Evidence 2003

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER
1 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY BAR OPERATIONS
prove its contents in some authentic document, or by

testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (Sec. 5;
EVIDENCE People vs. Dismuke, 53 SCAD 182, G.R. No. 108453,
July 11, 1994).
Rule 130 Q: When may secondary evidence be shown if

RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY the original of a document is in the possession of the adverse
party.
A: If the document is in the custody or under the control
of the adverse party, he must have reasonable notice
1. Best Evidence Rule to produce it. If after such notice and after satisfactory
proof of its existence, he fails to produce the
Q: State the best evidence rule. document, secondary evidence may be presented as
A: When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a in the case of its loss. (Sec. 6).
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than
the original document itself. (Sec. 3) Q: How may a public document be proved?
A: When the original of a document is in the custody of a
Q: The rule is that, no evidence shall be public officer or is recorded in a public office, its
admissible other than the document itself. Are there exceptions? contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by
A: Yes, and they are: the public officer in custody thereof. (Sec. 7).
(a) When the original has been lost or destroyed, or
cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on Q: During the trial, X moved for the production
the part of the offeror; of a document. Is it obligatory for him to offer it in evidence?
(b) When the original is in the custody or under the A: No. A party who calls for the production of a document
control of the party against whom the evidence is and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as
offered, and the latter fails to produce it after evidence. (Sec. 8)
reasonable notice;
(c) When the original consists of numerous accounts
or other documents which cannot be examined in 3. Parol Evidence Rule
court without great loss of time and the fact
sought to be established from them is only the Q: State the rule when the terms of the agreement are
general result of the whole; and put to writing.
(d) When the original is a public record in the A: When the terms of an agreement have been reduced
custody of a public officer or is recorded in a to writing, it is considered as containing all the terms
public office. (Sec. 3). agreed upon and there can be, between the parties
and their successors-in-interest, no evidence of such
Q: What are considered originals of a document? terms other than the contents of the written
A: They are: agreement. (Sec. 9).
(a) When the original of a document is one the
contents of which are the subject of inquiry; Q: Under what circumstances may a party
(b) When a document is in two or more copies present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of
executed at or about the same time, with identical the written agreement?
contents, all such copies are equally regarded as A: A party may present evidence to modify, explain or
originals; add to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in
(c) When an entry is repeated in the regular course issue in his pleading:
of business, one being copied from another at or (a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in
near the time of the transaction, all the entries the written agreement;
are likewise equally regarded as originals. (Sec. (b) The failure of the written agreement to express
4). the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto;
Q: State the extent of applicability of the best (c) The validity of the written agreement; or
evidence rule. (d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the
A: It is only applied to prove the contents of a document, parties or their successors-in-interest after the
but not the truth thereof. It prohibits the evidence of execution of the written agreement.
the contents of a document other than the original, The term agreement includes wills. (Sec. 9).
unless the contents are the subjects of inquiry.
Q: A contract of sale of a motor vehicle was entered
into between A and B. Later on, a controversy
2. Secondary Evidence arose where the seller contended that there was
actually no consideration in the sale and that the
Q: How may the original of a lost or destroyed deed was merely a security for the time deposit
document be proved? placements of the buyers relatives with the bank.
A: When the original document has been lost or May the deed of sale be proved or altered by parol
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, evidence? Why?
upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause A: No. It is a well-accepted principle of law that evidence
of its unavailability without bad faith on his part, may of a prior or contemporaneous verbal agreement is
Prepared by the REMEDIAL LAW SECTION Chief CHRISTIAN PAUL ULPINDO Assistant Chief MAGDALENA ERFE Members YVONNE
BINWAG, SHARON BANAGEN, CHARLES JAVIER CALAPINI, BRIAN CRISPIN, QUOINA GABOL, RAYMOND MENDOZA, RUSSEL
SABADO, MICHELLE EXIOMO and ANA MAY CORPUZ. All Rights Reserved by the SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW
BAR OPERATIONS 2003.
generally not admissible to vary, contradict or defeat at all in the writing unless there has been fraud or
the opration of a valid instrument. (American Factors mistake, (Dela Rama vs. Ledesma).
[Phils.] Inc. vs. CA, Tire Corporation, et al., [CA] 49
O.G. 189; Ortanez vs. CA, 78 SCAD 261, et al., G.R. Q: X sold his house and lot with right to repurchase
No. 107372, Jan. 23, 1997). to Y. Can he prove it to be one of sale with
While parol evidence is admissible in a variety of ways mortgage?
to explain the meaning of written contracts, it cannot A: Yes. Even when a document appears on its face to be
serve the purpose of incorporating into the contracts sale with pacto de retro, the owner of the property
additional contemporaneous conditions which are not may prove that the contract is really a loan with
mentioned at all in the writing, unless there has been mortgage by raising as an issue the fact that the
fraud or mistake. (Yu Tek & Co. vs Gonzales, 29 Phil. document does not express the true intent and
384; see also De La Rama vs. Ledesma, 143 SCRA agreement of parties. In this case, parol evidence then
[1986]. becomes competent and admissible to prove that the
In one case, the petitioner failed to produce any instrument was in truth and in fact given merely as a
instrument or written document which would prove that security for the payment of the loan. And upon proof of
the deed of sale in question was only a security for the the truth of such allegations, the court will enforce the
time deposit placements of respondents relatives in agreement of the aprties at the time of the execution
the petitioner bank. The two (2) main witnesses for the of the contract. This principle is applicable even if the
petitioner, namely, Messrs. Eudela and Pangilinan, purported sale on pacto de retro was registered in the
were not mere employees of the bank. They were name of the transferee and a new certificate of title
bank officers; one being a lawyer (Pangilinan), and was issued in the name of the latter. (Olea vs. CA, et
supposed to be equipped in legal and banking al., 61 SCAD 100, G.R. No. 117389, May 11, 1995).
knowledge and practices. As such, they were
expected to know the consequences of their act of Q: What is the extent of the applicability of the parol
signing a document which outrightly transferred evidence rule?
ownership over the subject vehicle in favor of A: The parol evidence rule applies to an agreement in
respondent Santos. They could have incorporated in writing, regardless of whether the written contract is a
the deed of sale (if such was the intention or public or private document. (Inciong, Jr. vs. CA, et al.,
agreement of the parties) a stipulation that transfer of 71 SCAD 287, G.R. No.96405, June 26, 1996).
ownership and registration of the vehicle in Santos
name were conditioned on the failure of his relatives
to recover their time deposit placements in petitioner
bank. No such stipulation was incorporated in the
deed of sale which was an outright and unconditional
transfer of ownership of the motor vehicle to
respondent Santos. (Pioneer Savings and Loan Bank
vs. CA, et al.,45 SCAD 25, G.R. No. 105419, Sept.
27,1993).
Q: May parol evidence be presented to show that one

party was defrauded into signing it?
A: Yes. Parol evidence is admissible to show that a
contract was fraudulently misread to one not able to
read and write and that he was by such fraud indeed
to give his signature that were it not for the
misrepresentation, he would not have signed the
document. (De la Cruz vs. Capinpin).
Q: State the reason why parol evidence is

inadmissible to vary the terms of a contract?
A: This is so because spoken words could be notoriously
unreliable, unlike a written contract which speaks of a
uniform language. (De Leon vs. CA, 204 SCRA 612;
Abella vs. CA, 71 SCAD 210, G.R. No.107606, June
20, 1996).
Q: May parol evidence be presented to show prior or

contemporaneous acts or agreements to vary
transaction?
A: As a rule, no. It is a well-accepted rule that evidence is
inadmissible to vary, contradict, or defeat the
operation of a valid transaction. While parol evidence
is admissible in a variety of ways to explain the
meaning of written contracts, it cannot serve the
purpose of incorporating into the contract additional
contemporaneous conditions which are not mentioned
RULE 131 Generally, a negative allegation need not be proved.

However, it must be proved when, in a civil action, it is an
BURDEN OF PROOF AND essential part of the cause of action or, in a criminal action, it is
PRESUMPTIONS an essential element of the crime alleged.
` BURDEN OF PROOF ( onus probandi ) DEFINED: People vs Tiozon

198 S 368
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim There being no proof that accused-appellant had no
or defense by the amount of evidence required by law license to possess the firearm in question, he could not be
( sec. 1 Rule 131 ) convicted for illegal possession of firearm.
Although proof of the existence or non existence of
` BURDEN OF EVIDENCE DEFINED: such license can, with more facility, be adduced by the
defendant, it is nevertheless, incumbent upon the party alleging
Burden of evidence is the duty of a party, at any the want of the license to prove the allegation. Naturally, as the
particular time during the trial, to create a prima facie case in subject matter of the averment is one which lies peculiarly within
his favor, or to overthrow one when created against him. the control or knowledge of the accused, prima facie evidence
thereof on the part of the prosecution shall suffice to cast the
BURDEN OF PROOF & BURDEN OF EVIDENCE, onus upon him.
DISTINGUISHED:
BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF People vs Manalo
EVIDENCE 230 S 309
-never shifts -shifts to 1 party when
-determined by the the other party has ISSUE: Accused-appellant maintains that since the
pleadings created a prima facie absence of a license or authority is an essential ingredient of
-a legal presumption case the crime ( violation of the anti-drug law ), proof of such
creates the necessity of -determined by the negative allegation should have been presented by the
presenting evidence to progress of the trial prosecution.
meet the prima facie case -a legal presumption HELD: The negative averment that the accused had
creates a prima facie no license or authority to sell shabu has been fairly indicated by
case & shifts burden of the following circumstances, deduced from and established by
evidence to the other the testimony of the arresting officers, viz: the accused was
party caught selling shabu not in a hospital or pharmacy at an
unholy hour xxxxxxxx. She delivered the drug to the poseur-
buyer. Proof of these circumstances thus shifted the onus on the
` PRIMA FACIE CASE DEFINED: accused. She could have verily disproved these damning
circumstances by mere presentation of a copy of her license.
A prima facie case is one which is supported by
sufficient evidence and will support a finding in the absence of People vs Mesal
evidence to controvert it. 244 S 166
WHO HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF? The presentation of either the testimony of a
representative of , or a certification from the PNP Firearms &
In civil cases, the burden of proof rests upon the party Explosives Unit, may be dispensed with to prove illegal
who will fail if he offers no evidence competent to show the fact possession of firearm where other evidence firmly and
averred as the basis for the relief he seeks to obtain. undisputably established that the accused did not have, and
In criminal cases, the burden of proof is on the could not possibly have, the requisite license or authority to
prosecution to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the essential possess a rifle which only military men are authorized to
elements of the offense with which the accused is charged. possess.
WHAT MATTERS NEED BE PROVED? People vs Mendi

19 Feb. 2001
As a general rule, all facts in issue and relevant facts
must be proved by evidence. Appellant must be acquitted for failure of the
prosecution to prove the 2nd element of the offense which is non-
WHAT MATTERS NEED NOT BE PROVED? possession of a license.
People vs Mesal is inapplicable as the firearm
The following classes of facts need not be proved: involved in this case, a .38 cal. Smith & Wesson paltik
i. those within the judicial notice of revolver, is not one exclusively issued to the military.
courts
ii. those admitted
iii. those legally presumed PRESUMPTION DEFINED:
MUST A NEGATIVE ALLEGATION BE PROVED? A presumption is an inference of the existence or non-

existence of some fact which common sense draws from the
connection, relations and coincidence of facts and

circumstances with each other.
Sec. 3 Rule 131 ( a kk ) enumerates the disputable

CLASSES OF PRESUMPTIONS: presumptions; those that are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but
may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence.
A. Presumption ` juris or of law a deduction which the law
considers as established from facts proven.
B. Presumption hominis or of fact a deduction or
inference which reason or experience draws Discussions on some of the disputable presumptions:
from other facts proved.
a.) that a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
CLASSES OF PRESUMPTION JURIS: The accused is presumed innocent until the contrary
is proved by the prosecution. If the prosecution fails, it
A. Conclusive Presumption or Presumption et de Jure that fails utterly, even if the defense is weak or even if
whish is not permitted to be overcome by any proof to the there is no defense at all. ( People v Castro 4 Oct.
contrary, however strong. 1989 )
B. Disputable Presumption or Presumption Juris Tantum
that which suffices until overcome by contrary evidence. If the evidence gives rise to 2 possibilities, one
consistent with the defendants innocence and another
WHAT ARE THE INSTANCES OF CONCLUSIVE indicative of his guilt, that which favors the accused
PRESUMPTIONS? should be considered. ( People v Go 142 S 238 )
The following are instances of conclusive b.) that an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
presumptions: A crime is not committed if the mind of the person
1. Equitable estoppel or estoppel in pais and performing the act complained of be innocent.
2. Estoppel by deed ie. against tenant
c.) that a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
WHAT IS THE RULE ON EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL OR In the absence of proof tending to show the contrary,
ESTOPPEL IN PAIS? where a person is killed by an accident to which there
are no eyewitnesses, the presumption of the law is
The Rule is that whenever a party has, by his own that he was in the exercise of due care.
declaration, act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led
another to believe a particular thing true, and to act upon such d.) that evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if
belief, he cannot in any litigation arising out of such declaration, produced;This presumption is INAPPLICABLE where:
act or omission, be permitted to falsify it. ( sec. 2(a) Rule 131 ) i. the evidence is at the disposal of
both parties
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE? ii. the suppression was not willful
iii. the evidence suppressed was
The Rule is based on grounds of public policy and merely corroborative or cumulative
good faith, it being intended to afford protection against injustice iv. the suppression is an exercise of a
and fraud by denying to a person the right to repudiate his acts, privilege
admissions or representations which have been relied on by the
person to whom they were directed and whose conduct they
were intended to, and did, influence.
WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF ESTOPPEL IN PAIS?
1. there must have been a representation or

concealment of material facts;
2. the representation must have been made with
knowledge of the facts;
3. the party to whom the representation was made
must have been ignorant of the truth of the
matter; and
4. the representation must have been with intention
that the other party would act upon it.
WHAT IS THE RULE ON ESTOPPEL AGAINST TENANT? RULE 132
The Rule is that the tenant is not permitted to deny the

PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
title of his landlord at the time of the commencement of the EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
relation of landlord and tenant between them. ( sec. 2(b) Rule
131 )
Section 1. Examination to be done in open court. the law providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired
property; and under P.D. 749 in prosecutions for bribery and
How may the examination of a witness be done/ How oral graft.
evidence is given?
Classification of Immunity Statutes
Answer: The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or Use immunity prohibits use of witness compelled
hearing shall be done in open court and under oath or testimony and its fruit in any manner in connection
affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the with the criminal prosecution despite invocation of
question calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the rights against self-incrimination.
witness shall be given orally.
: It is usually given orally, in open court. Therefore, generally Transactional Immunity grants immunity to the
the testimonies of witness cannot be presented in affidavit. witness from prosecution for an offense to which his
-One instance when the testimonies of witnesses may be given compelled testimony relates.
in affidavits is under the rule on summary procedure.
NOTE: For purposes of evidence, Right against self
PURPOSE: to enable the court to judge the credibility of the incrimination refers to testimonial compulsion.
witness by the witness manner of testifying their intelligence Right against self-incrimination is granted only in favor
and their appearance. of individuals; hence, a corporation cannot invoke that
privilege as the question testimony can come only
The form and nature of the questions that may and may not be from a corporate officer or employee who has a
propounded to a witness are as follows: personality distinct from that of the corporation.
Right against self-incrimination extends to
Questions must not be indefinite or uncertain; administrative proceedings with a criminal or penal
Questions must be relevant; aspect.
Questions must not be argumentative; Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his
Questions must not call for conclusion of law; reputation, unless it be to the very fact at issue or to a
Questions must not call for opinion or hearsay evidence; fact from which the fact at issue would be presumed.
Questions must not call for illegal answer; But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous
Questions must not call for self-incriminating testimony; final conviction for an offense.
Questions must not be leading
Questions must not tend to degrade reputation of witness; WITNESS PROTECTION SECURITY AND BENEFIT ACT RA
Questions must not be repetitious 6981:
NOTE: The testimony of a witness in court cannot be SEC.10 State Witness - person who has participated in the
considered self-serving since ha can be subjected to cross- commission of a crime and desires to be a witness for the state
examination. Self-serving evidence is one made out of court shall be admitted into the program whenever the following
and is excluded on the same ground as hearsay evidence. An circumstances are present:
instance would be; The deprivation of a witness to the right of 1) the offense in which his testimony will be used is a
cross-examination. grave felony as defined under RPC or its equivalent
under special laws;
Section 3: Rights and Obligations of a witness 2) absolute necessity for his testimony;
3) there is no direct evidence available for the proper
What are the rights of a witness? prosecution of the offense committed;
4) his testimony can be substantially corroborated on its
Answer: The rights of a Witness are: involving moral turpitude;
5) he does not appear to be the most guilty; and
1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or 6) he has not at any time been convicted of any crime
insulting questions, and from harsh or involving moral turpitude.
insulting demeanor;
2) Not to be detained longer than the interests SEC.11 Sworn Statement - before any person is admitted into
of justice require; the program he shall execute a sworn statement describing in
3) Not to be examined except only as to detail the manner the offense was committed and his
matters pertinent to the issue; participation therein.
4) Not to give an answer which will tend to If his application is denied, said sworn statement and
subject him to a penalty for an offense other testimony given in support of said application shall not be
unless otherwise provided by law; admissible in evidence, except for impeachment purposes.
5) Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it be to the SEC. 12 Effect of admission of a state witness into the
very fact at issue or to a fact from which the program The certification of admission into the program by
fact in issue would be presumed. But a the department shall be given full faith and credit by the
witness must answer to the fact of his provincial or city prosecutor who is required not to include the
previous final conviction for an offense. witness in a criminal complaint or information and if included
therein to petition the court for his discharge in order that he can
NOTE: The exception refers to immunity statutes wherein the be utilized as a state witness..
witness is granted immunity from criminal prosecution for
offenses admitted in his testimony, e.g. under Sec. 8, R.A. 1379,
Admission into the program shall entitle such state witness was extensively cross-examined on the material points
witness to immunity from criminal prosecution for the offense in and thereafter failed to appear and cannot be produced despite
which his testimony will be given and used. a warrant for his arrest.
SEC. 13 Failure or Refusal of the Witness to Testify Failure

without just cause when lawfully obliged to do so, shall be PARTY CALLING THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES ARE NOT
prosecuted fro contempt. If he testifies falsely or evasively, he BOUND BY THEIR TESTIMONY:
shall be liable for perjury. His immunity shall be removed and he
shall be subject to contempt or criminal prosecution. 1) adverse party;
2) hostile witness;
Must a witness answer any question asked? 3) unwilling witness.
Answer: Yes, a witness must answer questions, although his Hostile witness- a witness may be considered as unwilling or
answer may tend to establish a claim against him. (Sec. 3) hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing
of:
Section 4. Order in the examination of an individual witness a) his adverse interest
b) unjustified reluctance to testify
State the order of examination of an individual witness. c) or his having mislead the party into calling him to the
witness stand.
Answer: The order of examination of an individual witness may
be examined is as follows: Section 9. Recalling witness
a) Direct examination by the GENERAL RULE: After the examination of a witness by both
proponent; sides has been concluded, the witness cannot be recalled
b) Cross-examination by the without leave of court.
opponent;
c) Re-direct examination by the EXCEPTION:
proponent; 1) The examination has not been concluded; and
d) Re-cross examination by the 2) recall has nor been expressly reserved with the approval of
opponent. (Sec.4) the court.
PURPOSES OF CROSS-EXAMINATION Section 10. Leading and Misleading questions

1. To discredit the witness;
2. To discredit the testimony of the witness; What is a leading question?
3. To clarify certain matters; Answer: Questions which suggest to the witness the answer
4. To elicit admissions from a witness. which the examining party desires.
SCOPE OR LIMITS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION: May a leading Question be allowed?

1. ENGLISH RULE-where a witness is called to testify to Answer: As a rule, leading questions may not be allowed. But
a particular fact, he becomes a witness for all there are exceptions like:
purposes and may be fully cross-examined upon all a) on cross examination;
matters material to the issue, the examination not b) on preliminary matters;
being confined to the matters inquired about in the c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible
direct examination. answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a child of
2. AMERICAN RULE-restricts cross-examination to facts tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
and circumstances which are connected with the d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
matters that have been stated in the direct e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer,
examination of the witness. director, or managing agent of a public or private
corporation or of a partnership or association which is
Under Philippine Jurisdiction, we follow the two rules, an adverse party. (Sec. 10)
specifically under the following instances:
In civil cases, we follow the English Rule, Under the rule on examination of a child
which allows the cross-examination to elicit witness, corroboration shall not be required
all important facts bearing upon the issue of a testimony of a child. His testimony, if
(Sec. 6), but this does not mean that a party credible by itself, shall be sufficient to
by doing so is making the witness his own in support a finding of fact, conclusion, or
accordance with Section 5. judgment subject to the standard of proof
In two instances we follow the American required in criminal and non-criminal cases
Rule, 1) the accused may only be cross- (Sec. 22 of the Rule on examination of a
examined on matters covered by direct child witness)
examination 2) hostile witness.
When cross-examination cannot be done or completed

due to causes attributable to the party who offered the witness, What is a Misleading question?
the incomplete testimony is rendered incompetent and should
be stricken from the record. Except where the prosecution
Answer: one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by Answer: As a rule, no. Evidence of the good character of a
the witness or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It witness is not admissible until such character has been
is NOT allowed. impeached. (Sec. 14)
Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum.

Only one counsel should be allowed to examine a
witness in a single stage. However, the other counsel REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY/PRESENT RECOLECTION
may make objection to testimony. REVIVED-a witness may be allowed to refresh his memory
REASONS: respecting a fact, by anything written or recorded by himself or
1) To protect the witness from undue and under his direction as the time when the fact occurred, or
confusing interrogation; and immediately thereafter.
2) To secure system and brevity by giving the
control of the interrogation to a single hand. PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED/REVIVAL OF PAST
RECOLLECTION- a witness may also testify from such writing
When Questions preliminary? or record, though he retains no recollection of the particular
Answer: When the question does not touch on any issue. facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly
stated the transaction when made, but such evidence must be
A question that merely suggests a subject without received with caution.
suggesting an answer or a specific thing is not a leading
question. Example: State whether anything occurred between PRESENT MEMORY PAST RECOLLECTION
you and the defendants on the evening of January 9, 1913. REVIVED RECORDED
Memory is obscure but Recollection is zero
Section 11. Impeachment of adverse partys witness. there is still memory
The main evidence is the The main evidence is the
WAYS OF IMPEACHING ADVERSE PARTYS WITNESS: testimony of the witness memorandum
1) By contradictory evidence; and the memorandum
2) By evidence that the general reputation for truth, The witness simply Witness must swear that the
honesty, or integrity of the witness is bad; or
testifies that he knows that writing correctly states the
3) By prior inconsistent statements.
the memorandum is transaction.
correctly written by him or
PROCEDURE FOR IMPEACHING WITNESS BY EVIDENCE
under his direction; no
OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS (LAYING THE
need to swear.
PREDICATE)
1. The statement must be related to him with the
The memorandum from which the witness may be
circumstances of the times and places and the
persons present; permitted to refresh his memory need not be an original
- if the statement be in writing they must be writing. It is sufficient if it is shown that the witness knows
shown to the witness before any question is the copy to be a true one, and his memory refreshed
put to him concerning them; and thereby enables him to testify from his own recollection of
2. He must be asked whether he made such statements, the facts, independent of his confidence in the accuracy of
and if so, allowed to explain it. the copy.
NOTE: Where the previous statements of a witness are offered State the rule when part of an act, declaration or writing is
as evidence of an admission, and not merely to impeach him, given in evidence by one party
the rule on laying the predicate does not apply. Answer: When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing
or record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the
May a party impeach his own witness? same subject may be inquired into by the other, and when a
Answer: As a rule no, except, if the witness is an unwilling or detached act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is
hostile witness or if the witness is an adverse party or an officer, given in evidence, any other act, declaration, conversation,
director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation or writing or record necessary to its understanding may also be
of a partnership or association which is an adverse party. given in evidence. (Sec. 17)
(Sec.12)
State the nature of the rule falsus in uno, falsus in
Section 13. How witness impeached by evidence of omnibus
inconsistent statements. Answer: The rule does nor really lay down a categorical test of
credibility. (People vs. Manalasan, 189 SCRA 619; See also
In case of a hostile witness People vs. Letigo, etal., G.R.No. 112968, Feb. 13, 1997). It is
Where the witness is the adverse party or the representative of not a positive rule of law or of universal application. It should not
a judicial person which is the adverse party; and be applied to portions of the testimony corroborated by other
When the witness is not voluntarily offered but is required by law evidence, particularly where the false portions could be innocent
to be presented by the proponent as in the case of subscribing mistakes. Moreover, the rule is not mandatory but merely
witness. sanctions a disregard of the testimony of a witness if the
circumstances so warrant. To completely disregard all the
May evidence of good moral character of an accused be testimony of a witness on this ground, his testimony must have
presented? been false on material point and the witness must have a
conscious and deliberate intention to falsify a material point.
It has been held that as long as the mass of testimony 2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public
jibes on material points, the slight clashing statements dilute except last wills and testimonies; and
neither the credibility nor the veracity of the testimony. 3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
Inconsistencies and contradictions on minor details do not documents required by law to be entered therein.
impair the credibility of witnesses as they are but natural they
even enhance credibility as these discrepancies indicate that the How may a private document be proved before it is
response are honest and unrehearsed. (People vs. Pacapac, et admitted in evidence?
al., 63 SCAD 173, G.R. No. 90623, Sept. 7. 1995) Answer: Before any private document offered as authentic is
received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be
What are the components of identification testimony? proved either:
Answer: Identification testimony has at least three (3) a) by anyone who saw the document executed or written;
components(which may be the causes of misidentification): or
1) Witnessing a crime, whether as a victim or a b) by evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
bystander, involves perception of an event actually handwriting of the maker.
occurring; Any other private document need only be
2) The witness must memorize details of the event; and identified as that which it is claimed to be. (Sec. 20)
3) The witness must be able to recall and communicate
accurately.
Danger of unreliability in eyewitness testimony arises PUBLIC WRITING DISTINGUISHED FROM PRIVATE
at each of these three stages, for whenever people WRITING:
attempt to acquire, retain and retrieve information
accurately, they are limited by normal human
fallibilities and suggestive influences. (People vs. PUBLIC WRITING PRIVATE WRITING
Teehankee, 64 SCAD 808, G.R. Nos.111206-08, Oct
6, 1995)
As to a public a private writing
authenticity document is must be proved
What are the ways of out-court identification of suspects admissible relative to its due
conducted by the police? evidence, execution and
Answer: without further genuineness-its
1) Show-ups, where the suspect alone is brought face to proof of its authenticity before
face with the witness for identification. genuineness and it may be received
2) Mug shots, where the photographs are shown to the due execution in evidence.
witness to identify the suspect; and As to a public a private writing
3) Line-ups, where a witness identifies the suspect from persons instrument is binds only the
a group of persons lined up for the purpose of bound evidence even parties who
identification. (People vs. Teehankee, supra.) against third executed them or
persons, of the their privies insofar
fact which gave as due execution
rise to its due and date of the
Section 17. When part of transaction, writing or record execution and to document are
given in evidence, the remainder admissible. the date of the concerned.
latter
RULE ON COMPLETENESS: When Part of an act, declaration, As to validity certain
conversation, writing or record is given in evidence by one party, of certain transactions must
the whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the other, transactions be in a public
and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing, or document,
record is given in evidence, any other act, declaration, otherwise they will
conversation, writing or recode necessary may also be given in not be given any
evidence. validity
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS The following are private writings which may be admitted in
evidence without previous proof of its authenticity and due
Section 19. Classes of documents. execution:
AUTHENTICATION-PROVING the due execution and 1. When the genuineness and due execution of the
genuineness of the document. document is admitted by the adverse party;
2. When such genuineness and due execution are
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS: immaterial to the issue;
For the purpose of their presentation in evidence, 3. When the document is an ANCIENT DOCUMENT.
documents are either in public or private (Sec. 19).
NOTE: Ancient Document Rule applies only if there are no other
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS: witnesses to determine authenticity.
1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts
of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, RULE 130, Sec. 34
and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a
foreign country; When may previous conduct or act be received in evidence?
When they are offered to prove a specific intent or pedigree includes relationship, family genealogy, birth,
knowledge, identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or marriage, death, the dates when and the places where
usage, and the like. (Sec. 34, Rule 130) these facts occurred, and the names of the relatives.
It embraces also facts of family history intimately
If an offer to pay money in writing is rejected without valid cause, connected with pedigree.
what is the rule?
An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or
to deliver a written instrument or specific personal property is, if 4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree- the
rejected without valid cause, equivalent to the actual production reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to
and tender of the money, instrument, or property. (Sec. 35, Rule the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one
130) of its members, may be received in evidence if the
witness, testifying thereon be also a member of the
What is the Hearsay Rule? family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in
A witness can testify only to those facts which he family bibles or other family books or charts,
knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are derived engravings on rings, family portraits and the like, may
from his own perception, except as provided in the rules. be received as evidence of pedigree.
What is hearsay evidence? 5. Common reputation- Common reputation existing

Hearsay derived not through the perception of the previous to the controversy, respecting facts of public
person testifying but acquired through information from others. or general interest more than 30 years old, or
respecting marriage or moral character, may be given
Are there exceptions to the Hearsay Rule? in evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public
Yes. They are: places may be received as evidence of common
1. Dying declaration- the declaration of a dying person, reputation.
made under the consciousness of an impending
death, may be received in any case wherein his death
is the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and 6. Part of res gestae- statements made by a person
surrounding circumstances of such death. while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior to or subsequent thereto with
To be admissible in evidence, respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in
what are the requisites that must be present evidence as part of the res gestae. So, also,
for dying declaration to be admissible in statements accompanying an equivocal act material to
evidence the issue, and giving it a legal significance, may be
The dying declaration must: received as part of re gestae.
a.. concern the cause and surrounding
circumstances of the 7. Entries in the course of business- entries made at, or
declarants death near the time of the transactions to which they refer,
b. that at the time it was made, the by a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in
declarant was under a consciousness a position to know the facts therein stated, may be
of impending death received as prima facie evidence, if such person made
c. that he was a competent witness the entries in his professional capacity or in the
d. that his declaration is offered in performance of duty and in the ordinary or regular
evidence in a criminal case for course of business or duty.
homicide, murder or parricide in which
the declarant is the victim; and
e. the declaration must be complete 8. Entries in official records- entries in official records
A dying declaration may be made in the performance of his duty by a public officer
oral or written of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance
of a duty specially enjoined by la, are prima facie
2. Declaration against interest- the declaration made by evidence of the facts therein stated.
a person deceased, or unable to testify, against the
interest of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the 9. commercial lists and the like- evidence of statements
declaration was at the time it was made so far of matters of interest to persons engaged in an
contrary to declarants own interest, that a reasonable occupation contained in alist, register, periodical or
man in his position would not have made the other published compilation is admissible as tending
declaration unless he believed it to be true, may be to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated if
received in evidence against himself or his successors that compilation is published for use by persons
in interest and against third persons. engaged in that occupation and is generally used and
relied upon by them therein.
3. Act or declaration about pedigree- the act or
declaration of a person deceased, or unable to testify, 10.Learned treatises- a published treaties, periodical or
in respect to the pedigree of another person related to pamphlet on
him by birth or marriage, may be received in evidence a subject of history, law, science, or art is admissible
where it occurred before the controversy, and the as tending to
relationship between the two persons is shown by prove the truth of a matter stated therein if the court
evidence other than such act or declaration. The word takes judicial
notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, that

the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or HEARSAY EVIDENCE RULE
pamphlet is recognized in his profession or calling as
expert in the subject. A witness can testify only to those facts which he
knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are derived
11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding- the from his own perception, except as otherwise provided in these
testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or unable to rules.
testify, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or Thus,hearsay evidence is inadmissible.
administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter,
may be given in evidence against the adverse party who had the REASON FOR THE RULE
opportunity to cross examine him.
The declarant is not present and available for cross-
What is the Opinion Rule-the opinion of a witness is examination in violation of the other partys right to confront and
not admissible. Is this absolute? No, there are exceptions and cross-examine the witness.
they are the following:
1. If the witness is an expert FORM OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE
2. if witness is an ordinary witness, it may be
received in evidence only on matters May be oral/verbal or in writing.
regarding:
i. the identity of a person about
whom he has adequate
knowledge Q: Private Respondent Corporation was chartered by
ii. a handwriting with which he has Petitioner Corporation to transport copper concentrates.
sufficient familiarity and The cargo was loaded on board at Poro Point, San
iii. the mental sanity of a person with Fernando, La Union and unloaded in Japan. An alleged
whom he is sufficiently shortage was reported. Petitioner made a claim for loss
acquainted. which respondent refused to pay. Thus, this suit for
The witness may also testify on his impressions of the damages. The issue here is whether or not petitioners
emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a witnesses had personal knowledge of the actual weight of
person. copper concentrate loaded on the vessel and discharged in
Japan.
Is character Evidence admissible?
As a rule, no. The exceptions are; ANS.: No, they did not have such personal knowledge.
a. In criminal cases: Lumibao, the marketing assistant of Pet. Corporation had no
i. the accused may prove his good moral part in the preparation of the bill of loading and the Draft Survey
character which is pertinent to the Report prepared by OMIC. Nor was he present when the copper
moral trait involved in the offense concentrates were loaded on the vessel or when the cargo was
charged; unloaded in Japan. He merely relied on the declarations made
ii. unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may by other persons that 2,243.496 wet metric tons were indeed
not prove his bad moral character loaded and that the cargo was short by 355 metric tons when
which is pertinent to the moral trait unloaded in Japan.
involved in the offense charged; The same maybe said of witness Cayabyab. While
iii. the good or bad moral character of the present at the loading site and familiar with the procedure
offended party may be proved if it tends followed in loading the cargo, he admitted that he could not
to establish in any reasonable degree state for certain that no spillage occurred as his attention was
the probability or improbability of the not at all times focused on the loading operation. Moreover,
offense charged. none of the documents he identified were signed by him. He
b. In civil cases only witnessed the signing of these documents by other people.
Evidence of the moral character of aparty in Hence, he was in no position to testify as to the truth or falsity of
a civil case is admissible only when the figures contained therein.
pertinent to the issue of character involved The testimonies of these witnesses were thus
in the case. HEARSAY. It has been held; any evidence, whether oral or
c. Evidence of the good character of a witness is not documentary, is HEARSAY if its probative value is not based on
admissible until such character has been impeached. the personal knowledge of the witness but on the knowledge of
another person who is not on the witness stand. Hearsay
evidence, whether objected to or not, has no probative value
unless the proponent can show that the evidence falls within the
exceptions to the hearsay evidence rule. (Benguet Exploration,
TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE Inc. Vs. CA, February 9, 2001).
Sec. 36-41, RULE 130
HEARSAY EVIDENCE Q: Petitioner was convicted for the crime of murder before
the lower courts. He now appeals to the Supreme Court,
One whose probative force depends in whole or in presenting an affidavit executed by a certain Elena de
part on the competency and credibility of some persons other Sagun vda. De Gatdula, stating that her late husband
than the witness by whom it is sought to produce it. admitted to her the killing of a certain person by the name
of Mario Anacay, the victim in this case. Is Elenas affidavit Our Supreme Court held that
admissible? although the question of admissibility can not be
raised for the first time on appeal, yet if the
ANS.: NO, for it is patently hearsay. It appears therein that she evidence is hearsay, it has no probative value
learned of the identity of the alleged culprit when her husband, and should be disregarded, whether objected to
who died in 1983, purportedly admitted to her of having killed or not.
Mario Anacay on May 24, 1981. In other words, she had no
personal knowledge of the killing of Mario Anacay except for the MULTIPLE HEARSAY/HEARSAY TWICE REMOVED
information allegedly revealed to her by her late husband. It is
an established doctrine that when the evidence is based on A hearsay declaration, which within itself contains
what was supposedly told the witness, the same is without any a hearsay statement.
evidentiary value or weight, being patently hearsay. (Barrera Vs. Admissible if it falls under the exceptions to the
People, February 19, 2001). hearsay rule.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE:

INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENT 1. Dying Declaration
2. Declaration Against Interest
One made by a third person intended not to establish 3. Act or Declaration About Pedigree
the truth of the facts asserted in that statement, but only to 4. Family Reputations or Tradition Regarding Pedigree
prove the tenor of the statement. 5. Common Reputation
6. Part of the Res Gestae
7. Entries In The Course of Business
DOCTRINE OF INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENT 8. Entries in Official Records
9. Commercial Lists And The Like
Where, regardless of the truth or falsity of a statement, 10. Learned Treatises
the fact that it has been made is relevant, the hearsay rule does 11. Testimony or Deposition At A Former Proceeding
not apply, but the statement may be shown. Evidence as to the
making of such statement is not secondary but primary, for the
statement itself may constitute a fact in issue or be
1. DYING DECLARATION/ANTE MORTEM
STATEMENT/STATEMENT IN ARTICULO MORTIS.
circumstantially relevant as to the existence of such fact.
Statement made by a person after the
mortal wound has been inflicted, under a belief that
i.e. where statement is the fact in issue:
death is certain, stating the facts concerning the cause
-In a prosecution for slander, a witness may testify that
of and the circumstances surrounding the homicide.
he heard the accused utter the slanderous words, for the
making of the statements is the principal fact in issue, and
REASONS FOR THE ADMINISSIBILITY OF DYING
witness is called upon to testify as to a matter within his
DECLARATIONS:
personal knowledge. There is here no question of hearsay
1. NECESSITY Because the declarants death
involved.
renders impossible his taking the witness stand
and it often happens that there is no other equally
i.e. where statement is a circumstantial evidence:
satisfactory proof of the crime.
1. Statements of a person showing his state of
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS The declaration is
mind, knowledge, belief, intention, ill will and
made in extremity, when the party is at the point
other emotions.
of death and every hope of this world is gone;
2. Statements of a person, which show his physical
when every motive to falsehood is silenced and
condition, as illness and the like.
the mind is induced by the most powerful
3. Statements of a person from which an inference
consideration to speak the truth.
may be made as to the state of mind of another,
that is, knowledge, belief, motive, good or bad
REQUISITE OF A DYING DECLARATION
faith, etc. of the latter.
1. The declaration must relate to the cause and
4. Statements, which may identify the date, place
surrounding circumstances of the declarants death
and person in question.
(how, where, when, why, by whom).
5. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a
witness.
NOTE: statements referring to the antecedents of the
fatal encounter or opinions, impressions or
MAY OBJECTION TO THE ADMISSION OF
conclusions of the declarant are not admissible.
HEARSAY EVIDENCE BE RAISED FOR THE FIRST
TIME ON APPEAL? 2. The declaration must have been made under the
NO. The failure of a party to object consciousness of an impending death, taking into
to the admission of hearsay evidence constitutes consideration:
a waiver of his right to make such objection, and
consequently, the evidence offered may be a. The words or statements made by the
admitted. person or any conduct or actions or
acknowledgment that he is going to die.
WHAT WEIGHT IS GIVEN TO HEARSAY EVIDENCE
ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION?
(There is abandonment of the hope of dont know his declaration was not made
survival.) under the consciousness of his imminent
death and does not qualify as an ante
b. Seriousness or gravity of the wound mortem statement, although the same was
-However, should the victim admitted as part of the res gestae since it
express hope of recovery, despite the was made immediately after the incident.
seriousness of his wounds, any statement (People Vs. Laquinon, Feb. 28, 1985.)
he makes would not be considered a dying
declaration. DESTRUCTION OF THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A
DYING DECLARATION:
2. The declarants death is the subject of inquiry (both
in civil and criminal cases) HOW?
1. Impeach the testimony
3. The declarant is competent as a witness at the time i.e. Show that the declaration was
of the declaration. made out of hatred or that the wound of
the declarant could have deranged his
NOTE: It is not necessary that if he survives, he is mental faculties.
competent. It is enough that he is competent at the
time of the declaration. 2. Prove the falsehood of the declaration
i.e. The use of profane language;
4. The declaration should have been made freely and statements which contradict the dying
voluntarily. declaration; establish the nature and
extent of the inquiry.
5. The victim must die but need not be immediately.
3. Attack the witness, that is, if he actually
NOTE: heard the declaration.
The intervening time from the making of the
declaration up to the actual death of the declarant is
immaterial, as long as the declaration was made
under the consciousness of impending death (US Vs. FORM OF A DYING DECLARATION
Mallari, 29 Phil. 14) which is a question of fact for the It needs not be in any
trial court to determine (People Vs. Extra July 30, particular form. A dying declaration may
1976) and as long as no retraction was made by the be a communication by means of signs,
declarant until his demise. Where the gravity of the an oral statement, a mere formal
wound did not diminish, the admissibility of the dying statement, or answers to questions put
declaration is not affected by the fact that the by the person to whom the declaration
declarant died hours or days later (People Vs. is made, writing signed by the declarant
Devaras et al, February 27, 1971) or even 14 days or an affidavit.
later (People Vs. Jacinto, November 29, 1984). It is
the belief in impending death at the time the statement If the dying declaration has
was made and not the rapid succession of death, that been made orally, it may be proved by
renders the dying declaration admissible. (People Vs. the testimony of the witness who heard
Sabio, January 27, 1981). the same or to whom it was made. The
better practice is for the witness to
** However, the interval of time between the repeat what the declarant said. Where
declaration and the death of the declarant the declaration is made by question
may be taken into account where the and answer, the entire conversation,
declaration is ambiguous as to whether the question and the answer, should be
declarant believed that his death was given so far as possible.
imminent when he made such declaration.
Thus, where the declarant stated that But if the witness cannot state the exact
he would not die if treated, such statement language of the declarant, he may state the substance
indicates an awareness of death and the of the declaration, although subject to criticism as to
nature of his wound and his death an hour its accuracy.
later qualifies such statement into a dying
declaration or at least as part of the res Where the dying declaration was reduced to
gestae (People Vs. Antonio, Aug. 25, 1970). writing and signed/approved by the declarant, it must
Where, shortly after he was wounded, be proved by the writing itself, which must be
the victim was asked as to whether he would authenticated and proved as any document offered in
die and which he replied I cannot ascertain evidence. The writing is the best evidence. But where
and he died the following day, his statement the absence of the original writing has been
is admissible both as part of the res gestae satisfactorily accounted for, the declaration may be
and as dying declaration (People Vs. established by secondary evidence.
Gueron, March 25, 1983).
But where the victim, when asked as to DOCTRINE OF COMPLETENESS OF DYING
whether he thought he would die replied I DECLARATION
A dying declaration must be complete. To be -Those, which are at variance with the
complete does not mean that it should contain everything declarants property rights.
that constitute the ges restae of the subject of declarants
statement, but is should express in full all that he intended
to say as conveying his meaning in respect of such fact. It d. DECLARATION AGAINST PENAL
must include all that the declarant wished or intended to INTEREST
include (People Vs. de Joya, Nov. 8, 1991). -i.e. Acknowledgement of the commission of
the crime.
2. DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY:
-Admissible in evidence if the declarant dies, become
insane or is not available as a witness. 1. Declarant is not available to testify.
-Admissible in its entirety including parts not against -Dead, insane/mentally incapacitated,
interest if the latter are substantially connected with the subject physically incompetent, of advanced
matter as that covered by the part against interest. age, has lost the power of speech.
2. The declaration must concern facts
cognizable by the declarant.
-He must have knowledge of it or he
has a duty to know it.
Admission Declaration Against 3. The circumstance must render it
Interest improbable that a motive to lie exists.
1. Person making
the statement is 1. The declarant is REASONS FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OFDECLARATION
alive dead, in sane or is AGAINST INTEREST:
2. Person admitting unable to testify.
is a party to a 2. Person admitting
1. NECESSITY The only mode of proof available.
case need not be a party
2. TRUSTWSORTHINESS Presumption that men
3. Used against the to the case
will not testify if what they will say will be
person admitting 3. Used against third
prejudicial to their own interest.
and those persons
identified with
FORM OF DECLARATION AGAINST
him 4.
Secondary evidence
INTEREST
4. Primary Evidence (used only if the
-May be oral or written.
declarant is dead,
insane or unable to
5. Not necessarily testify.
against interest 5. Against interest
3. ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE
PEDIGREE - is the history of family descent, which is

transmitted from one generation to another by both
oral and written declaration and by traditions. It
includes relationship, family genealogy, birth,
marriage, death, dates and places where the facts
occurred, names of relatives.
SELF SERVING DECLARATION
-Is a statement favorable to REASONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF DECLARATIONS
the interest of the declarant. It is not REGARDING PEDIGREE:
admissible in evidence as proof of the
facts asserted since its introduction in
evidence would open the door to frauds 1. NECESSITY Because facts occurred many
and perjuries. years before trial and were known to only a few
people.
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS The natural effusions
SCOPE OF THE RULE: of those who talk over family affairs when no
a. DECLARATION AGAINST MORAL special reason for bias or passion exists, are
INTEREST family trustworthy.
-i.e. acknowledgement of a natural child.
b. DECLARATION AGAINST PECUNIARY REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:

INTEREST Those which may bar in whole
or in part the declarants money claim or
which may give rise to a monetary claim 1. Declarant is dead or unable to testify.
against him. 2. Pedigree is in issue.
3. Declarant must be a relative of the person whose
c. DECLARATION AGAINST PROPRIETARY pedigree is in question (relationship may be by
INTEREST birth or affinity).
4. Declaration must be made before the controversy REPUTATION

occurred (ante litem motam) -It applies to the CHARACTER
5. The relationship between the declarant and the opinion which others -It refers to the
person whose pedigree is in question must be may have formed inherent qualities of
shown by evidence other than such act or and expressed of his the person.
declaration (proof of relationship may be either character.
direct or circumstantial).
4. FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITON REQUISITE FOR THE

REGARDING PEDIGREE ADMISSIBILITY OF COMMOM REPUTATION
Such declarations and statements as RESPECTING FACTS OF A PUBLIC OR GENERAL
have come down from generation to generation INTEREST.
from deceased relatives in such a way that even 1. The facts must be of public or general interest and
though it cannot be said or determined which of more than 30 years old.
the deceased relatives originally made them, or MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST
was personally cognizant of the facts therein common to all the citizens of the state or to
stated, yet it appears that such declarations and the entire people. i.e. public boundaries
statements were made as family history, ante MATTERS OF
litem motam, by a deceased person connected GENERAL INTEREST common only to a
by blood or marriage with the person whose single community or to a considerable
pedigree is to be established. number of persons forming part of the
community.
REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIBILITY 2. The common reputation must have been ancient, that
1. There is controversy with is, more than 30 years old.
respect to the pedigree of
any member of a family. 3. The reputation must have been one formed among a
2. The reputation or tradition of class of persons who were in a position to have some
the pedigree of the person sources of information and to contribute intelligently to
concerned existed previous the formation of the opinion.
to the controversy.
3. The witness testifying to the 4. The common reputation must have been existing
reputation or tradition previous to the controversy.
regarding the pedigree of the
person concerned must be a HOW PROVEN?
member of the family of said -By the testimony
person, either by
consanguinity of affinity.
of witnesses, old maps and old surveys, monuments
and inscriptions in public places.
5. COMMON REPUTATION
-Means *REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIIBILITY OF COMMON
REPUTATION RESPECTING MARRIAGE
general reputation; opinion or belief formed by 1. The common reputation must have been
others formed previous to the controversy;
-Admissible to prove:
a. Facts of public or general 2. The common reputation must have been
interest more than thirty formed in the community or among the class
years old of persons who are in a position to have
b. Marriage sources of information and to contribute
c. Moral character intelligently to the formation of the opinion.
*REASON FOR ADMISSIBILITY: *REQUISITE FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

COMMON REPUTATION RESPECTING MORAL
1. NECESSITY arising from the inherent CHARACTER:
difficulty of obtaining any other 1. That it is the reputation in the place where
evidence other than that in the nature the person in question is best known;
of common reputation.
2. That it was formed before the controversy
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS arising from occurred;
the a) the publics general interest
therein; b) the fact that the falsity or 6. PART OF THE RES GESTAE
error of such evidence could be
expressed or corrected by other RES GESTAE
testimony since the public are -Things done
interested in the same. - Event speaking through the
mouth of another
-Things done, spontaneous DYING DECLARATION RES GESTAE

statement or utterances made during the
occurrence of the event. -Can be made only by the -Can be made by the killer
victim. himself after or during the
RATIONALE FOR ADMISSION killing or that of a third
person.
-Statement made instinctively at the time of a specific -Made only after the
transaction or event, without the opportunity for homicidal attack has been -Statement may precede,
formulation of statements favorable to ones own cause committed. accompany or be made after
are likely to cast important light upon the matter in issue; the homicidal act was
as to such statement, the law creates a presumption of committed.
their truthfulness. -Its trustworthiness is
based upon its being given -Based on the spontaneity of
under an awareness of the statement
PARTS OF THE RES GESTAE impending death.
1. SPONTANEOUS STATEMENT
- Statements/exclamations made immediately NOTE:
after some existing occasions by a participant
or spectator and asserting the circumstances While the statements of the victim may not
of that occasion as it is observed by him. generally qualify as a dying declaration because it was not
made under the consciousness of impending death, it may
- Words, exclamations, utterances still be admissible as part of the res gestae if it was made
while a startling occurrence is taking immediately after the incident. However, where the
place before or after (statements elements of both are present, the statement may be
related to the event) i.e. Youre admitted both as a dying declaration and as part the res
driving fast! gestae.
2.VERBAL ACTS
- Equivocal acts which are susceptible of *FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN DETERMINING THE
different interpretations. SPONTANEITY OF A STATEMENT:
- i.e. A gave money to B. This may mean
payment of debt or for safekeeping, a bribery, 1. Time Element The time that elapsed between the
etc. occurrence of the act or transaction and the making of the
statement.
*REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIBILITTY OF -The interval of time between the startling
SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS: occurrence and the statement depends upon the
circumstances, but such statement must have
1. There must be a startling occurrence been made while the declarant was under the
sudden occurrence of an event or happening, immediate influence of the startling occurrence,
which is capable of inducing emotional hence, it is generally required to have been made
exclamations or nervous excitement without immediately prior or subsequent to the event.
the exercise of sufficient efforts on the part of However, if the declarant was rendered
the spectator. i.e. collusion. unconscious after the startling occurrence, his
2. The statement must be spontaneous Made statements relative thereto upon regaining
immediately during, before or after the consciousness are still part of the res gestae
startling occurrence/instinctive, not a product regardless of the time that intervened in between.
of analysis, deductive or inductive reasoning. If the statement was made under the
NOTE: influence of a startling event and the declarant did
The circumstances immediately not have the opportunity to concoct or contrive a
surrounding the act or transaction in question story, even if made 9 hours after the killing, the
and the conditions immediately preceding statement is admissible as part of the res gestae
and following it may ordinarily be shown as (People Vs. Berame, July 30, 1976). However, the
part of the res gestae, unless some other rule element of spontaneity is lacking in the alleged
of exclusions such as the one excluding parol ante-mortem statement taken some 39 hours after
evidence, would be violated thereby. the incident. Thirty-nine hours is too long a time to
be considered subsequent immediately to the
3. The statement must relate to the startling occurrence. Even as contemplated by the
circumstances of the startling occurrence. rules, statements given a day after the incident in
-They must be relevant to and must answer to questions propounded by an
explain and illustrate the facts of the investigator cannot be considered part of the res
transaction in issue. gestae (People Vs. Precadios, Jan. 5, 2001).
2. The place where the statement was made.

-It should be made in the crime scene. If
in another place, it becomes doubtful.
3. The condition of the declarant when he made the 5. The entries were made in the ordinary or
statement. regular course of business or duty.
-i.e. just receive serious injury, suffering
severe pain or was under intense excitement. NOTE:
If the entrant is available as a witness,
4. The presence or absence of intervening occurrences the said entries will not be admitted as exception
between the occurrence and the statement relative thereto. to the hearsay rule, but they may nevertheless be
-i.e. attention to other matters, receipt of availed of by said entrant as a memorandum to
medical assistance. refresh his memory while testifying on the
transactions reflected.
5. The nature and circumstances of the statement itself.

8. ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS.
*REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF VERBAL ACTS: -Made in the performance of the duties by a public
officer or by a person in the performance of a duty specially
1. Act or occurrence characterized must be enjoined by law. Such are prima facie evidence of the facts
equivocal, (ambiguous, vague, doubtful, not clear) stated therein. They are presumed to be true until and
unless rebutted.
2. Verbal acts must characterize or explain the
equivocal act. I.e. This is in payment of my debt. ** The official need not be dead or unable to
testify. Just present the records in court; the official need
3. Equivocal act must be relevant to the issue. not be called to testify.
4. Verbal act must be contemporaneous with REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIBILITY:

equivocal act. Declaration must accompany the 1. The entries were made by a public officer in the
act they describe or relate to and be made performance of his duties or by a person in the
simultaneously with its occurrence or so near performance of a duty enjoined by law.
thereto as to form a part thereof.
*WHEN IS THE RECORD MADE ON THE
7. ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS PERFORMANCE OF ONES DUTY:
a) When it is expressly required by law. i.e.
*RATIONALE FOR ADMISSION: records of death, birth, marriage.
1. NECESSITY best available evidence
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS b) When the nature of the office requires the
appropriate recording of events.
*REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY: i.e. Keeping of police blotters; NBI;
1. The person who made the entry must be dead Prosecutors office.
or unable to testify.
c) When the keeping of the records is
2. The entries were made at or near the time of required by superiors.
the transactions to which they refer.
-Contemporaneous with the time of 2. The entrant had personal knowledge of the facts
transaction. stated by him or such facts were acquired by him
-The entries, however, need not be made at from reports made by persons under a legal duty
the time of the occurrence to which they to submit the same.
relate or even on the same day, but it is
sufficient if they are made within a reasonable -Personal knowledge: through his senses
time thereafter, in the ordinary course of the -Official knowledge: subordinates are duty bound
business of the party making them. to report the facts needed with utmost honesty.
The knowledge of the subordinate is knowledge of
3. The entrant was in a position to know the the superior.
facts stated in the entries. i.e. Sheriffs return, return of search warrant,
-However, if the entry is based on reports, election returns.
oral or written of numerous persons
cooperating who had personal knowledge of 3. Such entries were duly entered in a regular
their own items, but did not themselves make manner in the official records.
the entries, the entries may be received,
either by calling the entrant alone to the stand HOW ARE OFFICIAL ENTRIES PROVED?
or by the testimony of one who can verify the 1. Production of the books or records
method of compiling them. themselves.
2. Production of a copy certified by the legal
4. The entries were made in his professional keeper thereof.
capacity or in the performance of a duty,
whether legal, contractual, moral or religious. 9. LEARNED TREATISES
TREATISES works done by experts, which are -witness cant be found after diligent
published. The author must be acknowledged as an expert. search.
EXPERTS authors recognized in their own fields. 2.Identity of parties

i.e. dictionaries, encyclopedia, compendium by Regalado -substantial identity,that is,identity of
interest.
RATIONALE FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
1. NECESSITY Unavailability of expert witness or if 3.Identity of issues
available the tremendous expense in hiring them. -need not be the principal issue so long
as similar to the previous ones.
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS no motive to misrepresent.
4.Opportunity of cross-examination of witness
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY: -actual cross-examination not
1. If the court takes judicial notice that the writer of necessary.It is enough that the
the statement in the treatise, periodical or opportunity to cross-examine was had.
pamphlet, is recognized in his profession or NOTE:
calling as expert in the subject. Subsequent failure or refusal to
appear at the second trial or hostility
2. A witness expert in the subject testifies that the since testifying at the first trial does not
writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical, amount to inability to testify.
or pamphlet, is recognized in his profession or
calling as expert in the subject. How to introduce evidence?
-present stenographic notes or transcript
THESIS? - NO of records.But if other party refuses to admit,present the
stenographer or clerk of court.
10.COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE

OPINION RULE
evidence of statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation contained in a OPINION-an inference or conclusion drawn from facts.
list,register,periodical or other published compilation is
admissible. -as a general rule,the opinion of a witness is not admissible
i.e.SCRA,journals,official publications-Official in evidence.(SEC. 48,RULE 130)
Gazette,Phil.Reports
EXCEPTIONS:
RATIONALE FOR ADMISSIBILITY: 1.EXPERT OPINION
1.Necessity -The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring
-inaccessibility of the authors,compilers special knowledge,skill,experience or training which he is
or publisher in other jurisdiction and also because shown to possess may be received in evidence.
of the great practical inconvenience in summoning
each individual whose personal knowledge has EXPERT-one possessing ,in regard to a particular
gone to make up the final result. subject or department of human
activity,knowledge not usually acquired by other
2.Trustworthiness persons.
-accurate and thus canbe relied upon for
commercial and professional purposes. How is knowledge acquired by an expert?
1.Training 5.Habit
2.Education 6.Occupation
11.TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER 3.Careful study 7.Trade
PROCEEDING 4.Experience
-the testimony in a previous case may be used in a

present case. Subjects of expert testimony:
-it may be a criminal,civil,administrative or labor 1.Handwriting 4.Typewritten letters
case so long as there was an opportunity to cross-examine. 2.Ballistics 5.Drug cases
3.Fingerprints 6.Valuationofproperties
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
1.The witness whose testimony is offered in
evidence is dead or unable to testify.
-insanity or mental incapacity,loss of ***CONDITIONS BEFORE AN EXPERT CAN
memory thru old age or disease. TESTIFY:
-physical disability by reason of sickness
or advanced age 1.The issue must be one which requires the
-witness is kept away by contrivance of assistance of an expert.
opposite party 2.Witness must be an expert.
-prove this by:
a)ask opponent if he accepts i.e.members of the family,friend,neighbor,officials

the witness to be an expert of the barangay
b)qualify the expert:show
through series of questions on ***The opinion on a persons mental
the following factors: condition is based on the external conduct
1.academic background of the person.
2.experience
3.professional standing ***The witness may also testify on his
4.training impressions of the
5.how fair is his/her opinion emotion,behavior,condition or appearance
of a person.But not as to his motives.
**Effect of failure to qualify:
-The experts opinion becomes that of an ordinary person.
RULE 131
STEPS: BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS
1.Qualify the witness
2.Present facts and ask his opinion What is burden of proof?
a)ask him about matters which he has It is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue
first hand knowledge. necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of
b)ask him on the procedures evidence required by law.
c)ask him on the facts arrived at and
reported by other experts,thru What does burden of evidence or burden of going forward with
hypothethical questions(assume certain the evidence mean?
facts to be true and based on such It is defined as that logical necessity which rests on a party at
assumed facts,expert will arrive at an any particular time during the trial to create a prima facie case in
answer) his favor, or to overthrow one when created against him.
d)ask his opinion on facts established by
evidence Burden of proof distinguished from burden of evidence.
**An expert cant give an opinion on the The burden of proof rests upon the prosecution from the first to
opinion of other people. the last stage, it is determined by the pleadings and it never
shifts while burden of evidence shifts to the defense when
***What is the value of an experts opinion? prosecution establishes prima facie case and goes back to the
-The court has the discretion to weigh prosecution when the defense overcomes the prosecutions
and rule on the opinion.Courts are not bound,the opinion is evidence, it is determined by logic in the progress of the trial.
not conclusive but merely advisory because such may be
erroneous or may be contradicted by others. What does presumption of law mean?
It is a conclusion or deduction drawn by reasonable and logical
2.OPINION OF AN ORDINARY WITNESSES inference from the usual probabilities attendant upon associated
-The opinion of a witness for which facts
proper basis is given may be received in evidence
regarding: What are the kinds of presumptions?
1.The identity of a person about whom he has adequate The kinds are:
knowledge. 1. Presumption hominis or of fact are those which
i.e.physical features, voice, the experience of mankind has shown to be valid,
residence, address founded on general knowledge and information;
2.A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity inferences which naturally arise in common
because: experience from particular circumstances or known
a)he has seen the person write facts.
b)he has seen the writing purporting to be his upon which
the witness has acted or been charged 2. Presumption juris or law - are those which the law
requires to be drawn from the existence of
Ways of proving handwriting: established facts in the absence of contrary evidence
1.testimony of experts on the subject, deductions which the law expressly
2.testimony of ordinary witnesses who has sufficient directs to be made from particular facts.
familiarity with the handwriting.
3.comparison of genuine handwriting with the questioned Presumption of law are usually classified as follows:
handwriting. 1. Conclusive presumptions/presumptions juris
et de jure
2. Disputable or rebuttable presumption or
3.The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently presumptions juris tantum
acquainted.
-2 instances: What is the rule on survivorship?
1.Subscribing witness to the document for which The rule is:
its validity is questioned.i.e.will 1. If both were under the age of fifteen years, the older is
2.If sufficiently acquainted deemed to have survived;
2. If both were above the age of sixty, the younger is The principle upon which good character
deemed to have survived; may be proved is that it affords a presumption against
3. If one is under fifteen and the other above sixty, the the commission of a crime. This presumption arises
former is deemed to have survived; from the improbability, as a general rule, as proved by
4. If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and the sex be common observation and experience, that a person
different, the male is deemed to have survived, if the who has uniformly pursued an honest and upright
sex be the same, the older; course of conduct will depart from it and do an act so
5. If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other inconsistent with it.
between those ages, the latter is deemed to have
survived. 2.) UNLESS in REBUTTAL, the PROSECUTION may not
prove his (accused) BAD moral character which is
PERTINENT to the moral trait involved in the offense
RULE 130 Sec. 51 charged.
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
REASON FOR ALLOWING PROSECUTION TO
CHARACTER DEFINED: PROVE BAD CHARACTER OF ACCUSED IN
Character is the sum total of a persons REBUTTAL:
attributes; his intellectual, emotional and psychological qualities,
impressed on him by nature or habit, which distinguishes him The object of permitting the prosecution to
from another. introduce such evidence is not for the purpose of
[ In Evidence, the Rule on Admissibility encompasses only showing the bad character of the defendant, but it is
MORAL character. ] for the purpose of refuting his claim that he has a
good character and thus to prevent the court from
HOW IS CHARACTER TO BE PROVEN: drawing therefrom the inference that the accused is
innocent of the crime charged.
Character is to be proved only by reputation
in the community. 3.) The GOOD or BAD moral character of the OFFENDED
party may be proved if it tends to establish in any
REPUTATION DEFINED: reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the
offense charged.
Reputation means what a person is
estimated, said, supposed , or thought, to be by others. This Rule is applied with frequency in cases of
homicide and sex offenses.
RULE: Character evidence is not, generally, admissible. ( sec.
51 ) . In rape cases, the character of the woman is not
ordinarily directly in issue, but evidence of previous
unchastity may be circumstantially relevant and
EXCEPTIONS: admissible on the question of her consent.
a.) In Criminal Cases When the woman consents to the act, no

crime of rape is committed. Thus, the main issue is
1.) The accused may prove his GOOD moral character often whether the woman did consent. Hence, the
which is PERTINENT to the moral trait involved in the womans disposition to unchastity would have
offense charged. probative value and would be admissible on behalf of
the accused.
CHARACTER MUST BE RELEVANT:
. In homicide cases, if the theory of the accused is that
Only pertinent traits, those involved in the he acted in self defense, the known violent character
offense charged, are provable by a defendant in a of the deceased is admissible to show that it has
criminal case. produced a reasonable belief of imminent danger in
the mind of the accused and a justifiable conviction
For example, on a charge of rape, character that a prompt defensive action was necessary.
for chastity; on a charge of assault, character for
peaceableness; on a charge of corruption, character [ This rule does not apply to cases of
for honesty are provable. murder. The character of the deceased in a
prosecution for murder where the killing is committed
On the other hand, in a case of murder, the with treachery or premeditation is inadmissible. ]
defendants character for truth is irrelevant and,
therefore, not provable. In summary,
i. The accused may prove:
REASON FOR ALLOWING ACCUSED TO PROVE . his own good moral character and
. the bad moral character of the offended party.
HIS GOOD MORAL CHARACTER: ii. The prosecution may prove:
. his own good moral character and
. the bad moral character of the accused but only in a. Written Official Acts - court decisions, laws passed by
rebuttal. Congress, orders or
iii. Character to be proved must be relevant. proclamations of the President. Rules and Regulations
promulgated by Dept.
Secretaries, Filing of information in court,
b.) In Civil Cases b. Records of Official Acts - Minutes of meetings, conducted by
Local Government
Evidence of the moral character of A PARTY in a civil Officials, sovereign body, judicial, marriage contract,
case is admissible only when PERTINENT to the issue of receipt(collection of money),return
character involved in the case. of search warrant(they conducted a search)
Note : Papers or documents coming from public officers. if they
` Putting character in issue or ` character have no reference to the official act of the officers are NOT
involved in the issue is a technical expression which public documents.
does not mean simply that character may be affected
by the result, but that it is of particular importance in How Can Official Record Can Be Proven?
the suit itself, as the character of the plaintiff in an 1. .By Official Publication of the Act - Philippine Reports, 0fficial
action for slander, or that of a woman in an action for Gazette. Newspapers of Genera] Circulation
seduction. 2. By a copy attested by the Officer who has Legal custody of
the record: i.e.Certified True Copy.signed and sealed by Public
In the following actions, evidence of Officer
character is admissible because reputation or The copy to be taken from the custodian must be literal
character is necessarily involved: copy. A mere summary of the contents thereof is
- libel & slander insufficient
- breach of promise of marriage the c. Documents acknowledged before the notary public -
defendant may justify the breach upon the documents which give rights or extinguish obligations. E.g.
ground that he discovered the plaintiff to be Deed of Sale, deed of donation, articles of incorporation.
of unchaste character & therefore he easements, etc.
refused to marry her. Except: Wills and Testaments. Why? Because they are not
- damages for seduction the actual or intended to be scrutinized by the public.
reputed character of the woman is at issue. Note: Affidavits, although notarized are not public documents.
why? Because they are hearsay.
In summary, d. Public Records kept in the Philippines of Private Documents
i. In criminal cases, evidence of the good character of the required by law to be kept therein. Hence, they are private
accused is admissible in evidence because there is a fair documents. To effect their validity .however, the law requires
and just presumption that a person of good character that they be kept as public records. E.g. Deed of Sale of a
would not commit a crime. parcel of land needs to be registered to be valid,the public
ii. In civil cases, unless the character of a party be directly put document is the record kept in the Register of Deeds.
in issue by the proceedings itself, evidence of his general
character is not admissible. Probative Value of Public Documents
1. Written Official Acts - conclusive
3 Entries in Official Records - prima facie evidence of facts
c.) In the case provided for in Rule 132, section 14. stated therein.presunied correct unless otherwise proven.
How? By clear and convincing evidence
Evidence of the good character of a witness
PROOF OF AUTHENTICITY OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
is not admissible until such character has been
a. Signature of the public
impeached.
officer b. Seal of the Office
c. Certification
The character or reputation of a witness must be
Probative value of certified true copy: it proves prima fade the
attacked or impeached before testimony sustaining his
original to have been in the public office when it was made.
character or reputation can be admitted.
Conclusive.
It is not necessary that there shall be a WHY ARE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS EXEMPTED FROM
successful impeachment of the witness, but an AUTHENTICATION
attempt to impeach his character, even though Because the presumption of validity Furthermore, the
unsuccessful, warrants the introduction of testimony signature of the officer, as
as to his good character. well as the seal of office of the public officer, is considered in
authentication.
WHAT MORAL CHARACTER OF THE WITNESS IS
INVOLVED:
HOW ARE FOREIGN LAWS PROVEN
The trait involved as a witness is that for veracity or A. By certification of the officer having charge of the original
truth telling and that the trait may or may not have any copy of the law, under the
probative value as to the offense charged. seal of the country state. B. By an official copy of the law,
published under the authority of the state, and
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS
1. PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
purpoting to contain such 3. Authentication by contents - since the witness knows

law. C. Testimony of an the contents of the documents, because no other person
expert knows it
4. Style of writing
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS- documents executed by a private 5. Authentication- by nature of reply letter
person, without PROOF OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY (Authentication) - accounting
the intervention of a notary public or other persons legally from the time of existence of the writing up to the time it is
authorized. shown before the court; tracing how it came to the court, who is
IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING WHETHER A DOCUMENT IS in possession thereof, and the condition of the object is the
PUBLIC OR PRIVATE same from the time it is found to the time it is presented in court;
To be able to know the ff: i.e. it is not altered. E.g. bullet is extracted from the body of the
1. the binding effect of the document; i.e., if public, it is victim- Who extracted it? Where was it extracted? Where was it
binding to third persons; if private, it is binding between the placed after it was extracted? Where is it now? If the chain is
parties only broken, the authenticity of the document is lost.
2. whether or not it is necessary to authenticate the document; INSTANCES WHEN THE PRIVATE DOCUMENTS NEED NOT
i.e., if public, no need to authenticate,ifprivate,must be VS.
authenticated. REASONS: AUTHENTICATED:
a. Irremovabil of
public record 1. When the document is ancient - In existence for 30 years or
more. To be reckoned from execution to the date it is being
offered. It is admissible without proof of due execution
b. to prevent because the witnesses are no longer available.
loss of public Requisites:
record a. It is in existence for 30 years or more
b. It is genuine and found in proper custody - It is not necessary
that the person is strictly entitled to possession. It is enough if
the person in whose custody the document is found is so
connected with it that he may reasonably be supposed to be in
possession with it without fraud-
c. It is unblemished by any alteration or any suspicious
circumstance
2. When the due execution and genuineness of the document is
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRIVATE DOCUMENTS admitted by the adverse party
3. When the due execution and genuiuneness of the document
As to Admissibility -not admisssible without is immaterial
-admissible even without proofs of due 4. When the document need only to be identified
proof of due execution and execution and 5. When the writing is a public document
genuineness genuineness 6. It is a notarial document,acknowledged,proved or certified
Probative value of notarial document: prima facie evidence of
As to Persons Bound -only parties and their the execution of the instrument/document involved.
-even against third persons privies IRREMOVABILITY OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS/RECORDS
Reasons:
As to Validity of Certain Transactions -substantive law 1. To prevent inconveniences on the part of the legal custodian,
requires that certain transactions be in public i.e. disruption of work
instrument to be valid 2. To prevent counterfeiting Joss or destruction of public
documents - if document is brought out. the one who took it
out may be held liable for infidelity of public record
Authentication: the process of showing before the court the Exception to the Rule of Irremovability - Upon order of the
due execution and genuineness of the document; the process of court, when the inspection
proving that the document is not spurious or counterfeit or that of the record is essential to the just determination of the case.
the document is the same document executed by a person.
HOW TO PROVE THE DUE EXECUTION AND PUBLIC RECORD OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT - entry of record
AUTHENTICITY OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT: How is it Proved:
1. Direct Testimony of-witness - any person present during the 1. Certified copy of the page which contain the recording
execution of the same 3. Ask for the presentation of the original record. How? Ask the
2. Proof of genuineness of signature or handwriting of the court to issue a subpoena duces tecum to the public officer
maker- if no person can be presented. How? having custody thereof
2.1. comparison with other genuine documents which are in Probative Value of Public Record - it is a proof of the
the handwriting of the person or the court existence of a private document in public record, but not a
2.2 . familiarity of the handwriting - those who are familiar proof of the validity of the private document.
with the handwriting of the HOW JUDICIAL RECORD IS IMPEACHED:
person; By evidence of:
2.3 . testimony of those who have seen the person write 1. Want of jurisdiction of the court or judicial officer
2.4 . testimony of an expert
2. Collusion between the parties - e.g. legal separation: Parities time to present such a translation without interrupting/delaying
agreed to separate the proceedings.
3. Fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the
proceedings. OFFER OF EVIDENCE
RULE:
It must be extrinsic and collateral to the matter tried and not a Any evidence, which a party desires to submit for the
matter which was actually or potentially in issue in the action. consideration of the court, must be formally offered because it is
(extrinsic fraud: means whereby the the duty of the judge to rest his findings of facts and his
judgment was procured- judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the
parties at the trial. The offer maybe made in any form sufficient
HOW IS LACK OF RECORD BE PROVED:
to show that the party is ready and willing to submit the
The certificate of the custodian that he has diligently
evidence to the court.
searched for a document or an entry of a specified tenor and
The purpose for which the evidence is presented must be
has been unable to find it.; ought to be usually a satisfactory
specified because it is the duty of a party to select the
evidence of its non-existence.
competent from the incompetent in offering testimony and he
ALTERATIONS IN DOCUMENT cannot impose this duty upon the trial court.
Alteration: It is a change in the instrument by a party thereto
RULE: A party who has introduced evidence is not entitled as a
or one entitled there under or one in privity with such a person
matter of right to withdraw it. It is discretionary with the court to
after the instrument has been signed or fully executed. without
allow it or not.
consent of the other party to it by an erasure, interlineation,
EXCEPTION: A party may withdraw it anytime before the court
addition or substitution of material affecting the identity of the
has passed on its admissibility.
instrument or contract. rights and obligations of parties. It
imports some fraud or improper design on the part of the person WHEN TO MAKE AN OFFER:
entitled there under to change the effect of the instrument. 1. Testimonial Evidence : at the time the witness is called to
How may alteration in a writing be explained? testify
A party producing a genuine writing, which appears to have 2. Documentary and Object Evidence: after all the witnesses
been altered, must explain in the following manner: have given their testimonies on the witness stand.
a. He may show that another made the alteration.
b. He may show tat the alteration was made with the consent REMEDIES
of the parties affected by it; 1. OBJECTION - procedure whereby a lawyer informs the court
c. He may show that the alteration was properly or that evidence offered should not be presented because it
innocently made d. He may show that the alteration did not violates the Rules of Procedure . e.g. "We object to Exhibit A
change the meaning/language of the instrument. because it is hearsay, self-serving, a forgery ,etc.
A party presenting the writing should have accounted for the Objection to What?
alteration when he introduced the paper in evidence, and not a. the witness
endeavor to explain the alterations afterwards. b. the testimony of the witness
c. the question - invoke the grounds enumerated in the rules of
Evidence
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN AN UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE d. the admission of a documentary evidence: to exhibit or to the
GEN. RULE: purpose
Documents written in an unofficial language are admissible in Kinds of Objection:
evidence when a. Object to the formal offer of the documentary evidence - by
accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino, making objection or
EXCEPTIONS: comment on each and every evidence presented or on the
1. People vs. Gaco 37 Off Gaz. 1684 purpose of the evidence.
No objection regarding its adrnissibility is raised by the party The comment may either be an OBJECTION or an
against whom it is offered.it must be presumed that the ADMISSION or plain SILENCE
language in which the document is written is understood by all, (NO OBJECTION) b. Object to the testimony of the witness, --
and the document is admissible in evidence. by objecting to the question or to the Answer
2. Ahgavs.Cabilingl8P415 of the witness; i.e. How it is phrased, the
When there is presented in evidence an exhibit written in any substance thereof, etc. Basis:
language other than Spanish(now Filipino), if there is an appeal, Violation of the Rules of Evidence
that exhibit should be translated into Spanish (no tilipino) by the Violation of Substantive Law
official interpreter of the court, or a translation should be agreed
upon by the parties, and both original and translation send to the HOW TO OBJECT ON A WINESS TESTIMONY?
court. A. State the ground for the objection. It must be specific, unless:
it is apparent, that there is a ground for the object! on. e.g.
3. Dionisio vs. Dionisio 45 P 699 "Question/answer is irrelevant". If ground is not stated, the
The refusal of the court a quo to allow counsel for appellant objection is deemed waived. Failure to object merely affects the
time to present an English translation of exhibit 1 (affidavit) is admissibility of the matter objected to, NOT the weight thereof.
not reversible error Section 33,ruleI32 expressly requires that B. Objection must be made clearly with utmost courtesy. C. "Try
documents written in an unofficial language, other than the to avoid incessant objections, i.e, mobjections which have no
national language be accompanied with translation in English limits, causing irritation.
and Spanish prepared before the trial, and it lies within the
GROUNDS FOR OBJECTING:
discretion of the trial court to allow or not to allow the attorneys
a. question is irrelevant RULING OF OBJECTIONS

b. question is vague The court need not state the reason for sustaining or
c. question has already been answered overruling an objection. However, if the objection is based on
d. multiple question two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one or
e. witness is incompetent some of them must specify the ground/s relied upon.
f. witness is not qualified IS ERRONEOUS RULING AS TO THE QUESTION OF
g. question has no basis ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE OR ITS REJECTION A
h. question requires an answer which is privileged GROUND FOR NEW TRIAL?
i. question is leading NO, if it shall appear to the court before which such
j. question calls for hearsay evidence objection is raised that, independently of the evidence objected
k. witness is asked to testify on what is already alleged in the to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the
pleadings decision, or that if the rejected evidence had been received, it
1. question is self-incriminatory would not have varied the decision. If the result is otherwise, a
m. when the proper foundation has not been laid new trial shall be granted.
n. when opposed is impeaching his own witness
o. question calls for opinion of the witness POSSIBLE RULINGS ON THE OFFER:
An objection to evidence must not be raised for the first time 1. The exhibits are admitted
on appeal 2. The exhibits are denied
Even if the questions were asked by the judge, the party has a 3. The exhibits are admitted, but not tile purpose
right to object to evidence which he considers not admissible.
The tria! judge may object to a question propounded to a 2. PROFFER OR OFFER OF PROOF - when the objection is
witness on cross-examination since he may on his own sustained, the proponent may present proof of the testimony of
motion deal with offered evidence, however, this is not the witness and or relevancy or importance of the question and
ordinarily to be commended. answer
How? Request that the document be attached to the records of
CONTINUING OBJECTION - may be imposed by the counsel the case
for the adverse Why? Because if case is appealed, the appellate court shall
party if the other party keeps on asking incompetent questions have a basis in determining whether or not the lower court
or when the answers elicited are hearsay, etc.How done? The committed an error in rejecting the document and in order for
counsel for the adverse party shall manifest before the court the court to find the evidentiary value of the document-
that he is interposing a continuing objection.
It therefore means that even if the adverse party's lawyer does 4. MOTION TO STRIKE - a motion addressed to the statement
not say "objection', the questions of the other counsel are of the witness, so that the same will deleted or erased from
deemed objected to. the record.
Two Instances:
EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE a. When the Question is objectionable and the witness
a. subsequent evidence is not of the same kind. Thus, in an answered. Here lawyer was not given the chance to object
action to probate a will because the witness answered immediately after the
destroyed by the testatrix allegedly of unsound mind, based on question was asked.
facts dissimilar from b. b.When the Question is proper but the answer is irrelevant
those supporting other witness' opinions, could not excuse failure or improper or immaterial
to objection other Effect:
witnesses. As If there is no answer
b, When the question has not been answered. When? When they
When is it Necessary?
are once objected to
-as soon as the grounds therefore becomes apparent-Why
and not answered are later repeated and answered without
is the Motion to Strike Out Necessary?
objection, the objection is
-in order to preserve the right of the objecting party to a
waived.
review of the ruling of the trial court on appeal.
c. Where in competency of evidence is shown later. Where
evidence is apparently 5. TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
competent when it is admitted over objection but its in Where the court refuses to permit the counsel to present
competency is made apparent testimony which he thinks is competent, material and necessary
by testimony which follows, the objection must be repeated, to prove his case, the method of properly preserving the record
followed by a motion to to the end that the question may be saved for purposes or
strike out, or it is waived. review is through the making of an offer of proof.
d. Where objection to evidence was sustained but reoffered at a
later stage of trial. e- Where evidence admitted on condition and Two Fold Purpose:
the condition is not fulfilled. E.g. the a. to inform the court what is expected to be proved b. procuring
condition that its competency or relevancy will be shown by exceptions to the exclusion of the offerred evidence so that the
further evidence and the upper
court may determine from the record whether the proposed
condition is not fulfilled, the objection must evidence is competent. How? The counsel shall manifest before
be repeated. f. Where the court reserves the the court that "Had the witness been allowed to testify, he
ruling on the objection. should have answered..." Then ask. the court that the answer be
recorded.
THE FOLLOWING REMEDIES ARE TO BE AVAILED OF 2. Alibi - defense that a person is innocent of the crime because
WHEN THE OBJECTION IS OVERRULED AND THE at the time of its commission, the accused is eelsewhere.
OPPONENT BELIEVES THAT THE COURT'S RULING IS Basis. Person cannot be in the same place at the same time.
ERRONEOUS: When must the court disregard the defense of alibi:
1. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - if this motion is a. when there is positive identification of the accused. b. When
denied, the remedy is to make the offer of record.m the place of the commission of the crime is accessible to the
Counsel here, must point out which part of the evidence place where the
must be considered by the court. accused was found. c. When the accused alleges self-
2. TAKE AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULING OF THE COURT defense - it is incumbent on the part of the accused to
- counsel objected but the court overruled the same. He prove by clear and convincing evidence the existence
therefore manifests that the Court's ruling is erroneous. ofself-defense-d. When the accused makes a denial of fact
Warn the court that if he loses the case, he shall appeal of the commission of the crime.
and point out the error in the appellate court.
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT - means moral
RULE 133 certainty; not necessarily 100% free of error; not absolute
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE certainty.
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

What happens if the evidence of plaintiff and defendant are Sufficient to Warrant Conviction if:
equal or in equipoise? a. there is more than one circumstance
The case will be decided in favor of the defendant b. the facts from which the inferences are derived are proved
Factors to be Considered by the Judge in determining c. a combination of all circumstances is suchj as to produce a
Preponderance of Evidence: conviction beyond reasonable doubt. EXCEPT: Homicide Case
1. accused was seen running away from the scene of the crime
1. Facts and circumstances of the case - court studies all angles with a bolo.
2. Intelligence of the witness - not IQ but the ability of the 2. Two days before the killing, accused was heard to take
witness to answer into straightforward manner. Did he revenge against the victim
correctly see the incident in question? Can he convince the 3. After the killing, the accused went into hiding.
Court that he is narrating the truth on what he saw, observed 4. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS APPLICABLE WHEN
and heard? THERE IS NO DIRECT EVIDENCE TO THE COMMISSION
3. Manner in which the witness testifies - in order to determine OF THE CRIME.
whether or not the witness is telling the truth, the behavior of a
person when testifying, to determine whether he is lying or PROOF OF MOTIVE IS MATERIAL EXCEPT WHEN:
telling the truth- E.g. perspiring, fidgeting. tensed THERE IS POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION OF THE ACCUSED.
4. Nature of the facts on to which the witness testifies
5. Personal Credibility of the Witness - refers to the reputation of
a witness
6. Means and opportunity of knowing what the witness is BINDING EFFECT OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT BY THE
testifying on - manner of observation; i,e, if he was only a few TRIAL COURT: It is entitled to great respect. It should not be
feet from the crime scene disturbed on appeal, because it is the trial court which had the
7. Probability or Improbability of their testimony - through human opportunity to observe the behaviour and demeanor of the
experience, the court can determine whether or not the witnesses. Except: The appellate court may review the findings
witness is exaggerating his testimony. The testimony must not of fact by the Trial Court when the latter has overlooked certain
only come from a credible witness. but the testimony must be facts of substance or value or significance which may affect or
credible in itself. Is the story in accordance with human may change th e outcome of the case.
experience. BINDING EFFECT OF FINDINGS OF FACT BY THE COURT
8. Number of witnesses. It is the substance of the testimony of a OF APPEALS -
witness that should be considered not their number or They are binding and final in the
quantity. EXCEPT in cases of: Supreme Court. Exceptions:
a. conflicting testimonies - here number of witnesses is to be 1. when the finding of the CA is grounded primarily on
considered b./n case of treason - two witnesses must testify to speculation or if tey are not supported by strong evidence.
the same overt act in open court 2. When the inference of the Ca is manifested by mistake
9. Interest or Want of Interest of Witness in the case - refers to 3. When the conclusion of the CA is based on a
the witness' bias, prejudice or motive because the person for misapprehension of facts
whom he is testifying is his friend, etc. 4. When the findings of facts are conflicting
Relationship per se does not affect the credibility of a witness. 5. When the findings are contrary to the admission of the
Proof of existence of bias and prejudice must be present. witnesses
PRINCIPLES TO BE CONSIDERED BY A JUDGE IN 6. When the findings of facts ware premised on the supposed
DETERMINING PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE: absence of evidence or when such are contradicted by
1. "Falsus in Uno,Falsus in Omnibus" - False in one, false evidence on record
7. When the findings of facts are without citation of evidence.
in all. Hence, when paret of the testimony of a witness is
untrue, all or the whole of his testimony shall not be PERPETUATION OF EVIDENCE - case when a witness would
want to give his
believed. testimony earlier, because he has to go abroad
Remedy: Offer the testimony of the witness ahead and keep the
same. When the action is filed, present the document before the
court.
STEPS TAKEN IN PERPETUATING A WITNESS' TESTIMONY
1.-File a Petition in court, stating the witness inability to testify
2.Court will set a date to take the witness testimony. This is
similar to a direct examination.
How to take the testimony?
-through a deposition under oath and with notice to the
adverse party.

Evidence 2003

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evidence 2003

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER

1 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY BAR OPERATIONS

prove its contents in some authentic document, or by

Rule 130 Q: When may secondary evidence be shown if

Q: May parol evidence be presented to show that one

Q: State the reason why parol evidence is

Q: May parol evidence be presented to show prior or

RULE 131 Generally, a negative allegation need not be proved.

` BURDEN OF PROOF ( onus probandi ) DEFINED: People vs Tiozon

WHAT MATTERS NEED BE PROVED? People vs Mendi

MUST A NEGATIVE ALLEGATION BE PROVED? A presumption is an inference of the existence or non-

connection, relations and coincidence of facts and

Sec. 3 Rule 131 ( a kk ) enumerates the disputable

WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF ESTOPPEL IN PAIS?

1. there must have been a representation or

WHAT IS THE RULE ON ESTOPPEL AGAINST TENANT? RULE 132

The Rule is that the tenant is not permitted to deny the

SEC. 13 Failure or Refusal of the Witness to Testify Failure

PURPOSES OF CROSS-EXAMINATION Section 10. Leading and Misleading questions

SCOPE OR LIMITS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION: May a leading Question be allowed?

When cross-examination cannot be done or completed

Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum.

What is hearsay evidence? 5. Common reputation- Common reputation existing

notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, that

EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE:

PEDIGREE - is the history of family descent, which is

b. DECLARATION AGAINST PECUNIARY REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:

4. Declaration must be made before the controversy REPUTATION

4. FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITON REQUISITE FOR THE

*REASON FOR ADMISSIBILITY: *REQUISITE FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

-Things done, spontaneous DYING DECLARATION RES GESTAE

2. The place where the statement was made.

5. The nature and circumstances of the statement itself.

4. Verbal act must be contemporaneous with REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIBILITY:

EXPERTS authors recognized in their own fields. 2.Identity of parties

10.COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE

-the testimony in a previous case may be used in a

a)ask opponent if he accepts i.e.members of the family,friend,neighbor,officials

a.) In Criminal Cases When the woman consents to the act, no

purpoting to contain such 3. Authentication by contents - since the witness knows

a. question is irrelevant RULING OF OBJECTIONS

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

You might also like

REASON FOR ADMISSIBILITY: REQUISITE FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF