ect matter of the la& suit or the very one involved to prove an issue in the case c. the authentication must be made by a competent &itness - To authenticate the ob(ect, there must be someone $i.e. the &itness% &ho should identify the ob(ect to be the actual thing involved. - An ob(ect evidence, being inanimate, cannot spea7 for itself. d. the ob(ect must be formally offered in evidence 5.*. the authentication of the ob(ect $b. and c.% is to comply &ith the element of competence. -. Cate%ories of O!&ect Evidence a. 0ni"ue Gb(ects 6 ob(ects that have readily identifiable mar7s - Gb(ects &hich has uni"ue characteristics li7e the serial number of a caliber ./ pistol. b. Gb(ects Dade 0ni"ue 6 ob(ects that are made readily identifiable

1< )f the ob(ect has no uni"ue characteristics, li7e a typical 7nife that has no serial numbers found in a common place, the &itness may identify the same in court as &hen he made it uni"ue by placing mar7s on the item. c. 5on#uni"ue Gb(ects 6 ob(ects &ith no identifying mar7s and cannot be mar7ed - This third category refers to those &hich has no uni"ue characteristic and those &hich cannot be mar7ed li7e for instance, a drop of blood, oil, drugs and the li7e. 0nder this situation, the proponent of the evidence must establish a ch(in of custo$y $this &ill be discussed further later% .. De onstrative Evidence a. Demonstrative Evidence is not a separately defined evidence under the rules of court and appears to be incorporated under the general term o2IectJ re(l e&i$ence because it represents or demonstrates the real thing. b. )t is the substantial representative of the true ob(ect li7e for e!ample, a map, a photograph, model, diagram, etc. c. The rule boils to one basic "uestion: ,Does the evidence sufficiently and accurately represent the ob(ect it see7s to demonstrate or representH- if it does, the evidence &ould be admissible. A$missi2ility of !hoto1r(phs 0nder the electronic evidence rule, photographic evidence of events, acts or transactions shall be admissible in evidence provided: i. )t shall be presented, displayed and sho&n to the court+ and ii. )t shall be identified, e!plained or authenticated by either: - The person &ho made the recording or - 1ome other person competent to testify the accuracy thereof The admissibility of photographs is &ithin the discretion of the court, and its ruling in this respect shall not be interfered &ith EICE>T upon a clear sho&ing of an abuse in discretion. A$missi2ility of ;otion !ictures (n$ recor$in1s The rule that apply to photographs generally apply to motion pictures and recordings. 0nder the Rules on Electronic Evidence, the authentication process need not involve the person &ho actually made the recording. )t can be done by someone &ho can testify as to its accuracy. There is also a re"uirement that the recording be sho&n, presented and displayed to court. A$missi2ility of -i(1r(ms, mo$els (n$ m(ps Aside from the re"uirement of relevance, a diagram, model, or map must be identified by a &itness &ho is familiar &ith &hat the evidence depicts, and that the same is an accurate representation of the scene it portrays 1ome courts may re"uire that the model, diagram or map be dra&n to scale. )f not dra&n to scale, the court must be so informed.

12

A$missi2ility of K6r(y pictures )t is admissible &hen sho&n to have been made under the circumstances as to assure their accuracy and &here relevant to a material issue in the case. *ecause the science of ta7ing I#ray is no& &ell#founded and generally recogniCed, almost all courts no longer re"uire testimony as to the reliability of an I#ray machine. A$missi2ility of Scientific tests, $emonstr(tion, (n$ e5periments This is sub(ect to (udicial discretion. )n#reenactment of material events, li7e&ise, has been held permissible to help illustrate the testimony of the &itness.
/. Vie, on O!&ect Evidence a. There are times that a party cannot bring an ob(ect to the court for vie&ing. )n such a situation, the court may ma7e an ocular inspection, inspect a crime scene or other&ise go out the courtroom. b. :oing out the courtroom to observe places and ob(ects is commonly termed a ,4)EFc. The trial (udge has discretion to grant or refuse a re"uest for a vie&. d. An inspection outside the court should be made in the presence of the parties or at least &ith previous notice to them. e. 1uch inspection or vie& is part of the trial since evidence is thereby being received. 1. Chain of C#stod" in relation to Section (1 of the Co prehensive Dan%ero#s Dr#%s Act of (BB( a. >urpose of Chain of Custody: to guaranty the integrity of the physical evidence and to prevent the introduction of evidence &hich is not authentic. b. )t is a chain because there are lin7s in the handling of the evidence. The lin7s are the people &ho actually handled or had custody of the ob(ect. $Each lin7 must sho& ho& he received the ob(ect, ho& he handled it and ho& it &as transferred to another% c. )t is not necessary that every person &ho had contact &ith the ob(ect give their testimony. 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. d. 1ection 1 $b% of the Dangerous Drugs *oard Regulation 5o. 1, 1eries of @@ 1= &hich implements R.A. 5o. =1;/ defines Jchain of custodyJ as follo&s: JChain of CustodyJ means the duly recorded authoriCed movements and custody of seiCed drugs or controlled chemicals or plants source of dangerous drugs or laboratory e"uipment at each stage, from the time of seiCureKconfiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safe7eeping to presentation in court and destruction. 1uch record of movements and custody of the seiCed item shall include the identity and signature of the person &ho held temporary custody of the seiCed item, the dates and times &hen such transfers of custody &ere made in the course of safe7eeping and use in court as evidence, and the final disposition.-

1= e. The procedure to be follo&ed in the handling and custody of seiCed dangerous drugs: i. The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall, immediately after seiCure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the personKs from &hom such items &ere confiscated andKor seiCed or hisKher representative or counsel, a representative from media and the DGB, and any elected public official &ho shall be re"uired to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof. ii. The failure of the prosecution to sho& that the police officers conducted the re"uired physical inventory and photographs pursuant to such guidelines does not automatically render the ob(ects inadmissible. The implementing rules provides for a proviso: ,provided further, that non#compliance &ith these re"uirements under (ustifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seiCed items are properly preserved by the apprehending officerK team, shall not render void and invalid such seiCures of and custody over said items9. )#le on DNA Evidence 3A.7. No. B16116/6SC4 a. 7eanin% of DNA i. Deo!yribonucleic acid $D5A%, a nucleic acid that contains the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all 7no&n living organisms. ii. D5A is the chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of the body $1ec. 'LbM, Rules of D5A Evidence% iii. A person8s D5A does not change throughout the person8s lifetime+ the person8s D5A is the same as the D5A found in his saliva, s&eat, s7in, bone, ear&a!, s7in tissue, etc and 5G t&o individuals have the same D5A, &ith the notable e!ception of identical t&ins. !. Applica!le for DNA testin% order i. Co, m(y (n or$er for -8A testin1 2e o2t(ine$L A person &ho has legal interest in the litigation may file an application before the appropriate court, at any time. The order of D5A testing shall not ho&ever, be issued as a of course and from the mere fact that the person re"uesting for the testing has a legal interest in the litigation. Eor the order to be issued, there must be a further sho&ing that: $a% A biological sample e!ists that is relevant to the case+ $b% The biological sample: $i% &as not previously sub(ected to the type of D5A testing no& re"uested+ or $ii% &as previously sub(ected to D5A testing, but the results may re"uire confirmation for good reasons+ $c% The D5A testing uses a scientifically valid techni"ue+

@ $d% The D5A testing has the scientific potential to produce ne& information that is relevant to the proper resolution of the case+ and $e% The e!istence of other factors, if any, &hich the court may consider as potentially affecting the accuracy or integrity of the D5A testing. $1ec ., RDE% )f the court finds that the re"uirements above have been complied &ith, the court shall 6 $a% Grder, &here appropriate, that biological samples be ta7en from any person or crime scene evidence+ $b% )mpose reasonable conditions on D5A testing designed to protect the integrity of the biological sample, the testing process and the reliability of the test results, including the condition that the D5A test results shall be simultaneously disclosed to parties involved in the case+ and $c% )f the biological sample ta7en is of such an amount that prevents the conduct of confirmatory testing by the other or the adverse party and &here additional biological samples of the same 7ind can no longer be obtained, issue an order re"uiring all parties to the case or proceedings to &itness the D5A testing to be conducted. n.b. the court may motu proprio order a D5A testing. s ( court or$er 1r(ntin1 the -8A testin1 (ppe(l(2leL An order granting the D5A testing shall be immediately e!ecutory and shall not be appealable. iii. 3h(t then is the reme$y (1(inst ( court if it is not (ppe(l(2leL A petition for certiorari. ?o&ever, a petition for certiorari initiated therefrom shall not, in any &ay, stay the implementation thereof, unless a higher court issues an in(unctive order. i&. s there (n (utom(tic ($mission of the -8A e&i$ence o2t(ine$ in the testin1L The grant of a D5A testing application shall not be construed as an automatic admission into evidence of any component of the D5A evidence that may be obtained as a result thereof. $1ec /, RDE% s ( court or$er (l,(ys re>uire$ 2efore un$ert()in1 ( -8A testin1L 5o. 1ec . of RDE allo&s a testing &ithout a prior court order if done before a suit or proceeding is commenced at the behest of any party including la& enforcement agencies. Thus, a court order shall only be re"uired only if there8s a pending litigation *0T not before the litigation. ii.

&.

1 n.b. a litigation need not e!ist prior to a D5A testing. c. Post6conviction DNA testin%5 re ed" i. The D5A test availed of by a person already convicted under a final and e!ecutory (udgment is termed ,post#conviction- D5A testing. ii. 1ec ; of RDE allo&s a post conviction D5A testing. )t may be available to $a% prosecution, or $b% to the person convicted by a final and e!ecutory (udgment provided that the ff. re"uirements are met: a. A biological sample e!ists+ b. 1uch sample is relevant to the case+ and c. The testing &ould probably result in the reversal of the (udgement of conviction iii. 3h(t is the reme$y (&(il(2le to the con&ict if the result of the !ost6con&iction -8A testin1 (re f(&or(2le to himL - ?e may file a petition for a ,rit of C(2e(s Corpus in the court of origin. - The court shall conduct a hearing and in case the court finds that the petition is meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the (udgment of conviction and order the release of the convict, unless his detention is (ustified for a la&ful cause n.b. although the la& spea7s that it be filed in the court of origin, the rule allo&s to be filed either in CA or 1C. n.b. the petition for &rit of h(2e(s corpus may also be filed by the prosecution d. Assess ent of the pro!ative val#e of DNA evidence and ad issi!ilit" i. >eople vs. 4alle(o $'2 1CRA 1= L @@ M% adopted the follo&ing guidelines to be used in assessing the probative value of D5A evidence: - ?o& the samples are collected+ - ?o& they &ere handled+ - The possibility of contamination of the samples+ - The procedure follo&ed in analyCing the samples+ - Fhether the proper standards and procedures &ere follo&ed in conducting the tests+ and - The "ualification of the analyst &ho conducted the test ii. 1ec < of the RDE provides that the determination of the probative value of the D5A evidence rests upon the sound (udicial assessment ta7ing into consideration the follo&ing matters: a. The chain of custody, including ho& the biological samples &ere collected, ho& they &ere handled and the possibility of contamination of the samples+ b. The D5A testing methodology, including the procedure follo&ed in analyCing the samples, the advantages and disadvantages of the

procedure, and compliance &ith the scientifically valid standards in conducting the tests+ c. The forensic D5A laboratory, including the accreditation and the "ualification of the analyst &ho conducted the test+ if the laboratory is not accredited, the court shall consider the relevant e!perience of the laboratory in the forensic case&or7 and its credibility shall be properly established+ and d. The reliability of the testing result.

e. )#les on eval#ation of relia!ilit" of the DNA testin% 7ethodolo%" n ,h(t situ(tion $oes the Rule on -8A %&i$ence (pplyL The Rule on D5A Evidence is the primary rule to be applied &henever D5A evidence is offered, used or proposed to be offered or used as evidence in: 1. Criminal actions . Civil actions '. 1pecial proceedings Fhen a matter is not specifically governed by the Rules on D5A Evidence, the Rules of Court and other pertinent provisions of la& on evidence shall apply. ii. 3h(t is the si1nific(nce of -8A The significance lies in the uni"ueness of the totality of the D5A of a person. )t is a scientific fact that the totality of an individual8s D5A is uni"ue for the individual, e!cept identical t&ins. $1ec'LbM, RDE% 1. A#thentication and Proof of Doc# ents A. Concept and 7eanin% A#thentication means the process of proving the due e!ecution and genuineness of a document. An evidence &hen presented in court is not presumed authentic. The general rule therefore is to prove its authenticity unless it is self#authenticating. :. P#!lic and Private Doc# ents 1. >ublic documents are: a. The &ritten official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, &hether of the >hilippines, or of a foreign country+ i.

' b. Documents ac7no&ledge before a notary public e!cept last &ills and testaments+ and c. >ublic records, 7ept in the >hilippines, of private documents re"uired by la& to be entered therein. Church registries by virtue of :eneral Grder 5o. ;2 are considered private &ritings. . )mportance of 7no&ing &hether document is public or private document: a. The re"uirement to prove the authenticity of a private document is not needed for a public document b. Documents ac7no&ledged before a notary public is considered a public document en(oys the presumption of regularity. C. =hen a private ,ritin% re2#ires a#thentication5 proof of a private ,ritin% 1. The due e!ecution and authenticity of a private document must be proved either by: a. Anyone &ho sa& the document e!ecuted or &ritten b. Evidence of the genuineness of the signature or hand&riting of the ma7er D. =hen evidence of a#thenticit" of a private ,ritin% is not re2#ired 3ancient doc# ent4 1. Fhen a document is considered ancient, evidence of its authenticity need not be given. A private document is considered ancient &hen it is more than thirty $'@% years old, is produced from a custody in &hich it &ould naturally be found genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion. E. >o, to prove %en#ineness of a hand,ritin% The hand&riting may be proven by a &itness &ho believes it to be the hand&riting of a person because: 1. ?e has seen the person &rite . ?e has seen &riting purporting to be his upon &hich the &itness has acted or been charged, and has thus ac"uired 7no&ledge of the hand&riting of such person '. *y a comparison made by the &itness or court, &ith &ritings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against &hom the document is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the (udge. 0. Evidence of Official records of official acts< a. Record of the official acts of official bodies, tribunals, or of public officers e!ist. Day be evidenced by: i. Gfficial publication ii. Copy of the document attested by the officer having legal custody of the record or by the attestation of his deputy+ if the record is not 7ept in the >hilippines G. Attestation of a cop" 1. )f the record is not 7ept in the >hilippines, the attestation must be accompanied by a certificate that such officer has the custody+ if the office in &hich the record

. is 7ept is in a foreign country, the certificate maybe 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 >hilippines stationed in the foreign country in &hich the record is 7ept, and authenticated by the seal of the office. . The attestation must state in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the cler7 of court having a seal, under the seal of such court. >. P#!lic )ecord of a Private Doc# ent A public record of a private document may be proved by: 1. *y the original record . *y a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, &ith an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody I. Proof of Aac8 of )ecord >roof of lac7 of record of a document consists of &ritten statement signed by an officer having custody of an official record or by his deputy. The &ritten statement must contain the follo&ing: 1. There has been a diligent search of the record . That despite the diligent search, no record of entry of a specified tenor is found to e!ist in the records of his office. The &ritten statement must be accompanied by a certificate that such officer has the custody of official records.

E. >o, a E#dicial )ecord is I peached 1. *y evidence of &ant of (urisdiction in the court or (udicial officer . Collusion bet&een the parties '. Eraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings F. Proof of Notarial Doc# ents Documents ac7no&ledged before a notary public is considered a public document en(oys the presumption of regularity. Thus, due e!ecution and authenticity need not be proved. The person &ho notariCed the document must really be a notary public, and that he has notariCed it in accordance &ith the 5otarial 3a&. A. >o, to e+plain alterations in a doc# ent The party producing a document as genuine &hich has been altered and appears to have been altered after its e!ecution has the duty to account for any alteration found in a document purported to be genuine. ?e may sho& any of the follo&ing: 1. That the alteration &as made by another, &ithout his concurrence . That it &as made &ith the consent of the parties affected by it '. That it &as other&ise properly or innocent made, or that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. )f he fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence. 7. Doc# entar" Aan%#a%e in an Official Aan%#a%e

/ Documents &ritten in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied &ith a translation into English or Eilipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed to have such translation prepared before trial.

E. TESTI7ONIAA EVIDENCE 1. C#alification of =itnesses

Sec. (B. 'itnesses5 t$eir (ualifications. * E+cept as provided in the ne+t s#cceedin% section$ all persons ,ho can perceive$ and perceivin%$ can a8e their 8no,n perception to others$ a" !e ,itnesses. )eli%io#s or political !elief$ interest in the o#tco e of the case$ or conviction of a cri e #nless other,ise provided !" la,$ shall not !e %ro#nd for dis2#alification. -

Basic (ualifications) a. b. c. d. ?e can perceive+ and in perceiving ?e can ma7e 7no&n his perception to others. ?e must ta7e either an oath or an affirmation (Sec.1, Rule 132) ?e must not possess the dis"ualifications imposed by la& or these Rules. (. Co petenc" Vers#s Credi!ilit" of a =itness

CO7PETENCG A matter of la& and a matter of rule. Refers to the basic "ualifications of a &itness as his capacity to perceive and his capacity to communicate his perception to others. )n deciding the competence of a &itness, the court &ill not in"uire into his trust&orthiness.

C)EDI:IAITG Refers to the believability of a &itness and has nothing to do &ith the la& or the rules. Refers to the &eight and the trust&orthiness or reliability of the testimony.

Other 0actors that Do Not Affect the Co petenc" of =itnesses

; As a general rule: a. b. c. d. Religious belief+ >olitical belief+ )nterest in the outcome of the case+ Conviction of a crime, unless other&ise provided by la&. E*ample) Those ,ho have !een convicted of falsification of a document$ per+ury or false testimony are dis2#alified fro !ein% ,itnesses to a ,ill (Art. ,-1# .CC . The relationship of a ,itness does not ipso facto render hi a !iased ,itness in cri inal cases ,here the 2#ant# of evidence is P:)D. There is no reason ,h" the sa e principle sho#ld not appl" to civil cases ,here the 2#ant# of evidence is onl" preponderance of evidence (.ort$%est Airlines# /nc. v. C$ion0# 1.R. .o. 122223# &an. 31# -33, .

. Dis"ualifications of Fitnesses A. D)1N0A3)E)CAT)G5 *O REA1G5 GE DE5TA3 )5CA>AC)TO GR )DDAT0R)TO ,1ec. 1. -is>u(lific(tion 2y re(son of ment(l inc(p(city or imm(turity . P The follo&ing persons cannot be &itnesses: 3a4Those ,hose ental condition$ at the ti e of their prod#ction for e+a ination$ is s#ch that the" are incapa!le of intelli%entl" a8in% 8no,n their perception to others5 3!4 Children ,hose ental at#rit" is s#ch as to render the incapa!le of perceivin% the facts respectin% ,hich the" are e+a ined and of relatin% the tr#thf#ll".'

7ENTAA INCAPACITG To be dis"ualified as a &itness by reason of ental incapacit", the follo&ing must concur:

I77ATH)ITG To be dis"ualified as a &itness by reason of i at#rit", the follo&ing must concur: 1. The mental maturity of the &itness must render him incapable of perceiving the facts respecting &hich he is e!amined+ and . ?e is incapable of relating his perception truthfully.

1. The person must be incapable of intelligently ma7ing 7no&n his perception to others+ . ?is incapability must e!ist at the time of his production for e!amination.

<

The incompetence of the &itness must e!ist not at the time of his perception of the facts but at the time he is produced for e!amination and consists in his inability to intelligently ma7e 7no&n &hat he has perceived.

The incompetence of the &itness must occur at the time the &itness perceives the event including his incapability to relate his perceptions truthfully.

!. Dis2#alification !" reason of

arria%e #nit"4

7arital Dis2#alification )#le 3Spo#sal I

Sec. ((. Dis(ualification by reason of marria0e. * D#rin% their arria%e$ neither the h#s!and nor the ,ife a" testif" for or a%ainst the other ,itho#t the consent of the affected spo#se$ e+cept in a civil case !" one a%ainst the other$ or in a cri inal case for a cri e co itted !" one a%ainst the other or the latterDs direct descendants or ascendants.' Reasons for t$e rule (Alvare4 v. Ramire4# 563 SCRA 6- ) a. There is identity of interests bet&een husband and &ife+ b. )f one &ere to testify for or against the other, there is a conse"uent danger of per(ury+ c. The policy of the la& is to guard the security and confidences of private life, even at the ris7 of an occasional failure of (ustice, and to prevent domestic disunion and unhappiness+ and d. Fhen there is &ant of domestic tran"uility there is danger of punishing one spouse through the hostile testimony of the other. E*ceptions to t$e 7arital Dis(ualification Rule) )n the follo&ing instances, a spouse may testify for or against the other even &ithout the consent of the latter: a. )n a civil case by one against the other+ b. )n a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other, or the latter8s direct descendants or ascendants.

C. DISCHAAI0ICATION :G )EASON O0 DEAT> O) INSANITG O0 ADVE)SE PA)TG. Survivors$ip Dis(ualification Rule or Dead 7an8s Statute

2 This rule applies only to a civil case or special proceeding (Re1(l($o, Reme$i(l +(, Compen$ium, Mol. , 2004 %$. !.70.). Sec. (-. Dis(ualification by reason of deat$ or insanity of adverse party . * Parties or assi%nor of parties to a case$ or persons in ,hose !ehalf a case is prosec#ted$ a%ainst an e+ec#tor or ad inistrator or other representative of a deceased person$ or a%ainst a person of #nso#nd ind$ #pon a clai or de and a%ainst the estate of s#ch deceased person or a%ainst s#ch person of #nso#nd ind$ cannot testif" as to an" atter of fact occ#rrin% !efore the death of s#ch deceased person or !efore s#ch person !eca e of #nso#nd ind.' Elements) a. The defendant in the case is the e!ecutor or administrator or a representative of the deceased or the person of unsound mind+ b. The suit is upon a claim by the plaintiff against the estate of said deceased or person of unsound mind+ c. The &itness is the plaintiff, or an assignor of that party, or a person in &hose behalf the case is prosecuted+ and d. The sub(ect 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. D. Dis2#alification !" reason of privile%ed co #nication.

Sec. (.. Dis(ualification by reason of privile0ed communication. * The follo,in% persons cannot testif" as to atters learned in confidence in the follo,in% cases< 1. >#s!and and =ife 7arital !rivile0ed Communications

Sec. (.3a4 The h#s!and or the ,ife$ d#rin% or after the arria%e$ cannot !e e+a ined ,itho#t the consent of the other as to an" co #nication received in confidence !" one fro the other d#rin% the arria%e e+cept in a civil case !" one a%ainst the other$ or in a cri inal case for a cri e co itted !" one a%ainst the other or the latterDs direct descendants or ascendants5Elements) a. There must be a valid marriage bet&een the husband and &ife+ b. There is a communication received in confidence by one from the other+ and c. The confidential communication &as received during the marriage.

= Eor the information to be confidential, it must be made during and by reason of the marital relations and is intended not to be shared &ith others. Fithout such intention, common reason suggests that the information is not confidential.

7arital Dis2#alification )#le (Sec. --# Rule 133 Refers to communications that are not intended to be confidential because they &ere uttered in the presence of third parties are not deemed confidential even &hen made during the marriage+ but 1ec. could apply instead of 1ec. .$a% &hen used as parts of a testimony for or against a party.

7arital Privile%ed Co #nication )#le (Sec. -5(a #Rule133 ?as reference to confidential communications received by one spouse from the other during the marriage. Applies only to testimonies of a confidential nature received by one spouse from the other during the marriage+ does not include acts merely observed by the spouse unless such acts are intended as a means of conveying confidential communication by one to the other. Applies only to confidential information received during the marriage. The spouse affected by the disclosure of the information or testimony may ob(ect even after the dissolution of the marriage. 5ot re"uired+ applies regardless of &hether the spouses are parties or not. Fhat is prohibited is the e5(min(tion of a spouse as to matters received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage.

)ncludes facts, occurrences or information even prior to the marriage. Day be asserted only during the marriage.

Re"uires that the spouse for or against &hom the testimony is offered is a party to the action. The prohibition is a testimony for or against the other.

(. Attorne" and Client

'@ Sec. (.3!4 An attorne" cannot$ ,itho#t the consent of his client$ !e e+a ined as to an" co #nication ade !" the client to hi $ or his advice %iven thereon in the co#rse of$ or ,ith a vie, to$ professional e plo" ent$ nor can an attorne"Ds secretar"$ steno%rapher$ or cler8 !e e+a ined$ ,itho#t the consent of the client and his e plo"er$ concernin% an" fact the 8no,led%e of ,hich has !een ac2#ired in s#ch capacit"5Re(uisites) a. There must be a communication made by the client to the attorney or an advice given by the attorney to his client+ b. The communication or advice must have been given in confidence+ and c. The communication or advice must have been given either in the course of the professional employment or &ith a vie& to professional employment. Fhere a person consults an attorney not as a la&yer but merely as a friend, or a participant in a business transaction, the consultation &ould not be one made in the course of a professional employment or &ith a vie& to professional employment as re"uired by 1ec. .$b%. 5ot confined to actual pending cases+ may refer to anticipated litigations or may not refer to any litigation at all. The statements of the client need not have been made to the attorney in person. Those made to the attorney8s secretary, cler7 or stenographer for transmission to the attorney for the purpose of the professional relationship or &ith a vie& to such relationship or those 7no&ledge ac"uired by such employees in such capacity are covered by the privilege. 1tatements should have been intended to be confidential. >rivilege does not apply in suits bet&een attorney and client. The client o&ns the privilege+ it is he &ho can invo7e it. The protection of the privilege &ill generally survive the death of the client.

-. Ph"sician and Patient Sec. (.3c4 A person a#thori?ed to practice edicine$ s#r%er" or o!stetrics cannot in a civil case$ ,itho#t the consent of the patient$ !e e+a ined as to an" advice or treat ent %iven !" hi or an" infor ation ,hich he a" have ac2#ired in attendin% s#ch patient in a professional capacit"$ ,hich infor ation ,as necessar" to ena!le hi to act in capacit"$ and ,hich ,o#ld !lac8en the rep#tation of the patient5Bhe inform(tion ,hich c(nnot 2e $isclose$ refers to7

'1 a. Any advice given to the client+ b. Any treatment given to the client+ c. Any information ac"uired in attending such patient provided that the advice, treatment or information &as made or ac"uired in a professional capacity and &as necessary in order to enable him to act in that capacity+ and d. That the information sought to be disclosed &ould tend to blac7en the reputation of the patient (Sec.24:c<, Rule 130). This privilege applies to a ci&il c(se, &hether the patient is party or not+ cannot be claimed in a criminal case presumably because the interest of the public in criminal prosecution should be deemed more important than the secrecy of the communication. The p(tient is the holder of the privilege (;etropolit(n +ife (n$ nsur(nce Co. &. =(ufm(n, 104 Colo. 13, 87 !.2$ 7.8 in ;cCormic), %&i$ence, 0102). Claimed against a person duly authoriCed to practice medicine, surgery, or obstetrics. The rule does not re"uire that the relationship bet&een the physician and the patient be a result of a contractual relationship+ it could be the result of a "uasi#contractual relationship. The physician may be said to be acting in a profession(l c(p(city &hen he attends to the patient for either cur(ti&e or pre&enti&e tre(tment. ('(ir$*s %st(te, 173 C(l., 917, 190 !(c, 1078/ Sm(rt &. =(ns(s City, 208 ;o., 192, 10. S.3. 70"). Results of (utopsies may not be deemed covered by the privilege because autopsies are not intended for treatment. The privilege does not apply to shield the commission of a crime or &hen the purpose is an unla&ful one. The privilege survives the death of the patient ('(ssil &. For$ ;otor Co., 278 ;ich. 173, 270 8.3. 2.8, 107 A.+.R. 14"1). The patient may ,(i&e the privilege e!pressly or impliedly. There could also be a &aiver by operation of la& or the rules (Sec.4, Rule 28).

.. Priest and Penitent Sec. (.3d4 A inister or priest cannot$ ,itho#t the consent of the person a8in% the confession$ !e e+a ined as to an" confession ade to or an" advice %iven !" hi in his professional character in the co#rse of discipline en&oined !" the ch#rch to ,hich the inister or priest !elon%s5-

' The person ma7ing the confession holds the privilege and the priest or minister holding the confession in his professional capacity is prohibited from ma7ing a disclosure of the confession &ithout the consent of the person confessing. The privilege e!tends not only to a confession made by the penitent but also to any ($&ice given by the minister or priest. The priest or minister must be duly ordained or consecrated by his sect. The communication must be made pursuant to confession of sins (3i1more on %&i$ence, 0848).

/. P#!lic officers Sec. (.3e4 A p#!lic officer cannot !e e+a ined d#rin% his ter of office or after,ards$ as to co #nications ade to hi in official confidence$ ,hen the co#rt finds that the p#!lic interest ,o#ld s#ffer !" the disclos#re.' The disclosure or non#disclosure is not dependent on the &ill of the officer but on the determination by a competent court. The privilege may be invo7ed not only during the term of office of the public officer but also after.

E. PA)ENTAA AND 0IAIAA P)IVIAEGE ,1ec. /. !(rent(l (n$ fili(l pri&ile1e. 6 5o person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants, children, or other direct descendants.Hnder the 0a il" Code$ no descendant shall !e co pelled$ in a cri inal case$ to testif" a%ainst his parents or %randparents. The Code$ ho,ever$ specificall" provides for an e+ception in the follo,in% instances< a. !. =hen s#ch testi on" is indispensa!le in a cri e co itted a%ainst said descendant5 or In a cri e co itted !" one parent a%ainst the other (Art. -12# 9amily Code of t$e !$ilippines . The privile%e !elon%s to and a" !e invo8ed !" the descendant.

.. E+a ination of =itnesses Open Co#rt E+a ination# 1ec. 1 of Rule 1' provides for the e!amination of the &itness in open court, or unless it calls for a different mode, it can be done orally. #There are ho&ever, testimonies &hich need not be given in open court. 0nder 1ec 1/ of the Rules on 1ummary >rocedure, the affidavits of the parties shall constitute the direct testimony of the &itnesses &ho e!ecuted the same.

'' 6 n ci&il c(ses, the parties are merely re"uired to submit affidavits of their &itnesses and other evidence on the factual issue, together &ith the position papers, setting forth the la& and the facts relied upon. $1ec. =, 1ummary >rocedure% Deposition need not be ta7en in open court since they may be ta7en before a notary public or a person authoriCed to administer oath. n crimin(l c(ses, either party may utiliCe the testimony of a &itness &ho is deceased, out of the country, or one &ho is unavailable to testify despite e!ercise of due diligence, even if the testimony is one used in another case or proceeding. Oath or Affir ation# &itness may ta7e an oath or affirmation but such option is given to &itness not the court. An :at$ is an out&ard pledge made out of immediate sense of responsibility to :od or a solemn appeal to a supreme being in attestation of the truth of some statement. An Affirmation is a substitute for an oath and is a solemn or formal declaration that the &itness &ill tell the truth. #E!amination shall be done in open court and under oath or affirmation. The ans&er of a &itness shall be given orally e!cept if: a% the &itness is incapacitated to spea7 b% or the "uestion calls for a different mode of ans&er. #the "uestions propounded to a &itness and his ans&ers thereto shall be recorded. 1tatements of the Budge shall also be recorded. #the official stenographer shall ma7e a transcript of the record of the proceedings and shall be certified by him as correct. The transcript shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings. A. )i%hts and O!li%ations of a =itness #As a rule, a &itness has obligation to ans&er "uestion, although his ans&er may tend to establish a claim against him. $1ec. ', Rule 1' %

Rights of a Fitness: a. 5ot to give an ans&er that &ill tend to sub(ect him to a penalty for an offense b. To be protected from irrelevant, improper or insulting "uestions and from harsh or insulting demeanor+ c. 5ot to be e!amined e!cept only as to matters pertinent to the issue+

d. 5ot to be detained longer than the interest of (ustice re"uires e. 5ot to give an ans&er &hich &ill tend to degrade his reputation unless it be the very fact at issue or to a fact from &hich the fact in issue &ould be presumed.

#A &itness has a right not to give an ans&er that &ill sub(ect him to a penalty, unless other&ise provided by la& $1ec 'L.M. Rule 1' %

'. #Right of a person against self#incrimination $Art. ))). 1ec. ', Constitution% #R.A. ;=21 $Fitness >rotection, 1ecurity and *enefit Act%, a &itness admitted into the &itness protection program cannot refuse to testify or give evidence or produce boo7s, documents records or &ritings necessary for the prosecution of the offenseKs for &hich he has been admitted on the ground of the right against self#incrimination.
Case: Accused compelled to submit himself to a blood test &here blood samples &ould be e!tracted from his veins to determine &hether he has ?)4. Ruling: The rights of the accused are not violated by such testings. There is no testimonial compulsion involved by e!tracting blood from the accused. 5o violation of the right to privacy and the right to be presumed innocent. 99 E!tracting blood samples and cutting strands of hair do not involve testimonial compulsion but purely mechanical acts &hich re"uires neither discretion nor reasoning. The right against self# incrimination applies only to testimonial evidence. $Ti(ing v. CA%

#Right of the accused against being degraded $right not to give ans&er that &ill degrade him%. E!ception: even if the ans&er is degrading to his reputation, he must ans&er, if the degrading ans&er: a% is the very fact in issue b% refers to a fact from &hich the fact in issue &ould be presumed. #*ut a &itness must ans&er to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense. #if the &itness is the accused, he may totally refuse to ta7e the stand. A mere &itness cannot altogether refuse to ta7e the stand. *efore he can refuse to ans&er, he has to &ait for the incriminating "uestion. #Counsel must al&ays aid his &itnesses being sub(ected to intimidation, harassment and embarrassment. E+a ination of a Child =itness #E!amination shall be done in open court. Ans&er of a child &itness given orally, unless incapacitated to spea7, or "uestions calls for a different mode of ans&er. $1ec 2, Rule on the e!amination of a child &itness% #this does not refer to the competency e!amination of the child but to a situation &here the child is already testifying in court. 0nder 1ec $c%, only specified persons are allo&ed to attend the competency e!amination of the child and is obviously not an open court e!amination. #&hen a child is testifying, the court may e!clude the public and persons &ho do not have a direct interest in the case, including members of the press, or if it &ould cause psychological harm to him, hinder the ascertainment of truth, or result in his inability to effectively communicate due to embarrassment, or if evidence to be produced is offensive to decency or public morals.

'/ #if a child does not understand the English or Eilipino language or is unable to communicate in said languages due to his developmental level, fear, shyness, disability or other similar reason, an interpreter may be appointed by the court, motu proprio or upon motion, to interpret for the child. )t is not a dis"ualification if the interpreter is another &itness in the same case or he is a member of the family of the child. )f interpreter is also a &itness, he shall testify ahead of the child. #The court may appoint motu proprio or on motion, a facilitator, in case the child is unable to understand or respond to "uestions as7ed. A Eacilitator may be a child psychologist, psychiatrist, social &or7er, guidance counselor, teacher, religious leader, parent, or relative. $1ec. 1@% #A child testifying shall have the right to be accompanied by t&o or more person of his o&n choosing for emotional support, &ho shall remain &ithin the vie& of the child during his testimony. *ut the court shall instruct the support person not to prompt, s&ay or influence the child during his testimony. #A support person &ho is also a &itness may be dis"ualified if it could be established that his attendance poses a substantial ris7 of influencing the content of the testimony of the child. A support person &ho is also a &itness, if allo&ed, shall testify ahead of the child. #An application for the child may be made for the testimony of the child to be ta7en in a room outside the courtroom and to be televised to the courtroom by live#lin7 television. The application may be made by the prosecutor, counsel or guardian ad litem, at least five $/% days before the trial date. The court may order that the testimony of the child be ta7en by live#lin7 television if there is a substantial li7elihood that the child &ould suffer trauma from testifying in the presence of the accused, counsel or prosecutor. ;rauma must be of 7ind that &ould impair the completeness or truthfulness of the testimony of the child. #if the child is testifying by live#lin7 television, the court may allo& the child to enter the courtroom, if it8s necessary to identify the accused at trial. #testimony of a child shall be preserved on videotape, digital disc, or other similar devices &hich shall be made part of the court record and shall be sub(ect to a protective order. #to shield the child from the accused, the child may testify through one#&ay mirrors, and other devices. #reports regarding a child shall be confidential and 7ept under seal. E!cept upon &ritten re"uest and order of the court, record shall be released only to the follo&ing+ 1%members of the court staff for administrative use+ %prosecuting attorney '%defense counsel .%guardian ad litem /%agents of investigating la& enforcement agencies ;%other person as determined by court. #3)A*3E for contempt of court# &hoever publishes or causes to publish in any format, the name, address, telephone number, school, or other identifying information of a child &ho is or is alleged to be a victim or accused of a crime or a &itness thereof, or an immediate member family of a child.

'; #&here a youthful offender has been charged before a prosecutor or a municipal (udge and the charges have been dropped, all the RECGRD1 shall be considered >R)4)3E:ED. )f he is charged and ac"uitted or case is dismissed, the records are also privilege as a rule. #a youthful offender &ho fails to ac7no&ledge the case against him or to recite any fact related thereto in response to any in"uiry made to him for any purpose, such not be held guilty of per(ury or concealment or misrepresentation. :. Order in the e+a ination of an individ#al ,itness 1. Direct E+a ination 6e!amination in chief of a &itness by the party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue. A procedure for obtaining information from one8s o&n &itness in an orderly fashion. To elicit facts about the client8s cause of action or defense. . Cross E+a ination# e!amination of &itness by the adverse party after said &itness has given his testimony on direct e!amination. As a rule, its scope is not confined to matters stated in the direct e!amination. Although 1ec. ; of Rule 1' , allo&s the cross#e!aminer, this provision merely states a general rule. An un&illing or hostile &itness may be cross#e!amined only as to sub(ect matter of his e!amination#in#chief. The same limited scope of a cross e!amination is imposed upon the cross e!aminer &here the &itness e!amined is an accused because he is sub(ect to cross e!amination on matters covered by the direct e!amination. T&o basic purposes: a% to bring out facts favorable to counsel8s client not established by the direct testimony and b% to enable counsel to impeach or to impair the credibility of the &itness.

'. )e6direct e+a ination# conducted after the cross e!amination of the &itness. A &itness on direct e!amination may be re#e!amined to e!plain or supplement his ans&er given during cross#e!amination. The counsel may elicit testimony to correct or repel any &rong impression or interferences that may be created in the cross e!amination. )t8s an opportunity to rehabilitate a &itness &hose credibility has been damaged. .. )e6cross e+a ination# this is an e!amination conducted upon conclusion of the re#direct e!amination. The adverse party may "uestion the &itness on matters stated in his re#direct e!amination. /. )ecallin% the ,itness# if &itness has been e!amined by both sides, the &itness cannot be recalled &ithout leave of court. )t8s a matter of (udicial discretion to &hich the court shall be guided by the interest of (ustice.

'<

99Death or A!sence of a =itness6 )f a &itness dies before his cross#e!amination is over, his testimony on the direct may be stric7en out only &ith testimony not covered by the cross e!amination. Absence is not enough to &arrant stri7ing out his testimony for failure to appear for further e!amination &here the &itness had already been sufficiently cross#e!amined. )f &itness is not cross#e!amined because of cause attributable to the cross e!amining party and the &itness had al&ays made himself available, the direct testimony of the &itness shall remain in record.

C. Aeadin% and

isleadin% 2#estions

#Aeadin% C#estion# a "uestion framed in a manner &here it indicates to the &itness the ans&er desired by the party as7ing "uestion. )t is not appropriate in direct or re#direct e!aminations &hen a &itness is being as7ed about a ma(or element of the cause of action or defense. *ut is allo&ed in cross or re#cross e!amination.

#3eading Nuestions are allo&ed in direct e!amination in the follo&ing instances: a% on preliminary matters b% &hen &itness is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is feeble# minded, deaf#mute and there is difficulty in getting direct or intelligible ans&ers c% on hostile &itness d% &itness is an adverse party, or an officer, director, managing agent of a corporation, partnership or association &hich is an adverse party.

Aeadin% 2#estion to a child ,itness 0nder 1ec @ of the Rule on E!amination of Child Fitness the court may allo& leading "uestions in all stages of e!amination of a child provided that such &ill further the interest of (ustice. *ut under rule 1' of the Rules of Court, a leading "uestion may be as7ed of a child only if there is difficulty of eliciting from said child a direct and intelligible ans&er.

67isleadin% C#estion# is one &hich assumes as true a fact not yet satisfied to by the &itness or contrary to that &hich he has previously stated. )t is not allo&ed on any type of e!amination.

'2
E!ample: Oou testified that you and the accused &ere in a car bound for *aguio City. ?o& fast &ere you drivingH $Disleading because there &as no previous testimony from the &itness that he &as driving .

D. 7ethods of I peach ent of adverse part"Is ,itness )mpeachment# a techni"ue employed usually part of the cross#e!amination to discredit a &itness by attac7ing his credibility, &hich is vital because it is lin7ed to a &itness ability and &illingness to tell the truth.

G#idelines in the I peach ent of a =itness< #done by the party against &hom the &itness is called. #sub(ect to certain e!ceptions: 1% the party producing the &itness is barred from impeaching his o&n &itness, e!cept &hen a &itness is a hostile or un&illing &itness. $upon (udicial evaluation that &itness possesses an interest adverse to the party calling him or there is ade"uate sho&ing that the reluctance of the &itness is un(ustified or that he misled the party into calling him as a &itness % &hen &itness is an adverse party or is an officer, director or managing agent of a corporation, partnership or association. #it is improper for the party calling the &itness to present evidence of the good character of his o&n &itness. 1ame is allo&ed only if the character of the &itness is impeached.

7anner of I peachin% the ,itness of the adverse part" $1ec 11, rule 1' % a% Contradictory Evidence b% *y evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty, and integrity is bad. c% *y evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent &ith his present testimony.

99 A &itness cannot be impeached by evidence of particular &rongful acts e!cept evidence of his final conviction of an offense as disclosed by his e!amination or by the record of the (udgment. 99 An un&illing or hostile &itness so declared cannot be impeached by evidence of his bad character.

'= E. >o, the ,itness is i peached !" evidence of inconsistent state ents 3la"in% the predicate4 Prior Inconsistent State ents# are statements made by a &itness on an earlier occasion &hich is inconsistent &ith his present testimony. $1ec 1'%

Aa"in% the Predicate# is a preliminary re"uirement before the impeachment process prospers. Elements: a% The alleged statements must be related to the &itness including the circumstances of the times and places and the persons present. )f the statements are in &riting they must be sho&n to him. b% ?e must be as7ed &hether he made such statements and also e!plain them )f he admits ma7ing those statements.

Eirst, As7 the &itness to repeat and reaffirm his most recent statement. 1econd, Relate to the &itness his prior inconsistent statement and at the same time ,building up- or highlighting the contradictory utterance by relating to the &itness the circumstance of time, persons and place. And &itness is as7ed &hether or not the statements &ere made.

JJI peach ent !" sho,in% !ad rep#tation# &hen a &itness testifies he puts his credibility at issue because the &eight of his testimony depends upon his credibility. Gne &ay to impair his credibility is sho&ing a not so pleasing personality. Evidence of bad reputation for purpose of impeachment should refer only to the follo&ing specific aspects: $a% for truth $b% for honesty $c% integrity. ?e cannot be impeached for his reputation for other grounds.

JJI peach ent !" evidence of !ad rep#tation not !" !ad character # Character,- is made up of things an individual is and does &hereas )ep#tation' is &hat people thin7 an individual is and &hat they say about him.

991ection 11 of Rule 1' disallo&s the i peach ent of a ,itness !" evidence of his ,ron%f#l acts. E!cept in prior conviction of an offense &here it is sho&n through, either of t&o &ays: a% by his e!amination, e.i. by cross e!amining him b% by presenting the record of his prior conviction.

99I peach ent of the Adverse Part" as a ,itness# that the &itness is the adverse party does not mean that the calling party &ill not be bound by the former8s testimony. ?e is not bound

.@ only in sense that he may contradict him by introducing other evidence to prove a state of facts contrary to &hat the &itness testifies. 0nli7e an ordinary &itness, the calling party may impeach an adverse &itness in all respects as if he had been called by the adverse party, e!cept by evidence of his bad character.

JJE+cl#sion and Separation of =itnesses# the court to e!clude other &itness so that he may not hear the testimony of other &itnesses or to separate them to prevent them from conversing &ith one another until all have been e!amined.

99Fhen &itness may refer to a memorandum# during his testimony, in order to refresh his memory, a &itness may refer to a memorandum or anything &ritten or recorded by himself or recorded by others under his direction. 1uch memorandum should have been &ritten at the time the fact occurred or immediately thereafter or at any time &hen the event or fact &as fresh in his memory.

0. Evidence of the %ood character of a ,itness A party calling a &itness, cannot initiate proof of his good moral character, he does not need to prove because he is presumed to be truthful and of good character. )t is only &hen his character has been impeached that he can prove his being good. This rule refers only to mere &itness. )t does not refer to an accused in a criminal case. *ecause in a criminal case, the accused may prove his good moral character relevant to the offense charged even before his character is attac7ed. *ut the prosecution cannot initiate proof of the bad character of the accused. )t can only do so by rebuttal. /. Ad ssions and Confessions Ad ission # may be implied # # # # is an act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact )t is a voluntary ac7no&ledgement made by a party of the e!istence of the truth of certain facts &hich are inconsistent &ith his claims in an action There is merely statement of fact not directly involving an ac7no&ledgement of guilt or of the criminal intent to commit the offense &ith &hich one is charged Applied to criminal case, it is a statement of the accused, direct or implied, of facts pertinent to the issue, and tending , in connection &ith proof of other facts, to prove his guilt

# Confessions# cannot be implied+ it should be a direct and positive ac7no&ledgment of guilt # )t is the declaration of an accused ac7no&ledging his guilt of the offense charged or of any offense necessarily included therein

.1 # Applied in criminal case, is an ac7no&ledgment in e!press terms, by a party of his guilt of the crime charged

)#le1-B$ Sec (1< Ad issions of a Part"< ,The act, declaraton or ommssion of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against the offeror.Effects of ad ission of a part"< # # # Day be given in evidence against him ?is admission is not admissible in his favor, because it &ould not be a self# serving evidence This rule is based on the notion that no man &ould ma7e any declaration against himself unless it is true.

Classification of Ad issions and Confessions< Admission may be: a. E!press: a positive statement or act &hile+ implied: is one &hich may be inferred from the declarations or acts of a person b. Budicial admission: made in the course of a (udicial proceeding+ e!tra# (udicial admission# made out of court or even in a proceeding other than the one under consideration c. Adoptive: occurs &hen a person manifests his assent to the statements of another person. The admission may be received as evidence if it can be sho&n that a party adopted the statements as his o&n. Confession is al&ays e!pressed. )t must be a positive ac7no&ledgment of guilt and cannot be inferred. Ad ission !" Silence< )#le 1-B Sec. -(. Admission by silence. * An act or declaration ade in the presence and ,ithin the hearin% or o!servation of a part" ,ho does or sa"s nothin% ,hen the act or declaration is s#ch as nat#rall" to call for action or co ent if not tr#e$ and ,hen proper and possi!le for hi to do so$ a" !e %iven in evidence a%ainst hi . Re"uisites: 1% That he heard and understood the statement % That he &as at liberty to ma7e a denial '% That the statement &as about a matter affecting his rights or in &hich he &as interested and &hich naturally calls for a response .% That the facts &here &ithin his 7no&ledge /% That the fact admitted from his silence is material to the issue

. # 5ot every silence is an implied admission. Eor instance, the silence of a person under investigation for the commission of an offense should not be construed as an admission by silence because of constitutonal reasons. a. Res /nter Alios Acta )#le # # fully e!pressed as res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet 3iterally means ,things done bet&een strangers ought not to in(ure those &ho are not parties to them

( :ranches of )es Inter Alios Acta )#le 0irst :ranch< Sec (;$ )#le 1-B< Ad issions !" third6 part" Sec (;. Ad issions !" third6 part". 6 The ri%hts of a third part" cannot !e pre&#diced !" an act$ declaration or o ission of another$ e+cept as hereinafter provided. # # A man8s actions and declarations should not affect or pre(udice others. This rule has reference only to e!tra(udicial declarations. 1tatements made in open court by a &itness implicating persons aside from his o&n (udicial admissions, are admissible as declarations from one &ho has personal 7no&ledge of the facts testified to.

E+ceptions to the )es Inter Alios Acta )#le< 0irst :ranch A. Ad ission !" a Co6 partner or A%ent< 1ec =, Rule 1'@ Sec. (@. Admission by co-partner or a0ent. * The act or declaration of a partner or a%ent of the part" ,ithin the scope of his a#thorit" and d#rin% the e+istence of the partnership or a%enc"$ a" !e %iven in evidence a%ainst s#ch part" after the partnership or a%enc" is sho,n !" evidence other than s#ch act or declaration. The sa e r#le applies to the act or declaration of a &oint o,ner$ &oint de!tor$ or other person &ointl" interested ,ith the part". 3(1a4 Re"uisites: 1% The declaration or act of the partner and agent must have been made or dne &ithin the scope of his authority % The declaration or act of the partner and agent must have been made or done during the e!itence of the partnership or agency '% The e!istence of the partnership or agency os proven by evidence other thatn the declaration or act of the partner or agent #Fhatever is said by an agent to a third person, during the course of the agency and &ithin the scope of his actual or apparent authority, relative :. Ad ission !" a Co6 conspirator< 1ec '@, Rule 1'@ Sec. -B. Admission by conspirator. * The act or declaration of a conspirator relatin% to the conspirac" and d#rin% its e+istence$ a" !e %iven in evidence a%ainst the co6 conspirator after the conspirac" is sho,n !" evidence other than s#ch act of declaration. 3(94

.' Re"uisites: 1% The declaration or act must be made or done during the e!istence of the conspiracy % The declaration or act must relate to the conspiracy '% The conspiracy must be sho&n by evidence other than the declaration or act C. Ad ission !" Privies< 1ec'1, Rule 1'@ Sec. -1. Admission by privies. * =here one derives title to propert" fro another$ the act$ declaration$ or o ission of the latter$ ,hile holdin% the title$ in relation to the propert"$ is evidence a%ainst the for er. 3(;4 >rivies# are persons &ho are parta7ers or have an interest in any action or thing, or any relation to another Re"uisites: 1% There must have been an act or declaration or an omission by a predeessor# in# interest % The act or declaration or omission of the predecessor must have accurred &hile he &as holding the title to the property '% The act, declaration or omission must be in relation to the property Second :ranch< Sec-.$ )#le 1-(< Si ilar Acts As Evidence Sec -.. Si ilar Acts As Evidence. 6 Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thin% at one ti e$ is not ad issi!le to prove that he did or did not do the sa e or si ilar thin% at another ti e !#t it a" !e receive to prove a specific intent or 8no,led%e$ identit"$ plan$ s"ste $ sche e$ ha!it c#sto or #sa%e and the li8e. # The rule prohibits the admission of ,propensity evidence- &hich is evidence that tends to sho& that &hat a person has done at one time is probative of the contention that he has done a similar act at another time.

Evidence of similar Acts is admissible for any of the follo&ing purposes: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. # 1pecific intent+ Qno&ledge+ )dentity+ >lan+ 1ystem+ 1cheme+ ?abit+ Custom+ 0sage+ and the li7e The admissibility of similar acts or previous conduct &ould depend on the purposes for &hich such acts or conduct are offered.

.. # Eor e!ample, evidence of the other similar crimes, acts or &rongs previously committed by the accused are admissible to sho& that the offense for &hich he is currently charged and his prior similar acts sho& the ,signature- or ,handi&or7- of the accused, or because of identical modus operadi.

1. >earsa" )#le< )#le 1-B Sec. -1.;estimony 0enerally confined to personal <no%led0e5 $earsay e*cluded. * A ,itness can testif" onl" to those facts ,hich he 8no,s of his personal 8no,led%e5 that is$ ,hich are derived fro his o,n perception$ e+cept as other,ise provided in these r#les. 3-Ba4 6Evidence is called hearsay &hen its probative force depends, in &hole or in part, on the competency and credibility of some persons other than the &itness by &hom it is sought to produce it. Elements of ?earsay Evidence: 1. There must be an out of court statement. # the form does not matter, it may be oral or &ritten+ &hat matters is that the statement &as not be made by the declarant in the hearing or trial.

. The statement made out of court is repeated and offered by the &itness in court to prove the truth of the matters asserted by the statement. !. )eason for E+cl#sion of >earsa" Evidence< c. E+ceptions to the >earsa" )#le< 314 )#le 1-B. Sec. -9. Dyin0 declaration. * The declaration of a d"in% person$ ade #nder the conscio#sness of an i pendin% death$ a" !e received in an" case ,herein his death is the s#!&ect of in2#ir"$ as evidence of the ca#se and s#rro#ndin% circ# stances of s#ch death. 3-1a4 Elements of a Dying Declarations: 1 ' . / ; That the declaration is one made by a dying person. That the declaration &as made by said dying person under a consciousness of his imminent death That the declaration refers to theca#se and circ# stances surrounding the death of the declarant and not of anyone else That the declaration is offered in a case &here the declarant8s death is the sub(ect of in"uiry That the declarant is competent as a &itness had he survived The declarant should have died

Rationale for Admissibility: it has been ruled that as a general rule, &hen a person a person is at the point of death, every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the mind is induced by the most

./ po&erful consideration to spea7 the truth, and therefore, the statements under such circumstances deserve &eight. :The dying declaration of the deceased need not be directed to a particular person in"uiring from the declarant as to the circumstances of his death. Anyone &ho has 7no&ledge of &hat the declarant said, &hether it be directed to him or not, or &hether he had made in"uiries from the declarant or not, can testify thereto. Assailing a Dying Declaration: :Dying declaration does not create a conclusive presumption f credibility of the admitted declaration. : The declaration may be attac7ed in the same manner as one &ould do to a testimony in an open court. : Courts have to apply to dying declarations the same rules applied in testing the credibility of testimony of a &itness in court. 3(4 Sec. -;. Declaration a0ainst interest. * The declaration ade !" a person deceased$ or #na!le to testif"$ a%ainst the interest of the declarant$ if the fact is asserted in the declaration ,as at the ti e it ,as ade so far contrar" to declarantDs o,n interest$ that a reasona!le an in his position ,o#ld not have ade the declaration #nless he !elieved it to !e tr#e$ a" !e received in evidence a%ainst hi self or his s#ccessors in interest and a%ainst third persons. :Figmore considers a declaraion against interest as also founded on necessity on account of the impossibility of obtaining other evidence from the same source, the declarant being unavailable in person to testify on the stand on the account of death, absence from the (urisdiction or serious illness. :As a rule, the interest against &hich the declaration may have been made should be either a pecuniary or moral interest, but in our (urisdiction, the declaration could be against one8s penal interest because if one admits to a crime, he is also civilly liable, a liability that is pecuniary. :The declaration must be one againts interest. )f the declaration is favorable to the interest of the declaration it does not fall &ithin the e!ception. :A statement by the debtor before he died, that he o&es the creditor the sum of money or an oral ac7no&ledgement by the principal that he received the money previously entrusted to his agent, are clear declarations against the interest of the person ma7ing the statement. 3-4 Sec. -@.Act or declaration about pedi0ree. * The act or declaration of a person deceased$ or #na!le to testif"$ in respect to the pedi%ree of another person related to hi !" !irth or arria%e$ a" !e received in evidence ,here it occ#rred !efore the controvers"$ and the relationship !et,een the t,o persons is sho,n !" evidence other than s#ch act or declaration. The ,ord Kpedi%reeK incl#des relationship$ fa il" %enealo%"$ !irth$ arria%e$ death$ the dates ,hen and the places ,here these fast occ#rred$ and the na es of the relatives. It e !races also facts of fa il" histor" inti atel" connected ,ith pedi%ree. Re"uisites:

.; a. The declarant is dead or unable to testify b. That the declarant is related by birth or marriage to the person &hose pedigree is in issue c. The declaration &as made before the controversy d. The relationship bet&een the t&o persons is sho&n by some evidence other than such act or declaration >edigree# includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates &hen and the places &here these facts occured and the names of the relatives. )t also embraces facts of family history intimately connected &ith pedigree. 3.4 Sec. .B. 9amily reputation or tradition re0ardin0 pedi0ree. * The rep#tation or tradition e+istin% in a fa il" previo#s to the controvers"$ in respect to the pedi%ree of an" one of its e !ers$ a" !e received in evidence if the ,itness testif"in% thereon !e also a e !er of the fa il"$ either !" consan%#init" or affinit". Entries in fa il" !i!les or other fa il" !oo8s or charts$ en%ravin%s on rin%s$ fa il" portraits and the li8e$ a" !e received as evidence of pedi%ree. 3/4 Sec. .1. Common reputation. * Co on rep#tation e+istin% previo#s to the controvers"$ respectin% facts of p#!lic or %eneral interest ore than thirt" "ears old$ or respectin% arria%e or oral character$ a" !e %iven in evidence. 7on# ents and inscriptions in p#!lic places a" !e received as evidence of co on rep#tation. <Admissible because of trust&orthiness. :)t cannot establish pedigree 314Sec. .(. !art of res 0estae. * State ents ade !" a person ,hile a startlin% occ#rrence is ta8in% place or i ediatel" prior or s#!se2#ent thereto ,ith respect to the circ# stances thereof$ a" !e %iven in evidence as part of res 0estae. So$ also$ state ents acco pan"in% an e2#ivocal act aterial to the iss#e$ and %ivin% it a le%al si%nificance$ a" !e received as part of the res 0estae. 3-1a4 :Res :estae is an old &ord &hich literally means things done. :The use of res gestae in the >hilippines is limited to t&o matters: $1% spontaneous statements and $ %verbal acts. )t has been held that in spontaneous e!clamations or statements, the res gestae is the startling occurence, &hereas in verbal acts, the res gestae are the statements accompanying the e"uivocal act. 1. 1pontaneous Acts Characteristics: a. That there is a startling event or occurence ta7ing place b. That &hile the event is ta7ing placeor immediately to or subse"uent thereto, a statement has been made c. The statements &ere made before the daclarant had time to contrive or devise a falsehood d. That the statement relates to the circumstances of the startling event or occurence

.< . 4erbal Acts Re"uisites: a. b. c. d. The principal act to be characteriCed must be e"uivocal The e"uivocal act must be material to the issue The statement must accompany the e"uivocal act The statement gives a legal significance to the e"uivocal act

394 Sec. .-. Entries in t$e course of business. * Entries ade at$ or near the ti e of transactions to ,hich the" refer$ !" a person deceased$ or #na!le to testif"$ ,ho ,as in a position to 8no, the facts therein stated$ a" !e received as prima facie evidence$ if s#ch person ade the entries in his professional capacit" or in the perfor ance of d#t" and in the ordinar" or re%#lar co#rse of !#siness or d#t". <Commonly encountered in breach of contract suits and suits filed for collection of sum of money. Elements: a. Entries &ere made at or near the time of the transactions referred to b. 1uch entries &ere made in the regular course of business c. The person ma7ing the entries did so in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty and in the regular course of business d. The person ma7ing the entry is no& dead or unable to testify 3;4 Sec. ... Entries in official records. * Entries in official records ade in the perfor ance of his d#t" !" a p#!lic officer of the Philippines$ or !" a person in the perfor ance of a d#t" speciall" en&oined !" la,$ are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. <The entries are admissible as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the entries. 3@4 Sec. ./.Commercial lists and t$e li<e. * Evidence of state ents of atters of interest to persons en%a%ed in an occ#pation contained in a list$ re%ister$ periodical$ or other p#!lished co pilation is ad issi!le as tendin% to prove the tr#th of an" relevant atter so stated if that co pilation is p#!lished for #se !" persons en%a%ed in that occ#pation and is %enerall" #sed and relied #pon !" the therein. <Certain commercial lists and reports of matters of interest to persons engaged in a particular occupation, are admissible in evidence as e!ceptions to the hearsay rule, provided, they are made by the persons engaged in that occupation and are generally used and relied upon by them and those lists and reports are published. 31B4 Sec. .1. =earned treatises. * A p#!lished treatise$ periodical or pa phlet on a s#!&ect of histor"$ la,$ science$ or art is ad issi!le as tendin% to prove the tr#th of a atter stated therein if the co#rt ta8es &#dicial notice$ or a ,itness e+pert in the s#!&ect testifies$ that the ,riter of the state ent in the treatise$ periodical or pa phlet is reco%ni?ed in his profession or callin% as e+pert in the s#!&ect.

.2 < ?istory boo7s, published findings of scientists fall &ithin the e!ception if an e!pert on the sub(ect testifies to the e!pertise of the &riter or if the court ta7es (udicial notice of such fact. 3114 Sec. .9.;estimony or deposition at a former proceedin0. * The testi on" or deposition of a ,itness deceased or #na!le to testif"$ %iven in a for er case or proceedin%$ &#dicial or ad inistrative$ involvin% the sa e parties and s#!&ect atter$ a" !e %iven in evidence a%ainst the adverse part" ,ho had the opport#nit" to cross6 e+a ine hi . Re"uisites: a. The &itness is dead or unable to testify b. ?is testimony or deposition &as given in a former case or proceeding, (udicial or administrative, bet&een the same parties or those representing the same interests c. The former case involved the same sub(ect as that in the present case, although on different causes of action d. The issue testified to by the &itness in the former trial is the same issue involved in the present case e. The adverse party had an opportunity to cross e!amine the &itness in the former case

9.OPINION )HAE The rule on opinion evidence provide:

Section .;. 1eneral rule. * The opinion of &itness is not admissible, e!cept as indicated in the follo&ing sections. a. Opinion of e+pert ,itness Section .@. :pinion of e*pert %itness. * The opinion of a &itness on a matter re"uiring special 7no&ledge, s7ill, e!perience or training &hich he sho&n to posses, may be received in evidence. !. Opinion of ordinar" ,itness Section /B. :pinion of ordinary %itnesses. * The opinion of a &itness for &hich proper basis is given, may be received in evidence regarding P $a% the identity of a person about &hom he has ade"uate 7no&ledge+ $b% A hand&riting &ith &hich he has sufficient familiarity+ and $c% The mental sanity of a person &ith &hom he is sufficiently ac"uainted. The &itness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.-

.=

AD7ISSI:IAITG O0 OPINION EVIDENCE As a rule, the opinion of a &itness is inadmissible. $ Sec. 48, Rule 130, Rules of Court). This is because &hen a &itness testifies, a &itness does so &ith respect to facts personally observed by him and it is for the court to dra& conclusions from the facts testified to. =>EN OPINION EVIDENCE IS AD7ISSI:AE5 ELPE)T TESTI7ONG Fhen the opinion is that of an e!pert, i.e., the opinion of a &itness re"uiring special 7no&ledge, e!perience or training &hich he is sho&n to possess, it may be received in evidence $sec. 4", Rule 130, Rules of Court) The court is not ho&ever, bound by the opinion of an e!pert such as a hand&riting e!pert. E!pert opinion evidence is to be considered or &eighed by the court li7e any other testimony, in the light of its o&n general 7no&ledge and e!perience upon sub(ect of in"uiry. (-iNon &s Bu(Non, D.R. 8o. 172197, #uly ", 2008) E!pert opinions are not ordinarily conclusive. Fhen faced &ith conflicting e!pert opinions, courts give &eight and credence to that &hich is more complete, thorough and scientific. ('(c(lso &s. !($i1os, D.R. 8o. 1731"2, (pril 22, 2008). A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on the testimonies of hand&riting e!perts, because the (udge must conduct an e!amination of the "uestioned signature in order to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to its authority. (!ont(oe &s. !ont(oe, D.R. 8o. 1.".8., April 22, 2008) OPINION O0 AN O)DINA)G =ITNESS5 =>EN AD7ISSI:AE (Sec. .0, Rule 130, Rules of Court)

;. C>A)ACTE) EVIDENCE
Character is the aggregate of moral "ualities &hich belong to and distinguish an individual person+ the general results of oneAs distinguishing attribute ('l(c) +(,Os -iction(ry). Fhile character is &hat the person really is, reputation is &hat he is supposed to be in accordance &ith &hat people say he is, and is dependent on ho& people perceive a person to be. Character evidence is, as a rule, not admissible (Sec. .1, Rule 130, Rules of Court) Grdinarily, if the issues in the case &ere allo&ed to be influenced by evidence of the character or reputation of the parties, the trial &ould be apt to have the aspects of a popularity contest rather than a factual in"uiry into the merits of the case. After all, the business of the court is to try the case, and not the man+ and a very bad man may have a righteous cause (!eople &s. +ee, D.R. 8o. 13"070, ;(y 2", 2002) a. IN C)I7INAA CASES EVIDENCE O0 GOOD 7O)AA C>A)ACTE) O0 T>E ACCHSED

/@ The applicable provision states:

Section /1. C$aracter evidence not 0enerally admissible5 e*ceptions< * 3a4 In Cri inal Cases< 314 The acc#sed a" prove his %ood involved in the offense char%ed.' oral character ,hich is pertinent to the oral trait

Fhen the accused presents proof of his good moral character, this strengthens the presumption of innocence, and &here good character and reputation is established, an inference arises that the accused did not commit the crime charged. This vie& proceeds from the theory that a person of good character and high reputation is not li7ely to have committed the act charged against him (!eople &s. +ee, D.R. 8o. 13"070, ;(y 2", 2002). ?e may not ho&ever, prove his character by evidence of specific instances of good conduct (2" Am #ur 2$, %&i$ence , 397/ Do&ernment of Mir1in sl(n$s &. Dr(nt :CA3 M< 77. F2$ .08, 1" Fe$ Rules %&i$ Ser& 920)

EVIDENCE O0 :AD 7O)AA C>A)ACTE) O0 T>E ACCHSED The applicable provision states:
Section /1. C$aracter evidence not 0enerally admissible5 e*ceptions< * 3a4 In Cri inal Cases< 314 + + + 3(4 Hnless in re!#ttal$ the prosec#tion a" not prove his !ad pertinent to the oral trait involved in the offense char%ed.' oral character ,hich is

The prosecution cannot prove the bad moral character of the accused in its evidence# in#chief. )t can only do so in rebuttal (Sec .1:(<:2<, Rule 130, Rules of Court). This means that the prosecution may not offer evidence of the character of the accused unless the accused himself has offered evidence of his bad moral character. The prosecution therefore, must &ait until the accused puts his character in issue during the proceedings. This is intended to avoid unfair pre(udice to the accused &ho might other&ise be convicted not because he is guilty but because he is a person of bad character. The offering of evidence of good moral character is a privilege of the accused and the prosecution cannot even comment on his failure to produce such evidence. *ut once he raises the issue of his good character, the prosecution may, in rebuttal, offer evidence of the defendantAs bad character (!eople &s +ee, D.R. 8o. 13"070, ;(y 2", 2002) EVIDENCE O0 C>A)ACTE) O0 T>E O00ENDED PA)TG The applicable provision states:
Section /1. C$aracter evidence not 0enerally admissible5 e*ceptions< * 3a4 In Cri inal Cases< 314 + + +

/1
3(4 + + + 3-4 The %ood or !ad oral character of the offended part" a" !e proved if it tends to esta!lish in an" reasona!le de%ree the pro!a!ilit" or i pro!a!ilit" of the offense char%ed.'

The above provision pertains only to criminal cases, not to administrative offenses. Also, not every good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved under the provision but only those &hich &ould establish the probability or improbability of the offense charged. This means that the character evidence must be limited to the traits and characteristics involved in the type of offense charged. (Ci&il Ser&ice Commission &s 'el(1(n, 440 SCRA .78). !. IN CIVIA CASES
Section /1. C$aracter evidence not 0enerally admissible5 e*ceptions< * 3a4 + + + 3!4 In Civil Cases< Evidence of the oral character of a part" in civil case is ad issi!le onl" ,hen pertinent to the iss#e of character involved in the case. 3c4 In the case provided for in )#le 1-($ Section 1.$ 3.1a$ .9a4'

EVIDENCE O0 GOOD 7O)AA C>A)ACTE) O0 A =ITNESS Evidence of the good moral character of a &itness is not admissible until such character has been impeached (Sec 14, Rule 132 (n$ Sec .1:c<, Rule 130, Rules of Court). )t is error for counsel to offer evidence of good moral character of his &itness &ho is presented in court for the first time since he could not have been previously impeached.

@. )HAE ON ELA7INATION O0 A C>IAD =ITNESS 3A.7. No. BB.6B96SC4

A. APPAICA:IAITG O0 T>E )HAE 0nless other&ise provided, this Rule shall govern the e!amination of child &itnesses &ho are victims of crime, accused of a crime, and &itnesses to crime. )t shall apply in all criminal proceedings and non#criminal proceedings involving child &itnesses. (Sec. 1, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness, A.;. 8o. 0046076SC) :. 7EANING O0 C>IAD =ITNESS' A ,child &itness- is any person &ho at the time of giving testimony is belo& the age of eighteen $12% years. )n child abuse cases, a child includes one over eighteen $12% years but is found by the court as unable to fully ta7e care of himself or protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, e!ploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition. (Sec. 4:(<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness, A.;. 8o. 0046076SC) CO7PETENCG O0 A C>IAD =ITNESS

/ Every child is presumed "ualified to be a &itness. (Sec. 9, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness) To rebut the presumption of competence en(oyed by a child, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging his competence (Sec. 9:2<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness).

Fhen the court finds that substantial doubt e!ists regarding the ability of the child to perceive, remember, communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth in court, the court shall conduct a competency e!amination of the child. The court may do so motu proprio or on motion of a party (Sec. 9, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness) A party &ho see7s a competency e!amination must present proof of necessity of a competency e!amination. >roof of such necessity must be grounded on reasons other than age of the child because such age in itself is not a sufficient basis for a competency e!amination (Sec. 9:(<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). The competency e!amination of a child &itness is not open to the public. Gnly the follo&ing are allo&ed to attend the e!amination: $1% The (udge and necessary court personnel+ $ % The counsel for the parties+ $'% The guardian ($ litem+ $.% Gne or more support persons for the child+ and 3/4 The defendant, unless the court determines that competence can be fully evaluated in his absence. (Sec. 9:c<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness) The competency e!amination of the child shall be conducted only by the (udge. )f counsels of parties desire to as7 "uestions, they cannot do so directly. )nstead, they are allo&ed to submit "uestions to the (udge &hich he may as7 the child in his discretion (Sec. 9:$<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). The "uestions as7ed at the competency e!amination shall be appropriate to the age and developmental level of the child. The "uestions 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 bet&een truth and falsehood and to appreciate the duty to testify truthfully (Sec. 9:e<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). The assessment is designed to be a continuing one. The court has the duty to continuously assessing the competency of the childthroughout his testimony (Sec. 9:f<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). D. ELA7INATION O0 A C>IAD =ITNESS The e!amination of a child &itness presented in a hearing or any proceeding shall be done in open court. 0nless the &itness is incapacitated to spea7, or the "uestion calls for a different mode of ans&er, the ans&ers of the &itness shall be given orally.

/' The party &ho presents a child &itness or the guardian ($ litem of such child &itness may, ho&ever, move the court to allo& him to testify in the manner provided in this Rule (Sec. 8, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). E. AIVE6AINF TV TESTI7ONG O0 A C>IAD =ITNESS IN C)I7INAA CASES =>E)E T>E C>IAD IS A VICTI7 O) A =ITNESS The applicable provision states: 3a4 The prosecutor, counsel or the guardian ($ litem may apply for an order that the testimony of the child be ta7en in a room outside the courtroom and be televised to the courtroom by live#lin7 television. *efore the guardian ($ litem applies for an order under this section, he shall consult the prosecutor or counsel and shall defer to the (udgment of the prosecutor or counsel regarding the necessity of applying for an order. )n case the guardian ($ litem is convinced that the decision of the prosecutor or counsel not to apply &ill cause the child serious emotional trauma, he himself may apply for the order. The person see7ing such an order shall apply at least five $/% days before the trial date, unless the court finds on the record that the need for such an order &as not reasonably foreseeable. 3!4The court may motu proprio hear and determine, &ith notice to the parties, the need for ta7ing the testimony of the child through live#lin7 television. 3c4 The (udge may "uestion the child in chambers, or in some comfortable place other than the courtroom, in the presence of the support person, guardian ($ litem, prosecutor, and counsel for the parties. The "uestions of the (udge shall not be related to the issues at trial but to the feelings of the child about testifying in the courtroom. 3d4 The (udge may e!clude any person, including the accused, &hose presence or conduct causes fear to the child. 3e4 The court shall issue an order granting or denying the use of live#lin7 television and stating the reasons therefor. )t shall consider the follo&ing factors: $1% The age and level of development of the child+ $ %?is physical and mental health, including any mental or physical disability+ $'%Any physical, emotional, or psychological in(ury e!perienced by him+ $.% The nature of the alleged abuse+ $/% Any threats against the child+ $;% ?is relationship &ith the accused or adverse party+ $<% ?is reaction to any prior encounters &ith the accused in court or else&here+ $2% ?is reaction prior to trial &hen the topic of testifying &as discussed &ith him by parents or professionals+ $=% 1pecific symptoms of stress e!hibited by the child in the days prior to testifying+

/. $1@% Testimony of e!pert or lay &itnesses+ $11% The custodial situation of the child and the attitude of the members of his family regarding the events about &hich he &ill testify+ and $1 % Gther relevant factors, such as court atmosphere and formalities of court procedure. 3f4 The court may order that the testimony of the child be ta7en by live#lin7 television if there is a substantial li7elihood that the child &ould 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 7ind &hich &ould impair the completeness or truthfulness of the testimony of the child. 3%4 )f the court orders the ta7ing of testimony by live#lin7 television: $1% The child shall testify in a room separate from the courtroom in the presence of the guardian ($ litem+ one or both of his support persons+ the facilitator and interpreter, if any+ a court officer appointed by the court+ persons necessary to operate the closed#circuit television e"uipment+ and other persons &hose presence are determined by the court to be necessary to the &elfare and &ell#being of the child+ $ % The (udge, prosecutor, accused, and counsel for the parties shall be in the courtroom. The testimony of the child shall be transmitted by live#lin7 television into the courtroom for vie&ing and hearing by the (udge, prosecutor, counsel for the parties, accused, victim, and the public unless e!cluded. $'% )f it is necessary for the child to identify the accused at trial, the court may allo& the child to enter the courtroom for the limited purpose of identifying the accused, or the court may allo& the child to identify the accused by observing the image of the latter on a television monitor. $.% The court may set other conditions and limitations on the ta7ing of the testimony that it finds (ust and appropriate, ta7ing into consideration the best interests of the child. 3h4 The testimony of the child shall be preserved on videotape, digital disc, or other similar devices &hich shall be made part of the court record and shall be sub(ect to a protective order as provided in section '1$b%. (Sec. 2., Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). 0. VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION O0 A C>IAD =ITNESS The applicable provision states
SEC. (9. >ideotaped deposition." 3a4 The prosec#tor$ co#nsel$ or %#ardian ad litem a" appl" for an order that a deposition !e ta8en of the testi on" of the child and that it !e recorded and preserved on videotape. :efore the %#ardian ad litem applies for an order #nder this section$ he shall cons#lt ,ith the prosec#tor or co#nsel s#!&ect to the second and third para%raphs of section (/3a4. 3!4 If the co#rt finds that the child ,ill not !e a!le to testif" in open co#rt at trial$ it shall iss#e an order that the deposition of the child !e ta8en and preserved !" videotape. 3c4 The &#d%e shall preside at the videotaped deposition of a child. O!&ections to deposition testi on" or evidence$ or parts thereof$ and the %ro#nds for the o!&ection shall !e stated and

//
shall !e r#led #pon at the ti e of the ta8in% of the deposition. The other persons ,ho per itted to !e present at the proceedin% are< a" !e

314 The prosec#tor5 3(4 The defense co#nsel5 3-4 The %#ardian ad litem5 3.4 The acc#sed$ s#!&ect to s#!6section 3e45 3/4Other persons ,hose presence is deter ined !" the co#rt to !e necessar" to the ,elfare and ,ell6!ein% of the child5 314 One or !oth of his s#pport persons$ the facilitator and interpreter$ if an"5 394 The co#rt steno%rapher5 and 3;4 Persons necessar" to operate the videotape e2#ip ent. 3d4 The ri%hts of the acc#sed d#rin% trial$ especiall" the ri%ht to co#nsel and to confront and cross6e+a ine the child$ shall not !e violated d#rin% the deposition. 3e4 If the order of the co#rt is !ased on evidence that the child is #na!le to testif" in the ph"sical presence of the acc#sed$ the co#rt a" direct the latter to !e e+cl#ded fro the roo in ,hich the deposition is cond#cted. In case of e+cl#sion of the acc#sed$ the co#rt shall order that the testi on" of the child !e ta8en !" live6lin8 television in accordance ,ith section (/ of this )#le. If the acc#sed is e+cl#ded fro the deposition$ it is not necessar" that the child !e a!le to vie, an i a%e of the acc#sed. 3f4 The videotaped deposition shall !e preserved and steno%raphicall" recorded. The videotape and the steno%raphic notes shall !e trans itted to the cler8 of the co#rt ,here the case is pendin% for safe8eepin% and shall !e ade a part of the record. 3%4 The co#rt a" set other conditions on the ta8in% of the deposition that it finds &#st and appropriate$ ta8in% into consideration the !est interests of the child$ the constit#tional ri%hts of the acc#sed$ and other relevant factors. 3h4The videotaped deposition and steno%raphic notes shall !e s#!&ect to a protective order as provided in section -13!4. 3i4 If$ at the ti e of trial$ the co#rt finds that the child is #na!le to testif" for a reason stated in section (/3f4 of this )#le$ or is #navaila!le for an" reason descri!ed in section .3c4$ )#le (- of the 1@@9 )#les of Civil Proced#re$ the co#rt a" ad it into evidence the videotaped deposition of the child in lie# of his testi on" at the trial. The co#rt shall iss#e an order statin% the reasons therefor. 3&4 After the ori%inal videotapin% !#t !efore or d#rin% trial$ an" part" a" file an" otion for additional videotapin% on the %ro#nd of ne,l" discovered evidence. The co#rt a" order an additional videotaped deposition to receive the ne,l" discovered evidence. (Rule Gn

%5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness).

G. >EA)SAG ELCEPTION IN A C>IAD A:HSE CASES The applicable provision states:

/;
Section (;. ?earsay e*ception in c$ild abuse cases. @ A state ent ade !" a child descri!in% an" act or atte pted act of child a!#se$ not other,ise ad issi!le #nder the hearsa" r#le$ a" !e ad itted in evidence in an" cri inal or non6cri inal proceedin% s#!&ect to the follo,in% r#les< 3a4 :efore s#ch hearsa" state ent a" !e ad itted$ its proponent shall a8e 8no,n to the adverse part" the intention to offer s#ch state ent and its partic#lars to provide hi a fair opport#nit" to o!&ect. If the child is availa!le$ the co#rt shall$ #pon otion of the adverse part"$ re2#ire the child to !e present at the presentation of the hearsa" state ent for cross6 e+a ination !" the adverse part". =hen the child is #navaila!le$ the fact of s#ch circ# stance #st !e proved !" the proponent. 3!4 In r#lin% on the ad issi!ilit" of s#ch hearsa" state ent$ the co#rt shall consider the ti e$ content and circ# stances thereof ,hich provide s#fficient indicia of relia!ilit". It shall consider the follo,in% factors< 314 =hether there is a otive to lie5 3(4 The %eneral character of the declarant child5 3-4 =hether ore than one person heard the state ent5 3.4 =hether the state ent ,as spontaneo#s5 3/4 The ti in% of the state ent and the relationship !et,een the declarant child and ,itness5 314 Cross6e+a ination co#ld not sho, the lac8 of 8no,led%e of the declarant child5 394 The possi!ilit" of fa#lt" recollection of the declarant child is re ote5 and 3;4The circ# stances s#rro#ndin% the state ent are s#ch that there is no reason to s#ppose the declarant child isrepresented the involve ent of the acc#sed. 3c4 The child ,itness shall !e considered #navaila!le #nder the follo,in% sit#ations< 314 Is deceased$ s#ffers fro ph"sical infir it"$ lac8 of e or"$ ental illness$ or ,ill !e e+posed to severe ps"cholo%ical in&#r"5 O) 3(4 Is a!sent fro the hearin% and the proponent of his state ent has !een #na!le to proc#re his attendance !" process or other reasona!le eans. 3d4 =hen the child ,itness is #navaila!le$ his hearsa" testi on" shall !e ad itted onl" if corro!orated !" other ad issi!le evidence.

>. SELHAA A:HSE S>IEAD )HAE The applicable provision states

SEC. -B. Se*ual abuse s$ield rule." 3a4 /nadmissible evidence." The follo,in% evidence is not ad issi!le in an" cri inal proceedin% involvin% alle%ed child se+#al a!#se< 314 Evidence offered to prove that the alle%ed victi en%a%ed in other se+#al !ehavior5 and 3(4 Evidence offered to prove the se+#al predisposition of the alle%ed victi . 3!4 E*ception." Evidence of specific instances of se+#al !ehavior !" the alle%ed victi to prove that a person other than the acc#sed ,as the so#rce of se en$ in&#r"$ or other ph"sical evidence shall !e ad issi!le. A part" intendin% to offer s#ch evidence #st<

/<
314 0ile a ,ritten otion at least fifteen 31/4 da"s !efore trial$ specificall" descri!in% the evidence and statin% the p#rpose for ,hich it is offered$ #nless the co#rt$ for %ood ca#se$ re2#ires a different ti e for filin% or per its filin% d#rin% trial5 and 3(4 Serve the otion on all parties and the %#ardian ad litem at least three 3-4 da"s !efore the hearin% of the otion. :efore ad ittin% s#ch evidence$ the co#rt #st cond#ct a hearin% in cha !ers and afford the child$ his %#ardian ad litem# the parties$ and their co#nsel a ri%ht to attend and !e heard. The otion and the record of the hearin% #st !e sealed and re ain #nder seal and protected !" a protective order set forth in section -13!4. The child shall not !e re2#ired to testif" at the hearin% in cha !ers e+cept ,ith his consent.'

I. P)OTECTIVE O)DE)S Any videotape or audiotape of a child that is part of the court record shall be under a protective order that provides as follo&s: 314 Tapes may be vie&ed only by parties, their counsel, their e!pert &itness, and the guardian ($ litem. 3(4 5o tape, or any portion thereof, shall be divulged by any person mentioned in sub# section $a% to any other person, e!cept as necessary for the trial. 3-4 5o person shall be granted access to the tape, its transcription or any part thereof unless he signs a &ritten affirmation that he has received and read a copy of the protective order+ that he submits to the (urisdiction of the court &ith respect to the protective order+ and that in case of violation thereof, he &ill be sub(ect to the contempt po&er of the court. 3.4 Each of the tape cassettes and transcripts thereof made available to the parties, their counsel, and respective agents shall bear the follo&ing cautionary notice: ,This ob(ect or document and the contents thereof are sub(ect to a protective order issued by the court in $case title%, $case number%. They shall not be e!amined, inspected, read, vie&ed, or copied by any person, or disclosed to any person, e!cept as provided in the protective order. 5o additional copies of the tape or any of its portion shall be made, given, sold, or sho&n to any person &ithout prior court order. Any person violating such protective order is sub(ect to the contempt po&er of the court and other penalties prescribed by la&.3/4 5o tape shall be given, loaned, sold, or sho&n to any person e!cept as ordered by the court. 314 Fithin thirty $'@% days from receipt, all copies of the tape and any transcripts thereof shall be returned to the cler7 of court for safe7eeping unless the period is e!tended by the court on motion of a party. 394 This protective order shall remain in full force and effect until further order of the court. (Sec. 31:2<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness).

/2 Additional protective orders.P The court may motu proprio or on motion of any party, the child, his parents, legal guardian, or the guardian ($ litem, issue additional orders to protect the privacy of the child (Sec. 31:c<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness). Any record regarding a child shall be confidential and 7ept under seal. E!cept upon &ritten re"uest and order of the court, a record shall only be released to the follo&ing: $1% Dembers of the court staff for administrative use+ $ % The prosecuting attorney+ $'% Defense counsel+ $.% The guardian ($ litem+ $/%Agents of investigating la& enforcement agencies+ and $;% Gther persons as determined by the court. (Sec. 31:(<, Rule Gn %5(min(tion of A Chil$ 3itness)

0. O00E) AND O:EECTION

1. O00E) O0 EVIDENCE

The court shall consider no evidence &hich has not been formally offered. The purpose for &hich the evidence is offered must be specified (Sec. 34, Rule 132, Rules of Court). (. =>EN TO 7AFE AN O00E)

As to &hen the offer of evidence is made depends upon the nature of the evidence. $a% As regards the testimony of a &itness, the offer must be made at the time the &itness is called to testify. $b% Documentary and ob(ect evidence shall be offered after the presentation of a partyAs testimonial evidence. 1uch offer shall be done orally unless allo&ed by the court to be done in &riting (Sec. 3., Rule 132, Rules of Court). The mere fact that a document is mar7ed as an e!hibit does not mean that it has thereby already been offered as part of the evidence of a party (!eople &s. Decomo, 2.4 SCRA 82). ?o&ever, &here the accused fails to ob(ect to the admissibility of certain items during their formal offer, he is deemed to have &aived his right against their admissibility (!eople &s -i(N, 271 SCRA .04)

-.

O:EECTION

P#rposes of O!&ections< Gb(ections may be made for any of the follo&ing purposes:

/= $a% Eirst, ob(ections are made to 7eep out inadmissible evidence that &ould cause harm to a clientAs cause. The rules of evidence are not self#operating and hence, must be invo7ed by &ay of an ob(ection+ $b% Gb(ections are interposed to protect the record, i.e. to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered evidence in a &ay that if the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon as a ground for future appeal+ $c% Gb(ections may be made to protect a &itness from being embarrassed on the stand or from being harassed by the adverse counsel+ $d% Gb(ections are inter(ected to e!pose the adversaryAs unfair tactics li7e his consistently as7ing obviously leading "uestions+ $e% Gb(ections may made to give the trial court an opportunity to correct its o&n errors and at the same time &arn the court that a ruling adverse to the ob(ector may supply a reason to invo7e a higher courtAs appellate (urisdiction+ and $f% Gb(ections are made to avoid a &aiver of the inadmissibility of an other&ise inadmissible evidence. GENE)AA AND SPECI0IC O:EECTIONS An ob(ection must point out the specific ground of the ob(ection, and if it does not do so, no error is committed in overruling it (7. Am #ur 2$, 2n$ %$., 2.462.9). The last paragraph of 1ec. ';, Rule 1' provides, , . . . the grounds for the ob(ections must be specified.- An ob(ector must be e!plicit as to the legal ground he invo7es. The follo&ing e!amples are considered as general ob(ections: $a% ,Gb(ection, The evidence is incompetentR-+ $b% ,Gb(ectionR )nadmissibleR-+ $c% ,Gb(ection: )ncompetent, )rrelevant, and )mproperR-+ $d% ,Gb(ection: )mproperRThey do not clearly indicate to the (udge the ground upon &hich the ob(ections are predicated. Rule 1' does not tell us ho& specific an ob(ection must be. ?o&ever, ob(ection must be specific enough to ade"uately inform the court the rule of evidence. Gb(ections li7e, $a% Nuestion calls for a hearsay ans&er+ $b% Fitness cannot testify on a privileged communication+ $c% The "uestion is beyond the scope of the direct e!amination+ $d% )mpeachment is improperK ### are specific enough for anyone to 7no& the basis of the ob(ection. There are cases &here incompetency of the evidence is so palpable that a mere general ob(ection is deemed sufficient, and &here the portion of the evidence ob(ected to is clearly pointed out, and its illegality is apparent on its face, then the ob(ection must be allo&ed.

;@ 0O)7AA AND SH:STANTIVE O:EECTIONS Eormal ob(ection 6 is one directed against the alleged defect in the formulation of the "uestion. $E!ample: ambiguous "uestions, leading and misleading "uestions, repetitious "uestions% 1ubstantive ob(ection 6 are ob(ections made and directed against the very nature of the evidence, i.e., it is inadmissible either because it is irrelevant or incompetent or both. $E!ample: parol, not the best evidence, hearsay, opinion, res inter (lios (ct(% O:EECTIONS 7HST :E TI7EAG )n order to be timely therefore, the ob(ection must be made at the earliest opportunity (88 C.#.S. 239). Fhat the earliest opportunity is depends upon the manner the evidence is offered. $a% Gb(ection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer is made. $b% Gb(ection to a "uestion propounded in the course of the oral e!amination of a &itness shall be made as soon as the grounds therefore shall become reasonably apparent. $c% An offer of evidence in &riting shall be ob(ected to &ithin three $'% days after notice of the offer unless a different period is allo&ed by the court. (Sec. 39, Rule 132, Rules of Court). The rules therefore, ma7e the offer of evidence the frame of reference for a timely ob(ection. ?ence, it is to be assumed that an ob(ection to the evidence before it is offered, is premature and no adverse inference may be had against a party &ho does not ob(ect to the evidence before it is offered. .. )EPETITION O0 AN O00E)

Fhen it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the e!amination of a &itness that the "uestions being propounded are of the same class as those to &hich ob(ection has been made, &hether such ob(ection &as sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat the ob(ection, it being sufficient for the adverse party to record his continuing ob(ection to such class of "uestions (Sec. 37, Rule 132, Rules of Court). /. )HAING

The ruling if the court must be given immediately after the ob(ection is made e!cept &hen the court desires to ta7e reasonable time to inform itself on the "uestion presented. ?o&ever, the court must give its ruling during the trial and at such time as &ill give a party an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling (Sec. 38, Rule 132, Rules of Court).

;1 The ruling of the court sustaining or overruling an ob(ection need not be stated e!cept if the ob(ection is based on t&o or more grounds. )n such case, a ruling sustaining the ob(ection must specify the ground or grounds relied upon (Sec. 38, Rule 132, Rules of Court). 1. ST)IFING OHT O0 AN ANS=E)

1hould a &itness ans&er the "uestion before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its ob(ection to the same, and such ob(ection is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the ob(ection and order the ans&er given to be stric7en off the record. Gn proper motion, the court may also order the stri7ing out of ans&ers &hich are incompetent, irrelevant, or other&ise improper(Sec. 3", Rule 132, Rules of Court). =>EN TO HSE A 7OTION TO ST)IFE A motion to stri7e may be availed in the follo&ing instances: $a% Fhen the ans&er is premature+ $b% Fhen the ans&er of the &itness is irrelevant, incompetent or other&ise improper+ $c% Fhen the ans&er is unresponsive+ $d% Fhen the &itness becomes unavailable for cross#e!amination through no fault of the cross#e!amining party+ or $e% Fhen the testimony &as allo&ed conditionally and the condition for its admissibility &as not fulfilled. 9. TENDE) O0 ELCAHDED EVIDENCE 3Offer of Proof4 The applicable provision states: Section .B. ;ender of e*clude evidence. -- If the doc# ents or thin%s offered in
evidence are e+cl#ded !" the co#rt$ the offeror a" have the sa e attached to or ade part of the record. If the evidence e+cl#ded is oral$ the offeror a" state for the record the na e and other personal circ# stances of the ,itness and the s#!stance of the proposed testi on".'

The foregoing rule, called ,offer of proof- in other (urisdictions, embodies the procedure for the ,tender of e!cluded evidence.- Fhy ma7e a tender of e!cluded evidenceH There are t&o reasons: $1% To allo& the court to 7no& the nature of the testimony or the documentary evidence and convince the trial (udge to permit the evidence or testimony. $ % Even, if he is not convinced to reverse his earlier ruling, the tender is made to create and preserve a record for appeal. ?o& is tender doneH The procedural depends upon the type of evidence e!cluded. Fhere the evidence involved is documentary or ob(ect evidence, the tender is made by having the document or ob(ect attached to or made part of the record (Sec. 40, Rule 132, Rules of Court).

)f the evidence e!cluded is testimonial, the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the &itness and the substance of the proposed testimony (Sec. 38, Rule 132, Rules of Court).