You are on page 1of 26



• The ultimate fact or the fact sought to be
established. It refers to the proposition (e.g.
victim was stabbed).
• The means, sanctioned by these rules, of • The evidentiary fact or the fact by which the
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding, the truth factum probandum is to be established; refers
respecting a matter of fact. [Rule 128, Sec. 1] to the materials that establish the proposition
• The mode and manner of proving competent (e.g. bloody knife).
facts in judicial proceedings. [Bustos v. Lucero]


• General Rule: Rules of evidence shall be the

same in all courts and in all trials and hearings
• Exception: If otherwise provided by:
1) law;
2) ROC.



1) OBJECT – Directly addressed to the senses of
the court [Rule 130, Sec. 1]
• Referred to as real evidence or evidence by
“autoptic preference”.
2) DOCUMENTARY - Consist of writing or any
material containing modes of written
expression (i.e. words, numbers, figures,
symbols) offered as proof of their contents.
[Rule 130, Sec. 2]
3) TESTIMONIAL - Submitted to the court
through the testimony or deposition of a


1) DIRECT – Proves the fact in dispute without
aid of any inference or presumption.
CIRCUMSTANTIAL – Proof of fact/s from
which, taken singly/collectively, the existence
of the particular fact in dispute may be inferred
as a necessary/probable consequence. It is
evidence of relevant collateral facts.
2) CUMULATIVE – Evidence of the same kind and
to the same state of facts.
CORROBORATIVE – Additional evidence of a
different character to the same point.
3) PRIMA FACIE – That which, standing alone, is
sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed.
CONCLUSIVE – That class of evidence which
the law does not allow to be contradicted.
4) PRIMARY – (Best evidence) The law regards
these as affording the greatest certainty of the
fact in question.
SECONDARY – (Substitutionary evidence)
Permitted by law only when the best evidence
is unavailable.
5) POSITIVE – When a witness affirms that a fact
did or did not occur (there is personal
NEGATIVE – When witness states that he did
not see or know of the occurrence of a fact
(total disclaimer of personal knowledge).


• It is the result or effect of evidence; when the
requisite quantum of evidence of a particular
fact has been duly admitted and given weight,
the result is called the proof of such fact.

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 66 of 227


II. ADMISSIBILITY a) Unreasonable searches and seizures;

privacy of communication and
correspondence. [Art. 3, Sec 2 & 3,
WHEN DETERMINED b) Miranda Rights; right to counsel,
prohibition on torture, force, violence,
• At the time evidence is offered to the court. threat, intimidation or other means
[Rule 132, Sec. 35] which vitiate the free will; prohibition of
secret detention places, solitary,
KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY incommunicado. [Art. 3, Sec. 12,
c) No person shall be compelled to be a
1) CONDITIONAL – Evidence, at the time
witness against himself. [Art. 3, Sec.
offered, appears to be immaterial/irrelevant
17, Consti]
unless it is connected with other facts to be
2) Statutory:
subsequently proved. The evidence may be
a) Lack of documentary stamp tax to
received in condition that the other facts will be
documents required to have one makes
proved thereafter; but there should be no bad
such document inadmissible as
evidence in court until the requisite
2) MULTIPLE – Evidence is relevant and
stamp/s shall have been affixed thereto
competent for 2 or more purposes.
and cancelled. [Sec. 201, NIRC]
3) CURATIVE – Considers a party’s right to
b) Any communication obtained by a
introduce incompetent evidence in his behalf
person, not being authorized by all the
where the court has admitted the same kind of
parties to any private communication,
evidence adduced by the adverse party.
by tapping any wire/cable or using any
other device/arrangement to secretly
RELEVANCE AND COMPETENCE overhear/intercept/record such
information by using any device, shall
• ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE – Evidence that is not be admissible in evidence in any
both relevant and competent. [Rule 128, Sec. judicial/quasi-judicial/legislative/
3] administrative hearing or investigation.
[Sec. 1 & 4 RA 4200 (Wire-Tapping
RELEVANCE [Rule 128, Sec. 4] Act)]
• Definition: Evidence has such a relation to the • An extension phone cannot be
fact in issue as to induce belief of its existence placed in the same category as a
or non-existence. dictaphone, dictograph or the other
• General rule: Evidence on collateral matters is devices enumerated in Sec. 1 of RA
not allowed. 4200 as the use thereof cannot be
• COLLATERAL MATTERS – Matters other considered as “tapping” the
than the fact in issue and which are offered wire/cable of a telephone line.
as a basis for inference as to the existence [Ganaan v. IAC (1986)]
or non-existence of the facts in issue. c) Rules on Electronic Document.
• Exception: When it tends in any d) CC presumptions (e.g. Art. 2185 as to
reasonable degree to establish the presumption of negligence when there
im/probability of fact in issue. is violation of traffic rules).
• Evidence may be relevant but immaterial to the e) Commercial laws (e.g. Art. 448, Code
case. of Commerce on the evidentiary weight
of conflicting entries in merchants’
Relevance Material books).
Definition Evidence having Evidence directed
any value in reason to prove a fact in RULES ON ADMISSIBILITY
as tending to prove issue as
any matter determined by the
provable in an rules of substantive 1. OBJECT EVIDENCE
action law and pleading
Test Logical relation of Determined by • Definition: Those addressed to the senses of
the evidence to the WON the fact it the court. [Rule 130, Sec. 1]
fact in issue (i.e. intends to prove is
• It includes the anatomy of a person or of
WON the former in issue
tends to establish any substance taken therefrom. [US v. Tan
probability or Teng]
improbability of the • General rule: When object is relevant to the
latter) fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined
Refers to the Refers to the or viewed by the court. [Rule 130, Sec. 1]
tendency in reason relationship • Exception: Court may refuse introduction
of offered fact A to between fact B and of object evidence and rely on testimonial
prove fact B the issues in the
alone if:
1) Its exhibition is contrary to public
policy, morals or decency;
2) It would result in delays,
COMPETENCE [Rule 128, Sec. 3]
inconvenience, unnecessary expenses,
out of proportion to the evidentiary
• Definition: Evidence is not excluded by law or
value of such object; [People v.
• Exclusionary rules:
1) Constitutional:

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 67 of 227


3) The evidence would be confusing or • The offeror, upon proof of its

misleading. [People v. Saavedra] execution/existence and cause of its
unavailability, without bad faith on his part,
2. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE may prove its contents by (in order): [Rule
130, Sec. 5]
• Definition: Writings or any material containing a) A copy;
letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or b) A recital of its contents in some
other modes of written expression offered as authentic document;
proof of their content. [Rule 130, Sec. 2] c) The testimony of witnesses.
2) Original document is in adverse party’s
custody/control. [Rule 130, Sec. 6]
• If after reasonable notice is given to the
Sec. 3]
adverse party to produce the document and
after satisfactory proof of the existence of
• General rule: When the subject of inquiry is
the document is made, he fails to produce
the contents of a document, no evidence shall
the document, secondary evidence may be
be admissible other than the original document
3) Original document is a public record. [Rule 130,
• Exception:
Sec. 7]
1) When the original has been lost or
• Its contents may be proved by a
destroyed, or cannot be produced in
certified copy issued by the public
court, without bad faith on the offeror’s
officer in custody thereof.
2) When the original is in custody or under
• The offeror of secondary evidence is burdened
control of party against whom evidence
to prove: [Lee v. People (2004)]
is offered, and latter fails to produce it
1) The loss or destruction of the original
after reasonable notice;
without bad faith on the part of the
3) When the original consists of numerous
proponent/offeror which can be shown by
accounts or other documents which
circumstantial evidence of routine practices
cannot be examined in court without
of destruction of documents;
great loss of time, and the fact sought
2) The proponent must prove by a fair
to be established from them is only the
preponderance of evidence as to raise a
general result of the whole;
reasonable inference of the loss or
4) When the original is a public record in
destruction of the original copy;
the custody of a public officer or is
3) It must be shown that a diligent and bona
recorded in a public office.
fide but unsuccessful search has been
made for the document in the proper place
or places. It has been held that where the
• Definition: [Rule 130, Sec. 4]
missing document is the foundation of the
1) One the contents of which are the subject
action, more strictness in proof is required
of inquiry.
than where the document is only
2) When a document is in 2 or more copies
collaterally involved.
executed at or about the same time, with
identical contents, all such copies are
• If the document is one in which other persons
equally regarded as originals.
are also interested, and which has been placed
3) When an entry is repeated in the regular
in the hands of a custodian for safekeeping, the
course of business, one being copied from
custodian must be required to make a search
another at/near the time of the transaction,
and the fruitlessness of such search must be
all the entries are likewise equally regarded
shown, before secondary evidence can be
as originals.
admitted. The certificate of the custody of the
• Affidavits and depositions are considered not
document is incompetent to prove the loss or
being the best evidence, hence not admissible
destruction thereof. Such fact must be proved
if the affiants/deponents are available as
by some person who has knowledge of such
witnesses. The contents of such affidavits and
loss. [Lee v. People (2004)]
depositions are not the issues in the case but
• Where the original is in the custody of the
are only intended as evidence to establish the
adverse party, it is not necessary that it be in
issues in controversy. [Regalado]
the actual possession of the adverse party. It
• Carbon copies are deemed duplicate originals.
is enough that the circumstances show that the
They may be introduced as evidence without
writing is in his possession or under his control.
accounting for the non-production of the
Secondary evidence is admissible where the
original. [People vs. Tan (1959)]
adverse party denies having it in his
• The Best Evidence Rule applies only when the
possession. [Villa Rey Transit v. Ferrer (1968)]
contents of the document are the subject of
• All duplicates/counterparts must be accounted
inquiry. It does not apply when the issue is
for before using copies as evidence. [De Vera
only as to WON such document was actually
v. Aguilar (1983)]
executed or in the circumstances relevant to its
• The voluminous character of the document
execution. [People v. Tandoy (1990)]
must be established before evidence other than
the original may be introduced. [Maritima v.
b. SECONDARY EVIDENCE Allied Free Workers (1977)]
• When the original is outside the jurisdiction of
WHEN SECONDARY EVIDENCE MAY BE the court, as when it is in a foreign country,
INTRODUCED secondary evidence is admissible. [PNB v.
1) Original document is unavailable (lost, Olila]
destroyed or cannot be produced in court);

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 68 of 227


• Before a party is allowed to adduce secondary

evidence to prove the contents of the original • The Parol Evidence Rule does not apply to
sales invoices, the offeror must prove the collateral agreements. [PNB v. Seeto (1952)]
following: (1) the existence or due execution of • The rule does not apply to exclude evidence of
the original; (2) the loss and destruction of the conditions subsequent in a deed of sale where
original or the reason for its nonproduction in such conditions were not stated in the
court; and (3) on the part of the offeror, the agreement. [Pioneer Savings v. CA]
absence of bad faith to which the unavailability • It also does not apply if the issue revolves
of the original can be attributed. The correct around fraud and false representation since
order of proof is as follows: existence, they are incidental to the execution and not to
execution, loss, and contents. At the sound the integration. [Woodhouse v. Halili (1953)]
discretion of the court, this order may be • It does not apply either when 3rd parties are
changed if necessary. [Citibank v. Teodoro involved. [Lechugas v. CA (1986)]
(2003)] • The exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule must
• A party who calls for the production of a be squarely put in issue. [Ortañez v. CA
document and inspects it is not obliged to offer (1997)]
it as evidence. [Rule 130, Sec. 8]
Parol Evidence Rule Best Evidence Rule
c. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE [Rule Presupposes that the Contemplates the
original document is situation wherein the
130, Sec. 9] available in court original writing is not
available and/or there is a
• Definition: Any evidence aliunde, whether oral dispute as to whether said
or written, which is intended or tends to vary or writing is the original
contradict a complete and enforceable Prohibits the varying of the Prohibits the introduction
agreement embodied in a document. terms of a written of substitutionary
• General rule: When the terms of an agreement evidence in lieu of the
agreement (including wills) have been reduced original document
regardless of WON it
to writing, it is considered as containing all the
varies the contents of the
terms agreed upon and there can be, between original
the parties and their successors in interest, no Applies only to documents Applies to all kinds of
evidence of such terms other than the contents contractual in nature documents
of the written agreement. (Exception: wills)
• Exception: A party may present evidence Can be invoked only when Can be invoked by any
to modify, explain or add to the terms of the controversy is between party to an action
written agreement if he puts in issue in his the parties to the written regardless of WON such
agreement, their privies or party participated in the
any party directly affected writing involved
1) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or thereby
imperfection in the written agreement;
• Mistake here refers to a mistake of
fact mutual to the parties or where
the innocent party was imposed d. RULES ON INTERPRETATION OF
upon by unfair dealing of the other. DOCUMENTS
• Imperfection includes an inaccurate
statement in the agreement or 1) Interpretation of a writing according to the
incompleteness in the writing or the legal meaning it bears in the place of
presence of inconsistent provisions execution, unless parties intended otherwise.
therein. [Rule 130, Sec. 10]
2) The failure of the written agreement to 2) Instrument construed so as to give effect to all
express the true intent and agreement provisions. [Rule 130, Sec. 11]
of the parties thereto; 3) Parties’ intention is to be pursued in
3) The validity of the written agreement; construction of instrument. In the inconsistency
4) The existence of other terms agreed to between general and particular provision, the
by the parties or their successors in latter prevails. Particular intent controls general
interest after the execution of the one inconsistent with it. [Rule 130, Sec. 12]
written agreement. 4) The circumstances under which an insturment
was made, including the situation of the
Latent/intrinsic Patent/extrinsic
subject thereof and of the parties to it, may be
validity validity
shown, so that the judge may be placed in the
When the writing on its Ambiguity which is
face appears clear and apparent on the face of position of those whose language he is to
unambiguous but there the writing itself and interpret. [Rule 130, Sec. 13]
are collateral matters or requires something to be 5) The terms of a writing are presumed to have
circumstances which make added in order to been used in their primary and general
the meaning uncertain or ascertain the meaning of acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show
where a writing admits of the words used that they have a local/technical/peculiar
two constructions both of signification and were so used and understood
which are in harmony with
in the particular instance, in which case the
the language used
Parol evidence admissible Parol evidence not
agreement must be construed accordingly.
admissible, otherwise the [Rule 130, Sec. 14]
court would thereby not 6) When there is inconsistency between written
be construing a contract words and printed words, the former controls
but would be rather over the latter. [Rule 130, Sec. 14]
creating a contract 7) Experts and interpreters to be used in
between the parties explaining writings that are difficult to be

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 69 of 227


deciphered, or where the language is not • Exception:

understood by the court. [Rule 130, Sec. 16] a) In a civil case by one
8) When the terms of an agreement have been against the other;
intended in a different sense by the different b) In a criminal case for a
parties to it, that sense is to prevail against crime committed by one
either party in which he supposed the other against the other or the
understood it. And when different constructions latter's direct
of a provision are otherwise equally proper, descendants/ascendants.
that is to be taken which is the most favorable • The wife is competent
to the party in whose favor the provision is to testify against her
made. [Rule 130, Sec. 17] husband in a
9) Construction in favor of natural right. [Rule prosecution against him
130, Sec. 18] for raping their
10) Interpretation according to usage to determine daughter. [Ordoño v.
instrument’s true character. [Rule 130, Sec. Daguigan]
19] • Purpose: Privilege to prevent
testimony by other spouse based
3. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE on an aversion to use judicial
compulsion in a litigation to place
spouses in an opposing posture
a. WITNESSES’ QUALIFICATION that may weaken or destroy their
marriage. [People v. Francisco]
• General rule: All persons who can perceive, • This privilege is also given to a
and, perceiving, can make their known spouse to prevent the other from
perception to others, may be witnesses. testifying in his favor. [People v.
Religious/political belief, interest in the Franciso]
outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime • For this rule to apply, the marriage
unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be must be valid and existing at the
ground for disqualification. [Rule 130, Sec. 20] time the testimony was offered.
• Exception: Disqualifications: [Arroyo v. Azur]
1) By reason of mental incapacity or 3) By reason of death/insanity of adverse
immaturity; [Rule 130, Sec. 21] party [Rule 130, Sec. 23]
a) Those whose mental condition, at • “Dead Man’s Statute” or
the time of their production for “Survivorship Rule”
examination, is such that they are • General rule: Parties or assignors
incapable of intelligently making of parties to a case, or persons in
known their perception to others. whose behalf a case is prosecuted,
• A mental retardate is not for against an executor/administrator
this reason alone disqualified or other representative of a
from being a witness. [People deceased person, or against a
v. Salomon (1993)] person of unsound mind, upon a
b) Children whose mental maturity is claim/demand against the estate of
such as to render them incapable of such deceased person or against
perceiving the facts respecting such person of unsound mind,
which they are examined and of cannot testify as to any matter of
relating them truthfully. fact occurring before the death of
• Every child is presumed such deceased person or before
qualified to be a witness. such person became of unsound
However, the court shall mind.
conduct a competency • Exception:
examination of a child, motu • The survivor may testify
propio or on motion of a party, against the estate of the
when it finds that substantial deceased where the latter
doubt exists regarding the was guilty of fraud which
ability of the child to perceive, fraud was established by
remember, communicate, evidence other than the
distinguish truth from testimony of the survivor.
falsehood, or appreciate the [Ong Chua v. Carr]
duty to tell the truth in court. • He may also testify where
[Sec. 6, AM 00-4-07-SC (Child he was the one sued by the
Witness Rule)] decedent’s estate since the
• Requisites of competency of a action then is not against
child as witness: [People vs. the estate. [Tongco v.
Mendoza (1996)] Vianzon]
(1) Capacity of observation; • He may likewise testify
(2) Capacity of recollection; where the estate had filed a
(3) Capacity of communication. counterclaim against him or
2) By reason of marriage; [Rule 130, Sec. where the estate cross-
22] examined him as to
• General rule: During their matters occurring during
marriage, neither the husband nor the lifetime of the
the wife may testify for or against deceased. [Goñi v. CA]
the other without the consent of • Purpose: To guard against the
the affected spouse. temptation to give false testimony

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 70 of 227


on the part of the surviving party client to liability;

and to put the parties to the suit c) When the name would furnish the
upon terms of equality in regard to only link that would form the chain
opportunity to produce evidence. of testimony necessary to convict.
[Bautista] 3) Physician-patient privilege; [Rule 130, Sec.
• The survivor-witness must be a 24(c)]
claimant against the estate and not • General rule: A person authorized to
a disinterested 3rd party. [Sunga- practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics
Chan v. Chua] cannot in a civil case, without the consent
of the patient, be examined as to any
b. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS advice or treatment given by him or any
information which he may have acquired in
1) Marital privilege; [Rule 130, Sec. 24(a)] attending such patient in a professional
• Purpose: Privilege for confidential capacity, which information was necessary
communications justified on the ground to enable him to act in capacity, and which
that it promotes marital harmony. Marital would blacken the reputation of the patient.
partners should be encouraged to share • Exception:
their most closely-guarded secrets as an • The prohibition against the
additional measure of intimacy and mutual disclosure does not apply to 3rd
support to their marriage. parties but only to the physician.
• General rule: Husband or the wife, during [Bautista; Krohn v. CA]
or after the marriage, cannot be examined • The privilege belongs to the
without the consent of the other as to any patient, not the physician so that
communication received in confidence by the latter cannot claim it if the
one from the other during the marriage patient abandons it. [Bautista]
• Exception: • This privilege does not apply when
a) In a civil case by one against the the doctor is presented as an
other; expert witness and only
b) In a criminal case for a crime hypothetical problems were
committed by one against the other presented to him. [Lim v. CA
or the latter's direct (1992)]
descendants/ascendants. 4) Priest-petinent privilege; [Rule 130, Sec.
• A widow of a victim allegedly murdered 24(d)]
may testify as to her husband’s dying • A minister or priest cannot, without the
declaration as to how he died the since the consent of the person making the
same was not intended to be confidential. confession, be examined as to any
[US v. Antipolo] confession made to or any advice given by
him in his professional character in the
Marital disqualification Marital privilege [Rule course of discipline enjoined by the church
[Rule 130, Sec. 22] 130, Sec. 24] to which the minister or priest belongs.
Broader since it prevents all Limited to those made 5) Public officer privilege; [Rule 130, Sec. 24(e)]
adverse testimony between during the course of the • A public officer cannot be examined during
spouses and not merely marriage his term of office or afterwards, as to
disclosure of confidential communications made to him in official
communications and may confidence, when the court finds that the
even cover matters
public interest would suffer by the
occurring prior to the
One spouse should be a Where neither spouse is 6) Parental and filial privilege. [Rule 130, Sec. 25]
party to the case a party, this is the • A person cannot be compelled to testify
disqualifying rule against his parents, other direct
ascendants, children or other direct
2) Attorney-client privilege; [Rule 130, Sec. descendants.
• An attorney cannot, without the consent of • The specific enumeration of disqualified
his client, be examined as to any witnesses in the ROC is understood to exclude
communication made by the client to him, the operation of causes of disability other than
his advice given thereon in the course of, those mentioned therein. [Cavili v. Fernando]
or with a view to, professional employment. • The failure of a witness to take an oath prior to
Nor can an attorney's secretary, his testimony is a defect that may be waived by
stenographer or clerk be examined, without the parties. [People v. Zheng Bai Hi]
the consent of the client and his employer,
concerning any fact the knowledge of which c. ADMISSIONS AND
has been acquired in such capacity. CONFESSIONS
• General rule: The attorney-client privilege
may not be invoked to refuse to divulge the
identity of the client.
• Definition: Any statement of fact made by a
• Exception: [Regala v. Sandiganbayan
party against his interest or unfavorable to the
conclusion for which he contends or is
a) When a strong probability exists
inconsistent with the facts alleged by him.
that revealing the name would
• Types:
implicate that person in the very
1) Verbal or written;
same activity for which he sought
2) Express or tacit;
the lawyer’s advice;
b) When disclosure would open the

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 71 of 227


3) JUDICIAL – One made in connection with an admission of any liability, and is not
a judicial proceeding in which it is offered; admissible against the offeror.
EXTRAJUDICIAL – Any admission other 2) In criminal cases – An offer of compromise by
than judicial (e.g. Rule 130, Sec 26 and the accused may be received in evidence as an
32). implied admission of guilt.
• General rule: Any act/declaration/omission of • Exception:
a party as to a relevant fact may be given in a) In cases involving quasi-offenses
evidence against him. [Rule 130, Sec. 26] (criminal negligence);
b) Those allowed by law to be
Admission Confession
Merely a statement of fact Involves an • An offer to pay or the payment of medical,
acknowledgement of hospital or other expenses occasioned by an
guilt/liability injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of
Maybe express or tacit Must be express
civil/criminal liability for the injury.
- Flight from justice is an - The silence of an accused
• A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an
admission by conduct and under custody or his failure unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to lesser
circumstantial evidence of to deny statements by offense, is not admissible in evidence against
consciousness of guilt. another implicating him in the accused who made the plea/offer.
[US v. Sarikala] a crime cannot be • In cases of public crimes, the accused is
considered as a tacit permitted to show that the offer was not made
confession of his under a consciousness of guilt but merely to
participation in the
avoid the inconvenience of imprisonment of for
commission of the crime.
[People v. Alegre (1979)]
some other reason which would justify a claim
Maybe made by 3rd Can be made only by the by the accused that the offer was not in truth
parties, and in certain party himself and are an admission of his guilt or an attempt to avoid
cases, admissible against admissible against his co- the legal consequences which would ordinarily
a party accused in some instances ensue therefrom. [People vs. Godoy (1995)]
• A plea of forgiveness may be considered as
analogous to an attempt to compromise.
Admission Self-serving testimony [People vs. De Guzman (1996)]
Made against the interest Made in favor of the • An offer to compromise does not require that a
of the person who interest of the person criminal complaint be first filed before the offer
admitted making the statement can be received as evidence against the
Made in anticipation of
offeror. [People vs. Yparriguirre (1997)]
future litigation
Admissible in evidence Not admissible in evidence
- Admissible not only Sec. 28]
against the party who
made it or his successors-
• Definition: The rights of a party cannot be
in-interest, but also
against 3rd persons.
prejudiced by an act/declaration/omission of
[Viacrucis v. CA (1986)] another. (1st branch of the res inter alios acta
• Only the admissions of a party-litigant are
admissible as substantive evidence. Those of
• Requisites
non-party witnesses may be admitted for
1) The statement was made extra-judicially;
impeachment purposes only.
• It does not include the party’s
• An admission by a 3rd-party cannot bind a
testimony as a witness in court. [Co v.
party-litigant because such 3rd-party admission
CA (1980)]
would be res inter alios acta and therefore
2) The statement is in favor of the declarant’s
• Extra-judicial statements of an accused
3) The statement was made in anticipation of
implicating a co-accused may not be utilized
future litigation
against the latter.
• Where the statement was not made in
• Exception: [People v. Raquel (1996)]
anticipation of a future litigation, it is
(1) The co-accused impliedly acquiesced in
not self-serving. [Korisu v. Rizal
or adopted the confession by not
Cement] questioning its truthfulness;
(2) The accused persons voluntarily and
ADMISSION BY SILENCE [Rule 130, Sec. 32]
independently executed identical
• An act/declaration made in the presence and
confessions without collusion and
within the hearing/observation of a party who
without contradiction by the others
does/says nothing when the act/declaration is
such as naturally to call for action/comment if
(3) The accused admitted the facts after
not true, and when proper and possible for him
being apprised of the confession;
to do so, may be given in evidence against
(4) If they are charged as co-conspirators
of the crime which was confessed by 1
• The rule does not apply if the statements
of the accused and the confession is
adverse to the party were made in the course
used only as a corroborating evidence;
of an official investigation. [US v. De la Cruz]
(5) The confession is used as circumstantial
evidence to show the probability of
d. COMPROMISE [Rule 130, Sec. 27] participation by the co-conspirator;
(6) The confessant testified for his co-
1) In civil cases – An offer of compromise is not defendant;

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 72 of 227


(7) The co-conspirator’s extra-judicial • Definition: A categorical acknowledgment of

confession is corroborated by other guilt made by an accused in a criminal case
evidence on record. without any exculpatory statement or
EXCEPTIONS TO RES INTER ALIOS ACTA • If the accused admits having committed
1) Partner’s/agent’s admission; [Rule 130, Sec. the act in question but alleges a
29] justification therefore, the same is merely
• Requisites: an admission. [US v. Tolosa]
a) The act/declaration must be within the • The declaration of an accused acknowledging
scope of the authority of the his guilt of the offense charged, or of any
partner/agent. offense necessarily included therein, may be
b) The act/declaration must have been given in evidence against him.
made during the existence of the • No person shall be compelled to be a witness
partnership/agency. against himself. [Art. 3, Sec. 17, Consti]
c) The partnership or agency must be • The operative act in determining whether
shown by evidence other than the act the right against self-incrimination has
or declaration. been violated is when the police
• This rule applies to the act/declaration of a investigation is no longer a general inquiry
joint owner, joint debtor or other person into an unsolved crime but has begun to
jointly interested with the party. focus on a particular suspect who has been
Statements made after a partnership has taken into custody by the police to carry
been dissolved do not fall within this out a process of interrogation that lends
exception. itself to eliciting incriminatory statements
2) Co-conspirator’s admission; [Rule 130, Sec. and not the signing by the suspect of his
30] supposed extrajudicial confession. [People
• Requisites: v. Compil (1995)]
a) The act/declaration must relate to the • By affixing their signatures on the boxes,
conspiracy; accused in effect made a tacit admission of
b) It must have been made during the the crime charged. These signatures are
existence of the conspiracy; tantamount to an extrajudicial confession
• And not long after the conspiracy made without the assistance of counsel,
had been brought to end. [People which is not sanctioned by the Bill of
v. Chaw Yaw Shun (1968)] Rights. [People v. Wong Chuen Ming
c) The conspiracy must be shown by (1996)]
evidence other than such • Any confession, including a re-enactment
act/declaration. without admonition of the right to silence
• The existence of the conspiracy and to counsel, and without counsel chosen
may be inferred from the acts of by the accused is inadmissible in evidence.
the accused. [People v. Belen [People v. Yip Wai Ming (1996)]
(1963)] • The declaration of an accused expressly
• Where there is no independent acknowledging his guilt of the offense may
evidence of the alleged conspiracy, be given in evidence against him and any
the extra-judicial confession of an person, otherwise competent to testify as a
accused cannot be used against his witness who heard the confession as to the
co-accused as the res inter alios substance of what he heard if he heard and
rule applies both to extra-judicial understood it. [People v. Maqueda (1995)]
confessions and admissions.
[People v. Alegre (1976)]
• This rule in Rule 130, Sec. 30 applies only
to extra-judicial statements, not to
testimony given on the stand. [People v.
Serrano (1959)]
3) Admission by privies. [Rule 130, Sec. 31]
• Where one derives title to property from
another, the act/declaration/omission of
the latter, while holding the title, in relation
to the property, is evidence against the
• Requisites: [People v. Du]
a) There exists a relation of privity
between the party and the declarant;
• Privity in estate may have arisen by
succession, acts mortis causa or
acts inter vivos. [Alpuerto v. Perez
b) Admission was made by declarant as
predecessor-in-interest while holding
title to property; III. CONDUCT AND CHARACTER
c) Admission is in relation to the property.
f. CONFESSIONS [Rule 130, Sec. 33;
Rule 115 (e); Art. 3, Sec. 17, Consti]
• General rule: Evidence that one did or did not

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 73 of 227


do a certain thing at one time is not admissible of which is not based on the personal
to prove that he did or did not do the same or knowledge of the witness but on the knowledge
similar thing at another time. (2nd branch of of some other person not on the witness stand.
res inter alios acta rule) [Rule 130, Sec. 34] • Rationale: The party against whom such
• Exception: But that evidence may be hearsay evidence is presented is deprived of his
received to prove a specific intent or right and opportunity to cross-examine the
knowledge, identity, plan, system, scheme, persons to whom the statements or writings
habit, custom or usage and the like. are attributed.
• Previous acts of negligence is • General rule: A witness testify only as to
admissible to show knowledge or those facts which he knows of his personal
intent. [US v. Pineda] knowledge.
• An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of • PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE – Those derived
money or to deliver a written instrument or from his own perception, i.e. his 5 sense
specific personal property is, if rejected without (sight, hearing, touch, smell, taste).
valid cause, equivalent to the actual production • Witnesses can testify only with regard to
and tender of the money/instrument, or facts of which they have personal
property. [Rule 130, Sec. 34] knowledge. Testimonial or documentary
• It is merely an evidentiary complement to evidence is hearsay if it is based, not on
the rule on tender of payment. [Art. 1256, the personal knowledge of the witness, but
CC] on the knowledge of some other person not
on the witness stand. Consequently,
CHARACTER [Rule 130, Sec. 51; Rule 132, Sec. hearsay evidence -- whether objected to or
14] not -- has no probative value unless the
• General rule: Character evidence is not proponent can show that the evidence falls
admissible. within any of the exceptions to the hearsay
• Exception: rule, as provided in the ROC. [Mallari v.
1) In criminal cases: People (2004)]
a) Accused – May prove his good • The hearsay evidence rule applies also to
moral character which is pertinent affidavits when the supposed affiant never
to the moral trait involved in the identified the affidavit and there was no
offense charged. opportunity for the prosecution to cross-
b) Prosecution – May not prove the examine him/her. [People v. Brioso (1971)]
bad moral character of the accused, • The testimony of a witness regarding a
except in rebuttal. statement made by another person, if
c) Offended Party – His/her good or intended to establish the truth of the facts
bad moral character may be proved asserted in the statement is clearly hearsay
if it tends to establish in any evidence. It is otherwise if the purpose is
reasonable degree the merely to establish the fact that the
im/probability of the offense statement was made, or the tenor of such
charged. statement. [People v. Cusi (1965)]
• Victim’s good/bad moral • The testimony of a witness on the
character is not necessary in a confession made to him by the accused is
crime of murder where the not hearsay. He is testifying to a fact
killing is committed through which he knows of his personal knowledge
treachery or premeditation. (was testifying to the fact that the accused
[People v. Soliman (1957)] told him that he stabbed the victim) and
2) In civil cases: not to the truth of the statement of the
• Moral character is admissible only accused. [People v. Gaddi (1989)]
when pertinent to the issue of • Newspaper clippings or facts published in
character involved in the case. the newspapers are hearsay and have no
[Rule 130, Sec. 51] evidentiary value unless substantiated by
• Evidence of the witness’ good persons with personal knowledge of said
character is not admissible until facts. [People v. Aguel (1980)]
such character has been • 2 main requisites for evidence not to be
impeached. [Rule 130, Sec. 14] hearsay: [Gulam v. Sps. Santos (2006)]
• It is admissible when it is otherwise 1) It must be based on personal knowledge;
relevant, as when it tends to 2) There must be opportunity for cross-
identify defendant as the examination by the adverse party.
perpetrator and tends to show is • The hearsay rule covers all types of evidence
presence at the scene of the crime (oral, documentary and object). [Valencia v.
or in the vicinity of the crime at the Cabigting (1991)]
time charged, or when it is
connected with the crime. [People [Sec. 28, AM 00-4-07-SC]
vs. Irang (1937)] 1) Hearsay testimony of a child describing any act
or attempted act of sexual abuse may now be
IV. HEARSAY RULE admitted in any criminal proceeding subject to
certain prerequisites and the adverse party’s
right to cross-examine.
A. TESTIMONIAL 2) The admissibility of such hearsay statements
shall be determined by the court in light of
KNOWLEDGE specified subjective and objective
considerations which provide sufficient indicia
• HEARSAY - Any evidence the probative value or reliability of the child witness.

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 74 of 227


declarant is available as a witness.

DOCTRINE OF INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT • Declarations against interest are secondary
STATEMENTS evidence which constitute an exception to the
• It is not covered by the hearsay rule. [People v. hearsay rule and are admissible only when the
Cusi] declarant is unavailable as a witness.
• Independent of WON the facts stated are true, • A declaration against interest is the opposite of
they are relevant since they are the facts in a self-serving declaration.
issue or are circumstantial evidence of the facts
in issue. 3. PEDIGREE [Rule 130, Sec. 39]
• WON the statement made is true is immaterial.
What is sought to be proved is the fact that • Definition: Relationship, family genealogy,
such statement was made. birth, marriage, death, the dates when and the
• It pertains to the tenor of statement, not truth. places where these fast occurred, and the
names of the relatives. It also embraces facts
B. EXCEPTIONS TO HEARSAY of family history intimately connected with
RULE • The act/declaration must be made by a person
deceased, or unable to testify, regarding the
1. DYING DECLARATION [Rule pedigree of another person related to him by
130, Sec. 37] birth/marriage.
• The rules do not require any specific degree
• “Antemortem statement” or “statement in of relationship but the weight to which such
articulo mortis”. act/declaration is entitled may be affected
• Requisites: [People v. Macandog (2001)] by the degree of relationship.
1) Declaration was made under the • The act/declaration is admissible if it occurred
consciousness of an impending death; before the controversy, and the relationship
• The deceased should have believed between the 2 persons is shown by evidence
himself in extremis, at the point of other than such act/declaration.
death where every hope of recovery is • The requirement that there be other proof
extinct. [People v. Laquinon (1985)] than the declarations of the declarant as to
2) Declaration refers to cause and surrounding the relationship does not apply where it is
circumstances of such death; sought to reach the estate of the declarant
3) Declaration refers to facts the person is himself and not merely to establish a right
competent to testify to; through his declarations to the property or
4) Declaration is offered in any case wherein some member of the family. [Tison v. CA]
his death is the subject of inquiry. • Requisites for admissibility: [Mendoza v. CA
• However, the law does not require the (1991)]
declarant to state explicitly a perception of the 1) The declarant is dead or unable to testify.
inevitability of death. The foreboding may be 2) The pedigree must be in issue.
gleaned from surrounding circumstances, such 3) The declarant must be a relative of the
as the nature of the declarant’s injury and person whose pedigree is in issue.
conduct that would justify a conclusion that 4) The declaration must be made before the
there was consciousness of impending death. controversy arose.
[People v. Latayada (2004)] 5) The relationship between the declarant and
• The intervening time from the making of the the person whose pedigree is in question
declaration up to the actual death of the must be shown by evidence other than
declarant is immaterial as long as the such declaration.
declaration was made under the consciousness
of an impending death. [US v. Mallari] 4. FAMILY TRADITION [Rule 130,
Sec. 40]
INTEREST [Rule 130, Sec. 38] • The exception refers to reputations/traditions
existing in a family previous to the controversy,
• Made by a person deceased, or unable to in respect to the pedigree of any one of its
testify, against the interest of the declarant. members. It may be received in evidence if the
• INABILITY TO TESTIFY – The person is witness testifying thereon be also a member of
either dead, mentally incapacitated or the family, either by consanguinity or affinity.
physically incompetent. Mere absence from • Documentary evidence allowed under the
the jurisdiction does not make him ipso exception: Entries in family bibles or other
facto unavailable. [Fuentes vs. CA (1996)] family books, charts, engravings on rings,
• Subject of declaration/act: The fact asserted family portraits and the like.
was at the time it was made so far contrary to • This enumeration, by ejusdem generis, is
declarant's own interest that a reasonable man limited to objects which are commonly
in his position would not have made the known as "family possessions," or those
declaration unless he believed it to be true. articles which represent, in effect, a
• The declaration should be against himself or his family's joint statement of its belief as to
successors in interest and against 3rd persons. the pedigree of a person. These have been
described as objects "openly exhibited and
COMPARED TO ADMISSIONS AGAINST INTEREST well known to the family," or those "which,
• ADMISSIONS AGAINST INTEREST - Those if preserved in a family, may be regarded
made by a party to a litigation or by one in as giving a family tradition." Other
privity with or identified in legal interest with examples of these objects which are
such party and are admissible WON the regarded as reflective of a family's

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 75 of 227


reputation or tradition regarding pedigree have the opportunity to concoct or contrive a

are inscriptions on tombstones, monuments story, the statement is admissible as part of
or coffin plates. [Jison v. CA (98)] the res gestae. [People v. Berame (1976)]
• A person’s statement as to his date of birth and • Notes taken regarding a transaction by a
age, as he learned of these from his parents or person who is not a party thereto and who has
relatives, is an ante litem motam declaration of not been requested to take down such notes
a family tradition. [Gravador v. Mamigo are not part of the res gestae. [Borromeo v. CA
(1967)] (1976)]
• Such statement (as to his age) prevails
over the mere opinion of the trial judge. 7. ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF
[US v. Agadas (36 PHIL 246)]
BUSINESS [Rule 130, Sec. 43;
• However, such statement (as to age)
Rule 8, Rules on Electronic
cannot generally prevail over the secondary
Evidence (REE)]
statement of his father. [US v. Evangelista]
• The entry must have been made at or near the
5. COMMON REPUTATION [Rule time of transactions to which they refer.
130, Sec. 41] • The entry should have been made by a person
deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a
• Admissible evidences under this exception: position to know the facts therein stated.
1) Common reputation existing previous to • Such entry is treated as prima facie evidence, if
the controversy, respecting facts of public the person who made the entries did so in his
or general interest more than 30 years old, professional capacity or in the performance of
or respecting marriage or moral character; duty and in the ordinary or regular course of
• COMMON REPUTATION – The general business/duty.
or substantially undivided reputation • If the entrant is available as a witness, the
although it need not be unanimous. It entries will not be admitted as an exception to
is the definite opinion of the community the hearsay rule but they may nevertheless be
in which the fact to be proved is known availed of by said entrant as a memorandum to
or exists. refresh his memory while testifying on the
• CHARACTER – The inherent qualities transactions reflected therein. [Cang Yui v.
of a person. Gardner]
• REPUTATION - The opinion of a • There is no overriding necessity to bring into
person by others. court all the clerks/EEs who individually made
• Under this section, the character of a the entries in a long account. It is sufficient
person is permitted to be established that the person who supervises their work
by his common reputation. testify that the account was prepared under his
• The character of a place as an opium supervision and that the entries were regularly
joint may be proved by its common entered into in the ordinary course of business.
reputation in the community. [US v. [Yek Tong Fire & Marine Insurance v.
Chua Chiok] Gutierrez]
2) Monuments and inscriptions in public places
as evidence of common reputation. ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE AS EXCEPTION TO
6. RES GESTAE [Rule 130, Sec. 42] • A memorandum/report/record or data
compilation of
• Definition: It literally means “Things done”. acts/events/conditions/opinions/diagnoses,
• Statements admissible as part of the res made by electronic, optical or other similar
gestae: means at or near the time of or from
1) Statements made by a person while a transmission/supply of information by a person
starting occurrence is taking place or with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular
immediately prior or subsequent thereto, course/conduct of a business activity, and such
with respect to the circumstances thereof. was the regular practice to make the
2) Statements accompanying an equivocal act memorandum/report/record or data
material to the issue, and giving it a legal compilation by electronic, optical or similar
significance. means, all of which are shown by the testimony
• The rule refers to (a) spontaneous statements of the custodian or other qualified witnesses.
in connection with a startling occurrence [Rule 8, Sec. 1, REE]
relating to that fact and in effect forming a part • This presumption may be overcome by
thereof and (b) statements accompanying an evidence of the untrustworthiness of the source
equivocal act – verbal acts – on the theory that of information or the method or circumstances
they are the verbal parts of the act to be of the preparation/transmission/storage
explained. thereof. [Rule 8, Sec. 2, REE]
• A dying declaration can be made only by the
victim after the attack while a statement as 8. OFFICIAL RECORDS [Rule 130,
part of the res gestae may be that of the killer Sec. 44]
himself after or during the killing. [People v.
Reyes] • The entries must be made at or near the time
• Where the elements of both are present, of transactions to which they refer, and by a
the statement may be admitted both as a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was
dying declaration and as part of the res in a position to know the facts therein stated.
gestae. [People v. Balbas (1983)] • The entrant must have personal knowledge of
• If the statement was made under the influence the facts stated by him or such facts acquired
of a startling event and the declarant did not by him from reports made by persons under a

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 76 of 227


legal duty to submit the same. [Salmon, Dexter [Rule 130, Sec. 49]
& Co. v. Wijangco] • There is no precise requirement as
• Such record is prima facie evidence, if the to the mode in which
person made the entries in his professional skill/experience shall have been
capacity or in the performance of duty and in acquired. Scientific study and
the ordinary or regular course of business or training are not always essential to
duty the competency of a witness as an
• The report submitted by a police officer in the expert. Knowledge acquired by
performance of his duties on the basis of his doing is no less valuable than that
own personal observation of the facts reported, acquired by study. [Dilag Co. v.
may properly be constituted as an exception. Merced (1949)]
[Caltex v. Africa (1966)] • Polygraph test has not as yet
• Entries in a police blotter are not conclusive attained scientific acceptance as a
proof of the truth of such entries. [People vs. reliable and accurate means of
Cabuang (1993)] ascertaining truth or deception.
• Baptismal certificates or parochial records of [People vs. Adoviso (1999)]
baptism are not official records. [Fortus v. 2) Ordinary witness: If proper basis is
Novero (1968)] given, and regarding: [Rule 130, Sec.
9. COMMERCIAL LISTS [Rule 130, a) Identity of a person about whom he
Sec. 45] has adequate knowledge;
b) Handwriting with which he has
• Evidence of statements of matters of interest to sufficient familiarity;
persons engaged in an occupation contained in c) Mental sanity of a person with
a list/register/periodical or other published whom he is sufficiently acquainted;
compilation, is admissible as tending to prove d) Impressions of the
the truth of any relevant matter so stated if emotion/behavior/condition/appear
that compilation is published for use by persons ance of a person.
engaged in that occupation and is generally
used and relied upon by them therein.


130, Sec. 46]

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

11. PRIOR TESTIMONY [Rule 130,

Sec. 47]

• The prior testimony must have been made by a

witness deceased or unable to testify, in a
former case/proceeding (judicial or
administrative) involving the same parties and
subject matter.
• UNABLE TO TESTIFY – An inability
proceeding from a grave cause almost
amounting to death as when the witness is
old and has lost the power of speech. [Tan
v. CA (1967)]
• The prior testimony may be given in evidence
against the adverse party who had the
opportunity to cross-examine the witness.


• General rule: The opinion of a witness is not
admissible. [Rule 130, Sec. 48] A. JUDICIAL NOTICE
• Exception:
1) Expert witness: On a matter requiring
special knowledge/skill/experience/ WHEN MANDATORY [Rule 129, Sec. 1]
training which he shown to possess.

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 77 of 227


1) Existence and territorial extent of states; which would have required no proof. It
2) Their political history; becomes merely an extra-judicial admission
3) Their forms of government; requiring a formal offer in order to be
4) Their symbols of nationality; admissible. [Torres v. CA (1984)]
5) The law of nations;
6) Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and C. BURDEN OF PROOF
their seals;
7) Political constitution and history of the
• Definition: Duty of a party to present evidence
on the facts in issue necessary to establish his
8) Official acts of the legislative, executive and
claim/defense by the amount required by law.
judicial departments of the Philippines
[Rule 131, Sec. 1]
• Courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign
• The test for determining where the burden of
laws. [Yao-Kee v. Sy-Gonzales (1988)]
proof lies is to ask which party to an action/suit
• General rule: Courts are not mandated to
will fail if he offers no evidence competent to
take judicial notice of municipal ordinances.
show the facts averred as the basis for the
[City of Manila v. Garcia (1967)]
relief he seeks to obtain, and based on the
• Exception: If the charter of the
result of an inquiry, which party would be
concerned city provides for such judicial
successful if he offers no evidence. [Republic v.
Vda. De Neri (2004)]
• General rule: Courts cannot take judicial
• General rule: All facts in issue and relevant
notice of the contents/records of other
facts must be proven by evidence.
cases even if both cases may have been
• Exception: [Republic v. Vda. De Neri
tried or are pending before the same judge.
[Prieto v. Arroyo (1965)]
1) Allegations contained in the
• Exception: The case clearly referred to
complaint/answer immaterial to the
or the original or part of the records of
the case are actually withdrawn from
2) Facts which are admitted or which are
the archives of that case and admitted
not denied in the answer, provided they
as part of the record of the case
have been sufficiently alleged;
pending when: [Tabuena v. CA (1991)]
3) Those which are the subject of an
a) There is no objection from adverse
agreed statement of facts between the
party even with his knowledge
parties, as well as those admitted by
the party in the course of the
b) It is at the request or with the
proceedings in the same case;
consent of the parties.
4) Facts which are the subject of judicial
9) Laws of nature;
10) Measure of time;
5) Facts which are legally presumed;
11) Geographical divisions.
6) Facts peculiarly within the knowledge of
the opposite party.

1) Matters of public knowledge; D. PRESUMPTIONS

2) Matters capable of unquestionable
demonstration; CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS [Rule 131,
3) Matters which ought to be known to judges Sec. 2]
because of their judicial functions.
1) Whenever a party by his own
WHEN HEARING IS NECESSARY [Rule 129, declaration/act/omission, has led another to
Sec. 3] believe a particular thing to be true and act
upon such belief, he cannot in any litigation
1) During the trial: The court may announce its arising out of such declaration/act/omission be
intention to take judicial notice of any matter permitted to falsify it.
and allow the parties to be heard thereon on its 2) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of
own initiative or on request of a party. his landlord at the time of the commencement
2) After the trial and before judgment or on of the relation of landlord and tenant between
appeal: The court may announce its intention them.
to take judicial notice of any matter that is
decisive of a material issue in the case and DISPUTABLE [Rule 131, Sec. 3]
allow the parties to be heard thereon on its
own initiative or on request of a party. 1) Person is innocent of a crime or wrong;
2) Unlawful act is done with an unlawful intent;
B. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS 3) Person intends the ordinary consequences of
his voluntary act;
4) Person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
• Definition: Admissions, verbal or written,
5) Evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse
made by the party in the course of the
if produced;
proceedings in the same case. It requires no
• This presumption will not apply if the
proof. [Rule 129, Sec. 4]
evidence is at the disposal of both defense
• Judicial admission may be contradicted only by
and the prosecution. [People v. Padiernos
showing that:
a) It was made through palpable mistake;
6) Money paid by one to another was due to the
b) No such admission was made.
• An original complaint, after being amended,
7) Thing delivered by one to another belonged to
loses its character as a judicial admission,

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 78 of 227


the latter; Person whose Remarriage

8) Obligation delivered up to the debtor has been spouse has been
paid; absent for 4 - Before marrying
consecutive years again, the spouse
9) Prior rents or installments had been paid when 4
and who has a well- present must
a receipt for the later ones is produced; founded belief that institute summary
10) A person found in possession of a thing taken the absent spouse is proceedings as
in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the already dead provided in the
taker and doer of the whole act; otherwise, Missing spouse has
that things which a person possesses or been in danger of
exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by death under the
him; extra-ordinary
11) Person in possession of an order on himself for circumstances above
the payment of the money or the delivery of
anything has paid the money or delivered the
thing accordingly;
12) Person acting in public office was regularly
appointed or elected to it;
13) Official duty has been regularly performed; 24) Acquiescence resulted from a belief that the
14) A court or judge acting as such, whether in the thing acquiesced in was conformable to the
Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the law/fact;
lawful exercise of jurisdiction; 25) Things have happened according to the
15) All the matters within an issue raised in a case ordinary course of nature and ordinary nature
were laid before the court and passed upon by habits of life;
it; all matters within an issue raised in a 26) Persons acting as copartners have entered into
dispute submitted for arbitration were laid a contract of co-partnership;
before arbitrators and passed upon by them; 27) A man and woman deporting themselves as
16) Private transactions have been fair and regular; husband and wife have entered into a lawful
17) Ordinary course of business has been followed; contract of marriage;
18) There was a sufficient consideration for a
contract; Situation Presumption
19) Negotiable instrument was given or indorsed A man and a woman are Property acquired were
for a sufficient consideration; capacitated to marry each obtained by their joint
20) An indorsement of negotiable instrument was other and live exclusively efforts/work/industry
made before the instrument was overdue and with each other as
husband and wife without
at the place where the instrument is dated;
the benefit of marriage or
21) A writing is truly dated; under void marriage
22) Letter duly directed and mailed was received in Cohabitation by a man Such contributions and
the regular course of the mail; and a woman who are not their corresponding
23) Presumptions concerning absence: capacitated to marry each shares including joint
other and who have deposits of money and
No. of acquired property through evidences of credit are
years of Instances Purpose their actual joint equal
absence contribution of money,
Absence without it All purposes except property or industry
7 being known WON he for opening his
is alive succession 28) Presumptions governing children of women
10 Opening his who contracted another marriage within 300
Absence after age of Succession days after termination of her former marriage
75 y/o (in the absence of proof to the contrary):
1. Person on board All purposes
a vessel lost including opening
When child was born Presumption
during a sea of his succession
Before 180 days after the Considered to have been
voyage, or an
solemnization of the conceived during the
aircraft which is
subsequent marriage former marriage, provided
missing, who has
it be born within 300 days
not been heard of
after the termination of
for 4 years since
the former marriage
the loss of the
After 180 days following Considered to have been
vessel or aircraft
the celebration of the conceived during the
2. Member of the
subsequent marriage subsequent marriage,
armed forces who
even though it be born
took part in
4 within the 300 days after
armed hostilities,
the termination of the
and has been
former marriage.
missing for 4
3. Person who has 29) A thing once proved to exist continues as long
been in danger of as is usual with things of the nature;
death under 30) The law has been obeyed;
other 31) A printed/published book, purporting to be
circumstances printed/published by public authority, was so
and whose
existence has not
been known for 4 32) A printed/published book, purporting to contain
years reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of the
country where the book is published, contains
correct reports of such cases;
33) A trustee or other person whose duty it was to

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 79 of 227


convey real property to a particular person has 1]

actually conveyed it to him when such • In open court;
presumption is necessary to perfect the title of • Under oath/affirmation.
such person or his successor in interest;
34) Presumptions regarding survivorship: MODE OF ANSWERING
(Applicable for all purposes except succession)
• General rule: Oral answers.
When 2 persons perish in the same calamity, and it is
not shown who died first, and there are no particular
• Exception:
circumstances from which it can be inferred, the 1) Witness is incapacitated to speak;
survivorship is determined from the probabilities 2) Question calls for a different mode of
resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes: answer.
Situation Person presumed to • The testimony of the witness should be elicited
have survived by questions of counsel. But the court may
Both < 15 y/o The older itself propound questions either on the direct or
Both > 60 y/o The younger cross examination of the witness. [People v.
One < 15 y/o, The one <15 Moreno (1988)]
the other > 60 y/o
Both > 15 and < 60 y/o, The male
Of different sexes
Both > 15 and <60 y/o, The older 1) Testimony of witness in civil cases may be
Of the same sex given by depositions. [Rule 23 and 24]
One < 15 or > 60 y/o, The one between those 2) Depositions or conditional examinations are
and the other between ages allowed in criminal cases. [Rule 119 and 123]
those ages • Mere presentation of the affidavits of
prosecution witnesses subject to cross-
35) As between 2 or more persons called to examination is not allowed by the ROC.
succeed each other: If there is a doubt as to [People v. Estenzo (1976)]
which of them died first, whoever alleges the 3) Affidavits are allowed in cases covered by Rule
death of one prior to the other, shall prove the on Summary Procedure
same. In the absence of proof, they shall be • The admissibility of evidence should not be
considered to have died at the same time. confused with its probative
value. Admissibility refers to the question
of whether certain pieces of evidence are to
be considered at all, while probative value
refers to the question of whether the
admitted evidence proves an issue. Thus, a
particular item of evidence may be
admissible, but its evidentiary weight
depends on judicial evaluation within the
guidelines provided by the rules of evidence
[Heirs of Sabanpan v. Comorposa, (2003)]
• Hence, although affidavits of witnesses are
allowed/admissible under the Rule on
Summary Procedure, these may not have
any probative value.


• The entire proceedings of a trial/hearing should

be recorded, including:
• The questions propounded to a witness and
his answer thereto;
• Statements made by the judge or any of
the parties/counsels/witnesses with
reference to the case.
• Means of recording:
1) By shorthand;
2) By stenotype;
3) Other means found suitable by the court.

• TSN shall be made by the official stenographer/
stenotypist/recorder. He shall certify it as
correct, and it shall be deemed prima facie a
VII. PRESENTATION OF correct statement of the proceedings.
• That a judge did not hear a case does not
EVIDENCE necessarily render him less competent in
assessing the credibility of witnesses. He can
rely on the TSN of their testimony and calibrate
A. EXAMINATION OF them in accordance with their conformity to
common experience, knowledge and
WITNESS observation of ordinary men. Such reliance
does not violate substantive and procedural
MANNER OF EXAMINATION [Rule 132, Sec. due process of law. [People v. Cadley (2004)]

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 80 of 227




• Obligation of a witness: To answer questions,

although his answer may tend to establish a
claim against him.
• Rights of a witness:
1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper,
or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
2) Not to be detained longer than the interests
of justice require;
3) Not to be examined except only as to
matters pertinent to the issue;
4) Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense,
unless otherwise provided by law;
• “Unless provided by law” refers to
immunity statutes such as those which
the witness is granted immunity from
criminal prosecution for offenses
admitted (e.g. Sec. 8, RA 1379).
5) Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it to be the
very fact at issue or to a fact from which
the fact in issue would be presumed. But a
witness must answer to the fact of his
previous final conviction for an offense. RECALLING WITNESSES [Rule 132, Sec. 9]

ORDER OF EXAMINATION [Rule 132, Sec. 4] • After both sides have concluded the
examination of a witness, he cannot be recalled
without leave of court. The court will grant or
DIRECT EXAMINATION withhold leave in its discretion as the interests
[Rule 132, Sec. 5] of justice may require.
• Examples of grounds for recalling a witness:
• Examination-in-chief of a witness by the [People v. Rivera (1991)]
party presenting him, on the facts • Particularly identified material points were
relevant to the issue.
not covered in the cross-examination;
• Particularly described vital documents were
not presented to the witness;
• The cross-examination was conducted in so
inept a manner as to result in a virtual
absence thereof.
[Rule 132, Sec. 10]
• When conducted: Upon the termination
of the direct examination.
• Matters covered: Witness may be cross- • MISLEADING QUESTIONS – Questions that
examined by the adverse party: assume as true a fact not yet testified to by the
1) As to any matter stated in the witness, or contrary to that which he has
direct examination, or connected previously stated. They are not allowed.
therewith, with sufficient fullness • LEADING QUESTIONS – Questions that
and freedom to test his accuracy suggest to the witness the answer which the
and truthfulness and freedom from
examining party desires.
interest or bias, or the reverse;
2) To elicit all important facts bearing
• General rule: Leading questions are not
upon the issue. allowed.
• Exception:
1) On cross examination;
2) On preliminary matters;
3) When there is a difficulty is getting
direct and intelligible answers from a
witness who is ignorant, or a child of
tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a
• It is usual and proper for the court
to permit leading questions in
conducting the examination of a
witness who is immature; aged and
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION infirm; in bad physical condition;
[Rule 132, Sec. 7] uneducated; ignorant of, or
unaccustomed to, court
• When conducted: After the cross- proceedings; inexperienced;
examination of the witness has been
1 0 0 % U•P L AWhy
W conducted: To explain or UP BAROPS 2008 Page 81 of 227
supplement his answers given during
the cross-examination.
• On re-direct-examination, the court
in its discretion may allow questions

unsophisticated; feeble-minded; of 2) He must be asked whether he made such

sluggish mental equipment; statements;
confused and agitated; terrified; 3) If so, be allowed to explain them.
timid or embarrassed while on the • The statements of a witness prior to her
stand; lacking in comprehension of present testimony cannot serve as basis for
questions asked or slow to impeaching her credibility, unless: [People v.
understand; deaf and dumb; or Castillano (2003)]
unable to speak or understand the a) Her attention was directed to the
English language or only inconsistencies/discrepancies;
imperfectly familiar therewith. b) She was given an opportunity to explain
[People v. Dela Cruz (2002)] said inconsistencies.
4) On an unwilling or hostile witness; • Without such opportunity to explain,
• A witness may be considered the impeachment is incomplete.
hostile only when declared by the [People v. Relucio, 1978]
court, upon adequate showing of • LAYING THE PREDICATE – If the statements
his: [Rule 132, Sec. 12] be in writing, they must be shown to the
a) Adverse interest; witness before any question is put to him
b) Unjustified reluctance to concerning them.
testify; • This rule does not apply where the previous
c) His having misled the party into statements of a witness are offered as evidence
calling him to the witness of an admission, and not merely to impeach
stand. him. [Ysmael v. Hashim]
5) On a witness who is an adverse party
or an officer/director or managing WAIVER OF DEFECT IN IMPEACHMENT
agent of a public/private corporation or • Defect is deemed waived if no objection on
of a partnership/association which is an that ground is raised when the document
adverse party. involved is offered for admission. [People v.
Molo (1979)]
[Rule 132, Sec. 11]
• How done: • The judge may exclude from the court any
1) By contradictory evidence; witness who is not under examination at that
2) By evidence that his general reputation for time so that he may not hear the testimony of
truth, honesty or integrity is bad; other witnesses. The judge may also have the
3) By evidence that he has made at other witnesses separated and prevented from
times statements inconsistent with his conversing with each other until all have been
present testimony. examined.
• Evidence of particular wrongful acts is not • If a witness remains present in the hearing
allowed except that it may be shown by the despite the court’s order that all other
examination of the witness, or the record of the witnesses leave the court room, the discretion
judgment, that he has been convicted of an to admit/reject the testimony of such witness
offense. will lie within the court’s discretion. [People v.
IMPEACHMENT OF OWN WITNESS [Rule 132, Sec. • It is within the power of the judge to order or
12] to refuse to order the exclusion of a witness
• General rule: The party producing a witness is inside a court room. [People v. Lua Chu]
not allowed to impeach the latter’s credibility.
• Exception:
1) Unwilling or hostile witness.
• Impeachment may be made by the WITNESSES [Rule 132, Sec. 16]
party presenting the hostile or
unwilling witness in all respects as REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY
if he had been called by the • A witness may be allowed to refresh his
adverse party, except by evidence memory respecting a fact, by anything
of bad character. written/recorded by himself or under his
• He may also be impeached and direction at the time when the fact occurred, or
cross-examined by the adverse immediately thereafter, or at any other time
party, but such cross-examination when the fact was fresh in his memory and
must only be on the subject matter knew that the same was correctly
of his examination-in-chief. written/recorded.
2) Witness is an adverse party or an • But the writing/record must be produced and
officer/director or managing agent of a may be inspected by the adverse party, who
public/private corporation or of a may cross-examine the witness upon it, and
partnership/association which is an may read it in evidence.
adverse party. • This provision applies only when it is shown
beforehand that there is need to refresh the
IMPEACHMENT BY PRIOR INCONSISTENT memory of the witness. [Borromeo v. CA
STATEMENTS [Rule 132, Sec. 13] (1976)]
• Requirements: • Where the witness has testified independently
1) The statements must be related to him, of or after his testimony has been refreshed by
with the circumstances of the times and a memorandum of the events in dispute, such
places and the persons present; memorandum is not admissible as

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 82 of 227


corroborative evidence. It is self-evident that a consul, vice-consul, consular agent or any

witness may not be corroborated by any officer in the foreign service of the
written statement prepared wholly by him. He Philippines stationed in the foreign country
cannot be more credible just because he in which the record is kept, and
support his open-court declaration with written authenticated by the seal of his office.
statements of the same facts even if he did
prepare them during the occasion in dispute, • Translations of foreign judgments must be
unless the proper predicate of his failing made by an official court interpreter of the
memory is priorly laid down. What is more, Philippines or foreign governments or by a
even where this requirement has been competent and accurate translator. [Pacific Asia
satisfied, the express injunction of the rule Shipping v. NLRC, (1988)]
itself is that such evidence must be received
with caution, if only because it is not very HOW TO PROVE NOTARIAL DOCUMENTS (EXCEPT
difficult to conceive and fabricate evidence of LAST WILLS AND TESTAMENTS) [Rule 132, Sec.
this nature. This is doubly true when the 30]
witness stands to gain materially or otherwise • The document may be presented in evidence
from the admission of such evidence. without further proof, the certificate of
[Borromeo v. CA (1976)] acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of
the execution of the instrument or document
• A witness may testify from such writing or • Such notarized documents are evidence, even
record (as in the case in revival of present against 3rd persons, of the facts which gave
memory) though he retain no recollection of rise to their execution and of the date of
the particular facts, if he is able to swear that execution. [Rule 132, Sec. 23]
the writing/record correctly stated the
transaction when made; but such evidence HOW TO PROVE PUBLIC RECORDS (KEPT IN THE
• By the original record, or a copy thereof,
attested by the legal custodian of the record,
CONVERSATION/WRITING/RECORD [Rule with an appropriate certificate that such officer
132, Sec.17] has the custody.
• Such records are evidence, even against 3rd
• The whole of the same subject may be inquired persons, of the facts which gave rise to their
into by the other, and when a detached act, execution and of the date of execution. [Rule
declaration, conversation, writing or record is 132, Sec. 23]
given in evidence, any other act, declaration, • Only baptismal certificates issued by the priests
conversation, writing or record necessary to its during the Spanish regime are considered
understanding may also be given in evidence. public documents. [Adriano v. De Jesus]
• While the birth certificate is primary
B. AUTHENTICATION AND evidence of a victim’s age in a case of
statutory rape, in the absence of such
PROOF OF DOCUMENTS evidence, the victim’s minority may be
proved by other documentary evidence
1. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS [Rule 132, such as her baptismal certificate or other
Sec. 19] authentic records. [People v. Llandelar
• Public documents generally include notarial
documents and are admissible in evidence CONTENTS OF ATTESTATION [Rule 132, Sec. 25]
without the necessity of preliminary proof as to • The attestation must state that the copy is a
its authenticity and due execution. [Antillon v. correct copy of the original or a specific part
Barcellon] thereof, as the case may be. The attestation
1) Written official acts of the sovereign must be under the official seal of the attesting
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a
public officers, whether of the Philippines or court having a seal, under the seal of such
of a foreign country. court.
2) Records of official acts of the sovereign • A mere copy of the foreign public document,
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and without the attestation and the certificate, is
public officers, whether of the Philippines or not admissible in evidence to prove foreign law.
of a foreign country. [Wildvalley Shipping v. CA (2000)]

24] • Any public record, an official copy of which is
1) By an official publication thereof; admissible in evidence, must not be removed
2) By a copy attested by the officer having the from the office in which it is kept, except upon
legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, order of a court where the inspection of the
and accompanied: record is essential to the just determination of
• If the record is not kept in the Philippines, a pending case.
with a certificate that such officer has the
custody. PROBATIVE VALUE [Rule 132, Sec. 23]
• If the record is in a foreign country, the • Documents consisting of entries in public
certificate may be made by a secretary of records made in the performance of duty by a
the embassy/legation, consul-general, public officer are prima facie evidence of the

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 83 of 227


facts therein stated. 2) Collusion between the parties;

3) Fraud in the party offering the record, in
PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD [Rule 132, Sec. 28] respect to the proceedings.
• A written statement signed by an officer having
the custody of an official record or by his 4. ALTERATIONS [Rule 132, Sec.
deputy that after diligent search, no record or 31]
entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in
the records of his office, accompanied by a • The party producing a document as genuine,
certificate that such officer has the custody, is which has been altered and appears to have
admissible to prove that the records of his been altered after its execution, in a part
office contain no such record or entry. material to the question in dispute, must
account for the alteration. Failure to do so
2. PRIVATE DOCUMENTS would result in the inadmissibility of evidence.
• Such party may show that the alteration was
AUTHENTIC [Rule 132, Sec. 20] 1) By another;
• Its due execution and authenticity must be 2) Without his concurrence;
proved either: 3) With the consent of the parties affected by
1) By anyone who saw the document it;
executed/written; 4) Properly or innocently made;
2) By evidence of the genuineness of the 5) Without changing the meaning or language
signature/handwriting of the maker. of the instrument.
• Any other private document need only be
identified as that which it is claimed to be. 5. SEAL [Rule 132, Sec. 32]
following requisites have been met, no other • There shall be no difference between sealed
evidence of its authenticity is required: [Rule and unsealed private documents insofar as
132, Sec. 21] their admissibility as evidence is concerned.
1) The private document is more than 30
years old;
2) It is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine; UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE [Rule
3) It is unblemished by any alterations or 132, Sec. 33]
circumstances of suspicion.
• These documents are not admissible unless
PROVING GENUINENESS OF HANDWRITING [Rule accompanied by a translation into English or
132, Sec. 22] Filipino.
1) It may be proved by any witness who believes • Parties or their attorneys are directed to have
it to be the handwriting of such person the translation prepared before trial.
a) He has seen the person write; C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
b) He has seen writing purporting to be his
upon which the witness has acted or been
charged, and has thus acquired knowledge
of the handwriting of such person. 132, Sec. 34]
• This constitutes an exception to the opinion
rule. [Rule 130, Sec. 48 and 50] • Purpose: For evidence to be considered by the
2) Evidence respecting the handwriting may also court.
be given by a comparison made by the witness • In making the offer, the purpose for which the
or the court, with writings admitted or treated evidence is offered must be specified, because
as genuine by the party against whom the such evidence may be admissible for several
evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to purposes under the doctrine of multiple
the satisfaction of the judge. admissibility.
• The rule may be relaxed, provided the evidence
• Rule 132, Sec. 22 merely enumerates the must have duly identified by testimony duly
methods of proving handwriting, but does not recorded and they must have been
give preference or priority to a particular incorporated in the records of the case. [Vda.
method. [Lopez v. CA (1978)] De Orate v. CA (1995)]
• Expert evidence may also be admitted to prove
the genuineness of the handwriting. [Rule 130, WHEN TO MAKE OFFER [Rule 132, Sec. 35]
Sec. 49]
Kind of evidence When to offer
Testimonial At the time the witness is called
to testify
AUTHENTIC [Rule 132, Sec. 20]
Documentary and After the presentation of a party’s
• The document need only be identified as that Object testimonial evidence
which it is claimed to be. Offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the court to
be done in writing.
RECORD [Rule 132, Sec. 29] • Absence of an offer is a defect which is waived
when a party fails to object when the ground
became reasonably apparent, as when the
• Impeachment is done using evidence of:
witness is called to testify without any prior
1) Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial
offer. [Catuira v. CA (1994)]

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 84 of 227


• The defect caused by the absence of formal Documentary Offeror may have the same
offer of exhibits can be cured by the attached or made part of the
identification of the exhibits by testimony duly record
recorded and the incorporation of the said Testimonial Offeror may state for the record
the name and other personal
exhibits in the records of the case. [People v.
circumstances of the witness
Mate (1981)] and the substance of the
proposed testimony
2. OBJECTIONS [Rule 132, Sec. 36]
• Documents marked as exhibits during the
What to object to When to object hearing but which were not formally offered in
Testimonial evidence Immediately after offer is evidence cannot be considered as evidence nor
made shall they have evidentiary value. [Vda. De
Question propounded in As soon as the grounds Flores v. WCC (1977)]
the course of oral become reasonably
examination apparent
Identification of Formal offer of
Offer done in writing Within 3 days after notice
documentary evidence exhibit
of the offer, unless a
• Done in the course of the • Done only when
different period is allowed
trial and is accompanied the party rests
by the court
by the marking of the his/her case
The grounds for objection must be specified in any
• That a document has
been identified does not
UNNECESSARY [Rule 132, Sec. 37] offered
• When it becomes reasonably apparent in the [Interpacific Transit v. Aviles (1990)]
course of the examination of a witness that the
questions being propounded are of the same
class as those to which objection has been
made, whether such objection was sustained or
• It shall be sufficient for the adverse party to
record his continuing objection to such class of
• A court may, motu proprio, treat the objectin
as a continuing one. [Keller v. Ellerman &
Bucknall Steamship]


• It should be given immediately after the
objection is made, unless the court desires to
take a reasonable time to inform itself on the
question presented. But the ruling shall always
be made during the trial and at such time as
will give the party against whom it is made an
opportunity to meet the situation presented by
the ruling.
• The reason for sustaining or overruling an
objection need not be stated. However, if the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a
ruling sustaining the objection on one or some
of them must specify the ground/s relied upon.
• Reservation of a ruling by the court on an
objection to the admissibility of evidence,
without subsequently excluding the same,
amounts to a denial of an objection. [People v.

3. MOTION TO STRIKE [Rule 132,

Sec. 39]
• The court may sustain an objection and order
the answer given to be stricken off the record OF EVIDENCE (REQUIRED
should a witness answer the question before QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE)
the adverse party had the opportunity to voice
fully its objection and such objection is found to
be meritorious.
• The court may also, upon motion, order the
striking out of answers, which are incompetent, CASES) [Rule 133, Sec. 1]
irrelevant or otherwise improper.
• Definition: The evidence adduced by one side
4. TENDER OF EXCLUDED is, as a whole, superior to or has greater
weight than that of the other. Where the
EVIDENCE [Rule 132, Sec. 40]
evidence presented by one side is insufficient
to ascertain the claim, there is no
Kind of evidence How to tender the evidence

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 85 of 227


preponderance of evidence. [Habagat Grill v. the facts to which they testify. [Habagat Grill v.
DMC Urban (2005)] DMC Urban (2005)]
• In determining preponderance, the court may • Insofar as the civil aspect of the case is
consider: concerned, the prosecution or the private
1) All the facts and circumstances of the case; complainant is burdened to adduce
2) The witnesses’ manner of testifying; preponderance of evidence or superior weight
3) Their intelligence; of evidence. Although the evidence adduced by
4) Their means and opportunity of knowing the plaintiff is stronger than that presented by
the facts to which they testify; the defendant, he is not entitled to a judgment
5) The im/probability of their testimony; if his evidence is not sufficient to sustain his
6) Their interest or want of interest; cause of action. The plaintiff must rely on the
7) Personal credibility so far as the same may strength of his own evidence and not upon the
legitimately appear upon the trial; weakness of that of the defendants’. [Quinto v.
8) Number of witnesses (although Andres (2005)]
preponderance is not necessarily equated
with the number of witnesses). SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
(CRIMINAL CASES) [Rule 133, Sec. 2] • Definition: The amount of relevant evidence
which a reasonable mind might accept as
• Definition: That degree of proof which adequate to support a conclusion.
produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. It
does not mean such a degree of proof as, EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSIONS [Rule 133,
excluding the possibility of error, produces Sec. 3]
absolute certainty. Only moral certainty is
required – that degree of proof which produces • General rule: An extra-judicial confession
conviction in an unprejudiced mind. made by an accused, is not a sufficient ground
• General rule: Findings of the judge who tried for conviction.
the case and heard the witnesses are not to be • Exception: When corroborated by
disturbed on appeal, unless there are evidence of the actual commission of a
substantial facts and circumstances which have particular crime (corpus delicti).
been overlooked and which, if properly
considered, might affect the result. [People v. CORPUS DELICTI
Cabrera (1990)] • Corpus delicti is not synonymous with the
• Exception: The rule does not apply when whole charge so as to require that all the
the issue revolved on the identification of elements of the crime be established
the accused or credibility of witness and independently of the extra-judicial confession.
one judge heard the testimony and a [People v. Comendador (1980)]
different judge penned the decision. • Elements:
[People v. Escalante (1984); People v. CA 1) The existence of a certain act or result
(2000)] forming the basis of the criminal charge;
• Rationale: The latter judge is not in a 2) The existence of a criminal agency as the
better position than the appellate cause of the act or result.
courts to make the determination. • In murder, the fact of death is the corpus
• The number of witnesses should not in and by delicti. [People v. Garcia]
itself determine the weight of evidence. • Where there is doubt as to the identity of a
However, the numerical factor may be cadaver, in the absence of any other evidence,
considered in case of conflicting testimonies. there is no corpus delicti. [People v. Mutuc
[Caluna v. Vicente (1951)] (1984)]
• The testimony of the offended party is not
essential to convict an accused if there are
already other evidence to prove guilt. [People
v. Juliada].
• Inconsistencies/contradictions on details do not
• Requisites for circumstantial evidence to be
materially impair the credibility of such witness,
sufficient for conviction:
but on the contrary are indications of veracity
1) There is more than 1 circumstance;
rather than prevarication. [People v. Vinas
2) The facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven;
• The doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
3) The combination of all the circumstances is
is not absolute. The court may accept or reject
such as to produce a conviction beyond
portions of the witness’ testimony depending
reasonable doubt.
on the inherent credibility thereof or the
• Under the RPC, one cannot be convicted of
corroborative evidence in the case. [People v.
treason by means of circumstantial evidence.
Baao (1986)]
[Art. 114, RPC]
• In criminal cases in which the quantum of
evidence required is greater than in civil cases,
the testimony of only one witness - if credible, WHEN COURT MAY STOP INTRODUCTION
straightforward and worthy of belief - is OF FURTHER TESTIMONY [Rule 133, Sec. 6]
sufficient to convict. Under Rule 133, Sec. 1,
among the facts and circumstances to be • Upon any particular point when the evidence
considered by the court in determining which of upon it is already so full that more witnesses to
the presented evidence has superior weight is the same point cannot be reasonably expected
the witnesses’ means and opportunity to know to be additionally persuasive. This power

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 86 of 227


should be exercised with caution. 3) Administrative cases.


133, Sec. 7] • ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT – Information or
the representation of
• The Court may hear the matter on affidavits or information/data/figures/symbols or other
depositions presented by the respective parties modes of written expression described or
but the court may direct that the matter be however represented, by which a right is
heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or established or an obligation extinguished, or by
depositions. which a fact may be proved and affirmed,
which is received/recorded/transmitted/stored/
processed/retrieved/produced electronically. It
includes digitally signed documents and any
print out or output, readable by sight or other
means, which accurately reflects the electronic
data message or electronic document. [Rule 2,
Sec. 1(h), REE]
generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means. [Rule 2,
Sec. 1(g), REE]
• The two terms may be used interchangeably
under the REE.



• Definition: Any distinctive mark, characteristic

and/or sound in electronic form, representing
the identity of a person and attached to or
logically associated with the electronic data
message or electronic document or any
methodology/procedure employed/adopted by
a person and executed/adopted by such person
with the intention of authenticating, signing or
approving an electronic data message or
electronic document.
• It includes DIGITAL SIGNATURES - Electronic
signature consisting of a transformation of an
electronic document or an electronic data
message using an asymmetric or public
cryptosystem such that a person having the
initial untransformed electronic document and
the signer’s public key can accurately
determine: [Rule 2, Sec. 1(e), REE]
1) WON the transformation was created using
the private key that corresponds to the
signer’s public key;
2) WON the initial electronic document had
been altered after the transformation was
• DIGITALLY SIGNED - An electronic
document or electronic data message
bearing a digital signature verified by the
public key listed in a certificate. [Rule 2,
Sec. 1(f), REE]
• It is admissible in evidence as the functional
equivalent of the signature of a person on a
IX. RULES ON ELECTRONIC written document. [Rule 6, Sec. 1, REE]


2, REE]
1) By evidence that a method or process was
SCOPE utilized to establish a digital signature and
verify the same;
• Unless otherwise provided herein, REE shall 2) By any other means provided by law;
apply whenever an electronic document or 3) By any other means satisfactory to the judge
electronic data message is offered or used in as establishing the genuineness of the
evidence. [Rule 1, Sec. 1, REE] electronic signature.
• Cases covered: [Rule 1, Sec. 2, REE]
1) All civil actions and proceedings; DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS RELATING TO E-
2) Quasi-judicial; SIGNATURES [Rule 6, Sec. 3, REE]

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 87 of 227


1) The electronic signature is that of the person to authenticity must be proved by any of the
whom it correlates; following means: [Rule 5, Sec. 2, REE]
2) The electronic signature was affixed by that 1) By evidence that it had been digitally
person with the intention of authenticating or signed by the person purported to have
approving the electronic document to which it signed the same;
is related or to indicate such person’s consent 2) By evidence that other appropriate security
to the transaction embodied therein; procedures/devices as may be authorized
3) The methods or processes utilized to affix or by the SC or by law for authentication of e-
verify the electronic signature operated without documents were applied to the document;
error or fault. 3) By other evidence showing its integrity and
reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS RELATING TO • A document electronically notarized in
DIGITAL SIGNATURES [Rule 6, Sec. 4, REE] accordance with the rules promulgated by the
1) The information contained in a certificate is SC shall be considered as a public document
correct; and proved as a notarial document under the
2) The digital signature was created during the ROC. [Rule 5, Sec. 3, REE]
operational period of a certificate;
3) No cause exists to render a certificate invalid or EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT OF E-DOCUMENTS [Rule 7,
revocable; Sec. 1, REE]
4) The message associated with a digital signature • Factors for assessing evidentiary weight:
has not been altered from the time it was 1) The reliability of the manner/method in
signed; which it was
5) A certificate had been issued by the generated/stored/communicated, including
certification authority indicated therein. but not limited to input and output
procedures, controls, tests and checks for
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT [Rule 2, Sec. 1(h), accuracy and reliability of the electronic
REE] data message or document, in the light of
all the circumstances as well as any
• It is the functional equivalent of paper-based relevant agreement;
documents. [Rule 3, Sec. 1, REE] 2) The reliability of the manner in which its
• It is admissible in evidence if it complies with originator was identified;
the rules on admissibility prescribed by the 3) The integrity of the information and
ROC and related laws and is authenticated in communication system in which it is
the manner prescribed by the REE. [Rule 3, recorded/stored, including but not limited
Sec. 2, REE] to the hardware and computer programs or
• The confidential character of a privileged software used as well as programming
communication is not lost solely on the ground errors;
that it is in the form of an electronic document. 4) The familiarity of the witness or the person
[Rule 3, Sec. 3, REE] who made the entry with the
communication and information system;
5) The nature and quality of the information
which went into the communication and
information system upon which the
• An electronic document shall be regarded as
electronic data message or electronic
the equivalent of an original document under
document was based;
the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout or
6) Other factors which the court may consider
output readable by sight or other means,
as affecting the accuracy/integrity of the
shown to reflect the data accurately.
electronic document or electronic data
• Copies/duplicates regarded as originals:
1) When a document is in 2 or more copies
executed at or about the same time with
• In any dispute involving the integrity of the
identical contents;
information and communication system in
2) Counterparts produced by the same
which an e-document or e-data message is
impression as the original, or from the
recorded/stored, the court may consider the
same matrix, or by mechanical/electronic
following factors:
re-recording, or by chemical reproduction,
1) WON the information and communication
or by other equivalent techniques that
system or other similar device was operated
accurately reproduces the original.
in a manner that did not affect the integrity
• Copies/duplicates not admissible to the same
of the e-document, and there are no other
extent as the original:
reasonable grounds to doubt the integrity of
1) If a genuine question is raised as to the
the information and communication system;
authenticity of the original;
2) WON the e-document was recorded/stored
2) If in the circumstances it would be unjust
by a party to the proceedings with interest
or inequitable to admit the copy in lieu of
adverse to that of the party using it;
the original.
3) WON the e-document was recorded/stored
in the usual and ordinary course of business
by a person who is not a party to the
• The burden of proving authenticity is on the
proceedings and who did not act under the
person seeking to introduce an e-document in
control of the party using it.
any legal proceeding. [Rule 5, Sec. 1, REE]
• Before any private electronic document offered
as authentic is received in evidence, its
• A memorandum/report/record or data

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 88 of 227


compilation of 11, Sec. 2, REE]

made by electronic, optical or other similar AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC AND VIDEO EVIDENCE
means at or near the time of or from • Audio, photographic and video evidence of
transmission or supply of information by a events/acts/transactions shall be admissible
person with knowledge thereof, and kept in the provided it shall be shown/presented/displayed
regular course/conduct of a business activity, to the court and shall be
and such was the regular practice to make the identified/explained/authenticated by the
memorandum/report/record or data person who made the recording or by some
compilation by electronic, optical or similar other person competent to testify on the
means, all of which are shown by the testimony accuracy thereof. [Rule 11, Sec. 1, REE]
of the custodian or other qualified witnesses. • The same rule covers a recording of the
• This presumption may be overcome by telephone conversation or ephemeral electronic
evidence of the untrustworthiness of the source communication.
of information or the method or circumstances • If ephemeral, audio, photographic and video
of the preparation, transmission or storage evidence are recorded/embodied in an
thereof. [Rule 8, Sec. 2, REE] electronic document, then the provisions
authentication e-documents apply. [Rule 11,
• By an affidavit stating facts of direct personal
knowledge of the affiant or based on authentic
• The affidavit must affirmatively show the
competence of the affiant to testify on the
matters contained therein. [Rule 9, Sec. 1,
• The affiant shall be made to affirm the contents
of the affidavit in open court and may be cross-
examined as a matter of right by the adverse
party. [Rule 9, Sec. 2, REE]


• After summarily hearing the parties pursuant to

Rule 9, REE, the court may authorize the
presentation of testimonial evidence by
electronic means. Before so authorizing, the
court shall determine the necessity for such
presentation and prescribe terms and
conditions as may be necessary under the
circumstances, including the protection of the
rights of the parties and witnesses concerned.
[Rule 10, Sec. 1, REE]
• When examination of a witness is done
electronically, the entire proceedings, including
the questions and answers, shall be transcribed
by a stenographer, steno typist or other
recorder authorized for the purpose, who shall
certify as correct the transcript done by him.
The transcript should reflect the fact that the
proceedings, either in whole or in part, had
been electronically recorded. [Rule 10, Sec. 2,
• The electronic evidence and recording thereof
as well as the stenographic notes shall form
part of the record of the case. Such transcript
and recording shall be deemed prima facie
evidence of such proceedings. [Rule 10, Sec. 3,
• Definition: Refers to telephone conversations,
text messages, chatroom sessions, streaming
audio, streaming video and other electronic
• It shall govern the examination of child
forms of communication the evidence of which
witnesses who are victims of crime, accused of
is not recorded/retained. [Rule 2, Sec. 1(k),
a crime, and witnesses to crime. It shall apply
in all criminal proceedings and non-criminal
• It shall be proven by the testimony of a person
proceedings involving child witnesses. [Sec. 1]
who was a party to the same or has personal
• The ROC provisions on deposition, conditional
knowledge thereof. In the absence or
examination of witnesses and evidence shall be
unavailability of such witnesses, other
applied suppletorily. [Sec. 32]
competent evidence may be admitted. [Rule

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 89 of 227


especially the right to counsel and to

CHILD WITNESS confront and cross-examine the child, shall
not be violated during the deposition.
• Definition: [Sec. 4(a)]
1) Any person who at the time of giving WHEN TO TAKE THE CHILD’S TESTIMONY
testimony is < 18 years; • The court may order that the testimony of the
2) In child abuse cases, A child includes one child should be taken during a time of day
over 18 years but is found by the court as when the child is well-rested. [Sec. 14]
unable to fully take care of himself or
protect himself from abuse/neglect/cruelty/ PROVISIONS FOR EASE OF CHILD IN
exploitation/discrimination because of a TESTIFYING
physical/mental disability or condition.
• Every child is presumed qualified to be a 1) Interpreter for child. [Sec. 9]
witness. To rebut the presumption of 2) Facilitator to pose questions to child. [Sec. 10]
competence enjoyed by a child, the burden of 3) Support persons. [Sec. 11]
proof lies on the party challenging his • A child testifying at a judicial proceeding or
competence. [Sec. 6(b)] making a deposition shall have the right to
• When the court finds that substantial doubt be accompanied by 1 or 2 persons of his
exists regarding the ability of the child to own choosing to provide him emotional
perceive/remember/communicate, distinguish support.
truth from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to 4) Waiting area for child witnesses that is
tell the truth in court, a competency exam shall separate from waiting areas used by other
be conducted. persons. [Sec. 12]
• The age of the child by itself is not a 5) Courtroom environment is made a more
sufficient basis for a competency comfortable environment for the child. [Sec.
examination. [Sec. 6(a)] 13]
• The court has the duty of continuously 6) Recess during testimony: The child may be
assessing the competence of the child allowed reasonable periods of relief while
throughout his testimony. [Sec. 6(f)] undergoing direct, cross, re-direct, and re-cross
examinations as often as necessary depending
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC DURING THE on his developmental level. [Sec. 15]
CHILD’S EXAMINATION 7) Testimonial aids: use of dolls, anatomically-
correct dolls, puppets, drawings, mannequins,
• Rationale: or any other appropriate demonstrative device
1) To protect the right to the child’s privacy; to assist him in his testimony. [Sec. 16]
2) If the court determines on the record that 8) Emotional security item: While testifying, a
requiring the child to testify in open court child shall be allowed to have an item of his
would cause psychological harm to him, own choosing such as a blanket/toy/doll. [Sec.
hinder the ascertainment of truth, or result 17]
in his inability to effectively communicate 9) Conduct in questioning the witness: The court
due to embarrassment/fear/timidity. shall exercise control over the questioning of
children so as to: [Sec. 19]
a) Facilitate the ascertainment of the truth;
b) Ensure that questions are stated in a form
TESTIMONY appropriate to the child’s developmental
1) Live-link television testimony, in criminal cases c) Protect children from harassment or undue
where the child is a victim or a witness. [Sec. embarrassment;
25] d) Avoid waste of time.
• The court may order that the testimony of • The court may allow the child witness to
the child be taken by live-link television if testify in a narrative form.
there is a substantial likelihood that the 10) Weight given to testimony of child witness: His
child would suffer trauma from testifying in testimony, if credible by itself, shall be
the presence of the accused, his counsel or sufficient to support a finding of
the prosecutor. The trauma must be of a fact/conclusion/judgment subject to the
kind which would impair the standard of proof required in criminal and non-
completeness/truthfulness of the child’s criminal cases. [Sec. 22]
• If it is necessary for the child to identify the HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE
accused at trial, the court may allow the
child to enter the courtroom for the limited
CASES [Sec. 28]
purpose of identifying the accused, or the
court may allow the child to identify the • Before the hearsay statement may beadmitted,
accused by observing the image of the its proponent shall make known to the adverse
latter on a television monitor. party the intention to offer such statement and
2) Screens, one-way mirrors and other devices to its particulars to provide him a fair opportunity
shield child from accused. [Sec. 26] to object.
3) Videotaped deposition. [Sec. 27] • If the child is available, the court shall
• If the court finds that the child will not be require the child to be present at the
able to testify in open court at trial, it shall presentation of the hearsay statement for
issue an order that the deposition of the cross-examination by the adverse party.
child be taken and preserved by videotape. • If the child is unavailable, the fact of
• The rights of the accused during trial, unavailability must be proved by the
proponent and his hearsay testimony shall

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 90 of 227


be admitted only if corroborated by other

admissible evidence.


• General rule: The following evidence are

inadmissible in any criminal proceeding
involving alleged child sexual abuse:
1) Evidence offered to prove that the alleged
victim engaged in other sexual behavior;
2) Evidence offered to prove the sexual
predisposition of the alleged victim.
• Exception: Evidence of specific instances
of sexual behavior by the alleged victim to
prove that a person other than the accused
was the source of semen, injury or other
physical evidence shall be admissible.


• Video/audio tapes that are part of the court

record may be viewed only by parties, their
counsel, their expert witness and the guardian
ad litem. But they cannot divulge the tape (or
any portion thereof) to any other person,
except as necessary for the trial.
• The court may issue additional orders to protect
the child’s privacy.
• Publication (or causing it) in any format any
identifying information of a child who is or is
alleged to be a victim/accused of a crime or a
witness thereof, or an immediate family of the
child, shall be liable for contempt of court.
• A child has a right at any court proceeding not
to testify regarding personal identifying
information that could endanger his physical
safety or his family. However, the court may
require the child to testify regarding personal
identifying information in the interest of justice.
• The records of a youthful offender shall be
considered as privileged and may not be
disclosed in/directly to anyone for any purpose
• Exception: If he has been charged and the
court acquits him, or dismisses the case or
commits him to an institution and
subsequently releases him pursuant to
Chapt. 3, PD 603:
1) To determine if he may have his
sentence suspended (under Art. 192,
PD 603);
2) To determine if he may be granted
probation (under PD 968);
3) To enforce his civil liability, if said
liability has been imposed in the
criminal action.

100% UP LAW UP BAROPS 2008 Page 91 of 227