Ev

idence
Rul
e131 j
udicial tr
ibunal
, quasi-
judi
cial, admini
str
ati
ve
proceedi
ng underoath oraffi
r mati
on bef
ore an
Sec.3Di
sput
abl
ePr
esumpt
ions opencourt.

The f oll
owing pr
esumptions ar
e satisfact
oryif Q:Whatisanoath?
uncont r
adict
ed,but may be cont radicted and A:AnappealtoGodtowitnessthetr
uthofwhathe
overcomebyot herevi
dence: decl
ares,andanimpr
eci
ationofDiv
inepuni
shment
orvengeanceuponhi
mifwhathesay si
sfal
se.
e.Thatt heevi dencewi l
lful
lysuppr
essedwould
beadver sei fproduced; Q:Oathvs.Af
fir
mat
ion
m. That of fi
cial duty has been r egul
arl
y A:Anoat hiswhenthewit
nesspl
aceshi
shands
performed bef
oreaBi bl
eandanAff
ir
mationi
swhenther
eis
p.Thatpr ivatet ransact
ionshavebeenf ai
rand noBibl
eused.
regular
v.Thatal ett
erdul ydirectedandmai l
edwas Q:IstheCAall
owedtoacceptev i
denceandhear
receivedint heregularcourseofthemail thet
esti
moni
esofthewi
tnesses?
A:Uponit
sdi
scr
eti
on
Rul
e132
Q:Whatdoy oumeanbydiscret
ion?
(
Sir)Rul
e132i str
ialtechni
que;itdeal
swi
tht
he A:Thepowergi ven t
othecour tsorJudgest o
r
ulesandthepr
ocedureforhear
ings. deci
dequest i
onsduringtr
ialwherenopar t
icul
ar
l
aw i s appli
cabl
e and contr
olled by per
sonal
A.Exami
nat
ionofWi
tnesses j
udgment.

Sec.1Exami
nat
iont
obedonei
nopencour
t Q:IstheCTAallowedtoacceptevi
denceandhear
thetest
imoni
esofthewit
nesses?
A:Yes(i.
e.MannyPacqui
ao’
staxevasi
oncase)
Theexami nat i
onofwitnesspresentedinat r
ialor
heari
ngshal lbedoneinopencour t
,andunderoat h
Note:Anycaseinvolv
ingthequest
ionoft
axeslevi
ed
oraffi
rmation.Unlessthewitnessisincapaci
tated uponbyt heBIRandBOC, andtheamountis1M and
tospeak,ort hequesti
oncall
sf oradiff
erentmode abovecannotbet akenbyor di
nar
ycourt
s,theyare
ofanswer ,t heanswersoft hewi tnessshallbe underthejur
isdi
cti
onoftheCTA.
givenoral
l
y.
Q:Howshouldanswer s/t
esti
moni esbegi v
en?
Q:Howistheexami nat
ionofawitnessdone? A:
A:Theexami nat
ionofawi tnessshallbedonei
n GR:Iti
susuall
ygivenor al
lyinopencour t
opencour
t,andunderoathoraffi
rmati
on XPN:
1.I ft
hequest i
oncal l
sforadi ffer
entmodeof
Q:Wheni sacourtconsideredopen? answer(i
.e.demonst rat
ion)
A:A cour tf
ormallyopened and engaged i
nt he 2.Whent hetestimoniesofwi tnessesmaybe
tr
ansacti
onofj udi
cialaff
airs,t
owhichal
lpersons giv
en in af f
idavi
ts under t he Rules on
whoconductt hemselvesinanor der
lymannerare Summar
yPr
ocedur
e(ci
vi
lcases)
admitt
ed 3.Deposi
ti
ons

Q: I
sarr
aignmentpartofthetri
al? Q:Whyopencourt?
A:Technical
lyarr
aignmenti snotpar tofthet ri
al, A:Toenablethecour
ttojudgethecredi
bil
i
tyofthe
becausewhenwespeakoft r
iali
tpresupposest he wit
nessbyhismanneroftesti
fyi
ng,demeanor
,thei
r
present
ati
on ofev idence but,forourpur poses i
ntel
li
genceandthei
rappearance.
underSecti
on1,arr
ai gnmentispartofthet
rial
Q:Whyshoul
dthet
est
imonybegiv
enunderoat
hor
Q:Whoi
sconsider
edtobeawitness? af
fi
rmati
on?
A:A wi
tness i
s someone who test
if
ybef
orea A:Becauseonceawit
nesstel
l
sal i
e,hewi l
lbe
1

Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
char
gedwit
hperj
uryorf
alset
est
imonyunderci
vi
l Q: Cant
helawyersay,
“of
ftherecord”
?
and/
orcr
imi
nal
cases A:Technical
l
yt hi
si s notallowed because of
Secti
on2provi
dedthati
thasrefer
encetothecase.
Q:Ther ulesay stestimoni esshoul dbegi venorally
;
cant heanswer soft esti
moni esofwi tnessesbei n Sec.3Ri
ght
sandObl
i
gat
ionsofaWi
tness
thef or
mf oundinaquest ionandanswer ,l
ikethose
madebef oreorexecut edbef orepol i
ceof fi
cersor A wi tness mustanswerquest i
ons,al though his
aff
idav i
ts? answermayt endt oest abl
ishacl aim againsthim.
A: However ,i
tist her ightofawi tness:
GR:Af fi
dav i
tscannott akepl acet het esti
moni esof (1)Tobepr ot ectedf rom irr
elevant,impr oper,or
witnesses i
nsul t
ing quest ions,and f r
om har sh ori nsulti
ng
XPN: demeanor ;
1.Incasesgov ernedbyt herul esofSummar y (2)Nott obedet ainedl ongert hant hei nt
erestsof
Procedure j
ust i
cer equire;
2.Wher ethef actobt ai
ni ngt heaf fi
dav i
tisi n (3)Nott obeexami nedexceptonl yast omat t
ers
i
ssue perti
nentt ot hei ssue;
3.Asanadmi ssionbyt headv ersepar ty (4)Nott ogi veananswerwhi chwi llt
endt osubject
4.Toi mpeachawi t
nessonst and himt oapenal tyf oranof fenseunl essot herwise
5.Whent heal l
owsJudi cial Affidavit
s providedbyl aw; or
6.Aspar tofResGest ae (5)Nott o gi ve an answerwhi ch wi lltend to
7.As an admi ssion ordecl arati
on agai nst degradehi sr eput at i
on,unlessi ttobet heveryfact
i
nterest atissueort oaf actf rom whi cht hefacti nissue
8.Aspar tofthet esti
monyoft hewi t
ness woul dbepr esumed.Butawi tnessmustanswert o
9.Whent headv ersepar tywai v esitsobjection the factofhi s pr evious fi
nalconvi ct i
on foran
oni t
sadmi ssibili
ty offense.(3a, 19a)
10.When t he cour tt akes Judi ci
al Not ice
thereof Q:Whataret her ightsandobl igat ionsofawi tness?
A:
Q:Iftheanswerofthewi t
nessisnotresponsiveto a.Rights
thequesti
on,whatareyougoingtodo? 1.Tobepr otectedf r
om i r r
el ev ant ,
impr oper ,or
A:Askt hecourttoStrikeOutt heansweront he insul
ting quest i
ons,and f rom har sh or
ground thatyou are notgi v
en t i
me t o obj
ect insul
tingdemeanor ;
becausethewit
ness’answeritnotresponsi
ve 2.Nott obedet ainedl ongert hant hei nt erests
ofjust i
cer equire;
Q:Whatift heanswerisgiv
ensoquickthatyouare 3.Nott o be exami ned exceptonl y as t o
notabletoi mmediat
elyobject
,whatareyougoing mat t
er sper t
inentt ot hei ssue;
todo? 4.Nott ogi v eananswerwhi chwi llt endt o
A:Askt hecour ttoStri
keOutt heansweront he subjecthi m t o a penal t
yf oran of f
ense
ground thaty ou ar
e notgi ven t
ime to obj
ect unlessot herwi sepr ov idedbyl aw; or
becausethewi t
nessansweredsoquick 5.Nott ogi v eananswerwhi chwi llt endt o
degradehi sr eput ation,unl essi tt obet he
Sec.2Pr
oceedi
ngst
ober
ecor
ded veryfactati ssueort oaf actf r
om whi cht he
factini ssuewoul dbepr esumed.
The ent i
re proceedings of a t r
ialor heari
ng, b.Obl i
gations
i
ncludingthequest ionspr opoundedt oawi tness 1.Awi tnessmustanswerquest i
ons,al t hough
andhi sanswerst hereto,thestatementsmadeby hisanswermayt endt oest ablishacl aim
the judge or any of t he parti
es,counsel,or againsthi m,pr ovi
dedt hati ti snotv iolative
witnesses wit
hr eference t othe case,shallbe ofhisr ightagai nstsel f-incr i
mi nation.
recordedbymeansofshor thandorstenot
ypeorby 2.A wit nessmustanswert ot hef actofhi s
othermeansofr ecording found suit
abl
ebyt he previousf i
nal conv ictionf oranof fense.
court.
2

Q:
Whati
sthi
sri
ghtagai
nstsel
f-
incr
imi
nat
ion?
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
A:Nopersonshal
lbecompel l
edtobeawi tness i
nvokehi sr i
ghtagainstself-i
ncri
mination,alt
hough
agai
nst hi
msel
f( Sect
ion 17, Ar
ti
cle 3, 1987 i
ncr oss-examination,healreadydeniedaut horshi
p
Const
it
uti
on) ofthefalsifi
eddocument ?
A: Yes. Wai v
er of t he r i
ght agai nst self-
Q:I st he r
ight agai
nst sel
f-
incr
imi
nat
ion sel
f- i
ncriminationinvokeddur i
ngt hecross-examinati
on
execut
ing? doesnotmeani tswai verduri
ngrebuttalstage.
A:No,i
tshouldbeinvoked.
Sec.4Or
deri
ntheexami
nat
ionofani
ndi
vi
dual
Q:Isther i
ghtagainstself
-i
ncri
minat
ionappli
cabl
e wi
tness
toacorporati
on?
A:No,i tcannotbei nvokedbeacor por
ati
onbut Theor derinwhi cht heindivi
dualwit
nessmaybe
onl
ybyani ndivi
dualperson. examinedi sasfollows;
Q:Isther i
ghtagainstself
-i
ncri
minat
ionappli
cabl
e (
a)Di rectexami nat
ionbytheproponent;
i
ncivi
l,cri
minalandadmi ni
str
ati
vecases? (
b)Cr oss-exami nat
ionbytheopponent ;
A:Yes. (
c)Re- dir
ectexami nati
onbyt heproponent
;
d)Re-
( cross-examinati
onbyt heopponent.
Q:Doesther i
ghtagai
nstself
-incr
imi
nat
ioninvol
ve
onl
ytest
imonialcompulsi
on? Q:Atwhatst agedoest heorderofexaminat
ion
A:No.I ti nvol
ves product
ion of i
ncri
minati
ng takeplace?
documentar
yev i
dence A:Att hetri
alstage,duri
ng t
hepresent
ati
on of
evidence.
Q:Whati st hediff
erencebet weent herightagainst
self
-i
ncriminationofanor dinarywi t
nessandt he Q:Thepr osecuti
onhast hreewi tnesses–1,2,and
ri
ghtagai nstself
-i
ncri
mi nationofawi tnesswhoi s 3.Can t he fi
scalask t he j udge thatthe dir
ect
atthesamet imeanaccused? examinati
onofALLt hreewi tnessesbedonef irst
A: befor
ethecr oss,re-
directandr e-crossofeach?
a.Or dinaryWi t
ness–y oucani nvoket her i
ght A:As a r ul
e,t echnical
ly speaki ng,thatis not
onlywhent heincriminat i
ngquest i
onisasked, all
owed.Butt hecour t,ont hepr incipl
ethatithas
i
tisaki ntoapartialdisqualif
icat
ion thepowert o controlitspr oceedings,mayal low
b.AccusedWi t
ness–y oucani nvoket her i
ght such.Thatispurelydiscret
ionar y.
att hef i
rstinst
ance,y oucanaut omaticall
y
ref
uset oobeyt hesubpoenat ot esti
fy,itis Sec.5Di
rectexami
nat
ion
aki
nt oabsolutedisqual i
ficat
ion
Dir
ectexaminat
ionistheexaminat
ion-
in-
chi
efofa
Q:Xi schar gedwi thf al
sification,hewascal l
edt o
wit
nessbyt hepartypresent
inghi
m ont hefact
s
the wi tness st and by hi s counsel .On cr oss-
rel
evantt
otheissue.
exami nation,t he counseloft he adverse par t
y
asked hi m,“ Mr.X,ar ey ou t he authoroft hi
s
Q:Whati sdir
ectexami nati
on?
fal
sif
icat i
on? ”Theaccusedsai dno.TheCounselof
A:Directexaminati
oni stheexaminati
on-
in-
chi
efof
theAdv ersePar tythenaskedXt owriteinapi ece
awi t
nessbyt hepar t
ypr esent
inghim onthef
acts
ofpaper .X’scounselobj ected,r i
ghtagai nstself-
rel
evanttotheissue.(Sec.5)
i
ncrimi nation.Ruleont heObj ection.
A:Ov erruled.Althought heactofaski ngt hewitness
Q:Wheni
safactrel
evanttothei
ssue?
togivesampl esofhi ssi gnat ureisv i
olati
veofhi s
A:
Whenitismateri
alandprobat
ive
ri
ghtagai nstsel f-
incriminat ion,when he deni ed
authorshipoft hef alsif
ieddocument ,hei nef f
ect
Q:Whatisthepur
pose?
waivedhi sr i
ghtagai nstsel f-
incri
mi nat
ion.
A:
Topr ovetheel
ement
soft
hecr
ime
Q:Int heabovequesti
on,whatifthefiscaldidnot
Q:Can t he court
s del
egat
ethe r
ecept
ion of
ask him to produce sampl
e signatures buton
ev
idencetoi
tsCler
kofCourt
?
rebutt
al,t
hefiscali
snow aski
ngX,asanadv erse
A:Yes,pr
ovi
dedthat:
witnesstoproducesampl esi
gnature.CanXnow
3

Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
a.TheCler
kofCourti
salawyer;
and A:
Yes.Thequest
ioncal
l
sforanar
rat
ion.
b.ThecaseisaSpeci
alPr
oceedingCase
Q:I
st heactualcross-exami
nat
ionnecessar
y,ora
Sec.6Cr
oss-
exami
nat
ion;
itspur
poseandext
ent mereopport
unity
?
A:I
tisamereoppor tunity
Upont het er
minati
onoft hedi r
ectexami nati
on,the
wi t
nessmaybe cr oss-exami ned byt he adverse Q:Canal awyeroftheaccusedcr oss-
exami
net he
party as t o any mat ters st at
ed int he dir
ect wit
nessofhisco-accused?
exami nat i
on,orconnectedt herewith,wit
hsuf f
ici
ent A:Yes.Asl ongast hereisalreadyashowingof
full
ness and f reedom t ot esthi s accuracyand adver
seinter
estupont hetest
imonyofthewitness
truthfulnessandf reedom f rom inter
estorbi as,or –theyar
enowopponent s.
ther everse,andtoel i
citallimpor t
antfactsbearing
upont heissue. Q: Are l eading questions all
owed i n cr oss-
examinati
ons?
Q:Whati
sacr
oss-
exami
nat
ion? A:Yes,theyar eall
owedi ncrossandre-
cr ossBUT
A:
Sec.6 notindir
ectandr e-di
rect
.
Note:Mi sleading quest
ions are notall
owed i n
Q:Whati
sthepurposeoft hecr oss-
examinat
ion? dir
ect,cr
oss, r
e-di
rectandre-
crossexamination.
A:Totestthewitness’accur acyandt r
uthf
ulness
andfr
eedom fr
om interestorbi as,orthereverse, Q:Mayaj udgeasksclar
if
icat
oryquest
ionstoa
andtoeli
cital
limpor t
antf actsbearingupont he wit
ness?
i
ssue;
tobreakt
hecr edi
bili
tyoft hewit
ness. A:Yes,butnotsearchi
ngquesti
ons(asifyouar
e
al
readyt
hef i
scal
)
Q: Whatisthescopeoft
hecross-
exami
nat
ion?
A:Mat ters st
ated i
nthe di
rectexami
nati
on,or Q:Whati ft
hejudgeaskssearchingquest
ions,
what
thoseconnectedther
ewi
th shoul
dt helawyeroftheaccuseddo?
A:Invoket hecaset hatprovi
desthatJudgesare
Q:Cant hecr oss-exami
neraskt hewi tnessona not all
owed t o conduct sear chi
ng questi
ons
factnotst at
ed dur i
ng t
he directnorconnect ed (Val
desv s.Aquir
iza;133SCRA150;GR122749;J.
ther
ewith? Vit
ug);t
elli
tpoli
tely
A:Yes,undert heROC,t hecr oss-examinati
onisto
eli
ci
tfactsbear ingupont heissue–t hefactmust Q:Whati ft he judge i
s notaski ng searchi
ng
bemat erialandr el
evant
,alt
houghi twasnotasked quest
ions buti s aski
ng obj
ecti
onable questi
ons
duri
ng t he di r
ect exami nati
on nor connect ed (l
eadi
ng,misleadi
ng) ?
ther
ewith. A:Inv
okethecaseofLopezv s.Standar
dOi l(
5Phi l
549)
Q:Whati sthebasisoft heri
ghtt
ocr oss-
examine
thewitness? Sec.7Re-
dir
ectexami
nat
ion;
itspur
poseand
A:(Sec.14( 2)
,Ar t
.3,1987Consti
tut
ion)Ther i
ght ext
ent
tomeett hewitnessfacetofacei
nvolvestheri
ght
tocross-examinethewi t
ness. Aft
ert he cross-exami nation oft he witness has
been concluded,hemayber e-examined byt he
Q:Pp v s.X.X was char ged wi t
h murder.His part
ycal l
ing him,t o expl ain orsuppl ementhi s
defensewasthatinJuly31, 2012,heisi
ntheUS.X answersgivendur ingt hecr oss-examination.Onre-
i
snow ont hewi tnessstand.X’slawyernow asks di
rect-
exami nat
ion,quest ionsonmat tersnotdealt
hi
m,“ Wherewer ey ouonJul y31,2012?”Isthat wit
hdur i
ngt hecr oss-exami nat
ion,maybeal l
owed
questi
onobject
ionable? bythecourtinitsdi scr
etion.
A:No.Iti
sacorrectdirectexaminati
onquesti
on.
Q:Whati
sre-
dir
ectexami
nati
on?
Q:Intheaboveprobl
em,whatifmyquest
ionwas, A:
Iti
stheexaminat
ionaf
tert
hecrossexami
nat
ion
“Whathappened duri
ng Jul
y 31,2012,
”isthe
4

quest
ionobj
ecti
onabl
e? Q:
Whati
sthepur
pose?
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
A: To compl
ete t
he t
est
imony i
n t
he di
rect A:
Per
missi
onoft
hecour
t
exami
nati
on
Q:Whatistheparametert
hatthej
udgewi
l
lgr
ant
Q:Whati
sthescopeofre-
dir
ectexamination? l
eaveofcour
t?
A:
Onlymatter
saskedduri
ngthecross-examinat
ion A:I
tisuponthei
nter
estofj
ust
ice

Q:ift he matteri
snotasked dur i
ng the cr
oss- Sec.10Leadi
ngandmi
sleadi
ngquest
ions
examinati
on,canyousti
llasksuchquest
ions?
A:Yes,uponthejudges’
discret
ion A quest ion whi ch suggest st ot he witness the
answerwhi ch the exami ning par tydesi r
es isa
Sec.8Re-
cross-
exami
nat
ion l
eadingquest i
on.Itisnotall
owed, except:
(a)Oncr ossexami nat
ion;
Upont heconclusi
onoft here-di
rectexami nati
on, (b)Onpr eliminarymat t
ers;
the adver se part
y may r e-
cross-examine t he (c)Whent hereisadi f
ficultyinget ti
ngdi r
ect
witness on mat ters stat
ed i n hi s re-di
rect andi ntelligi
bleanswer sf rom awi t
nesswhoi s
exami nat
ion,andal soonsuchot hermat tersas i
gnor ant ,orachi l
doft enderyear s,ori sof
maybeal l
owedbyt hecourti
nitsdiscreti
on. feebl emi nd,oradeaf -mut e;
(d)Ofanunwi ll
ingorhost ilewitness;or
Q:Whati
sre-cr
ossexaminat
ion? (e)Ofawi t
nesswhoi sanadver separtyoran
A: Itis the examinat
ion aft
er t
he r
e-di
rect of f
icer ,director,ormanagi ngagentofapubl i
c
exami
nat
ion orpr ivatecor porati
onorofapar tnershi
p or
associ ationwhi chisanadver separty.
Q:Whatisthepur
pose? A mi sleadi ngquest i
oni sonewhi chassumesas
A:Tobr eakdowntheelement
sandcr
edi
bil
i
tyof tr
ueaf actnotyett est
if
iedt obyt hewi tness,or
thewi
tness contraryt ot hatwhi chhehaspr evi
ouslystated.I
tis
notallowed.
Q:Whati
sthescopeofre-
dir
ectexami
nat
ion?
A: Onl
y matters asked during t
he re-cr
oss Q:Whatisaleadingquest
ion?
exami
nat
ion A:A quest
ionwhi chsuggestst
othewi t
nesst
he
answerwhi
cht heexamini
ngpart
ydesi
res
Q:ift he matteri
snotasked dur i
ng the cr
oss-
examinati
on,canyousti
llasksuchquest
ions? Q: Whati
sami sl
eadingquesti
on?
A:Yes,uponthejudges’
discret
ion A:Aquestionwhichassumesast rueafactnoty
et
testi
fi
edt
obyt hewitness,orcont
rar
ytothatwhi
ch
Q: Af
terthepr
osecut
ionpresentedi
tsevi
dence,can hehaspreviousl
ystated.
theypresentr
ebut
talandsur-
rebutt
alev
idences?
A:Yes. Q: What should objecti
ons t
o objecti
onabl
e
quest
ionsber
aised?
Sec.9Recal
l
ingwi
tness A: When the object
ionabl
e gr
ounds becomes
appar
ent
Aft
ertheexami nati
onofawi t
nessbybot hsides
hasbeenconcluded,thewitnesscannotberecall
ed Q:Whatar ethebuzzwordsi nl
eadingquesti
ons?
wit
houtleaveoft hecourt.Thecour twil
lgrantor A:Wast he,Didyou,Youdidnot ,
Hav eyounot,I
sn’t
wit
hholdleaveinitsdiscr
etion,astheint
erestsof afact,Asamat teroffact,Thef act
sare,Thatis
j
usti
cemayr equir
e. tr
ue,I
sn’t,Don’
tyouknow, Doy oumeant osay,You
don’
tknow ofcour se,Byt hatanswerofy ours,
Q:Whatisther
ulei
nrecal
l
ingawi t
ness?Whatt
o Whether
do?
A:Youshoul
dfi
l
eamotionforl
eav
eofcourt Q:Howwi lly
oucounterarguethattheobj
ecti
onof
l
eadingshouldbeoverr
uled?
Q:
Whatdoy
oumeanbyl
eav
eofcour
t? A:“Yourhonorthatisnotal eadi
ngquesti
on.The
5

questi
onismerelysuggesti
veofthesubj
ectmatt
er
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
andnott
heanswer
.” Sec.11I
mpeachmentofadver
separ
ty'
swi
tness

Q:Whatisapr
eli
minarymatt
er? Awi tnessmaybei mpeachedbyt hepartyagai nst
A:Thesear
eprel
iminaryf
act
sthatar
enotr
elev
ant whom hewascal led,bycont r
adict
oryevidence,by
tot
heissue evidence t hathi s gener alreputati
on f ort ruth,
honestly,orint egri
tyisbad,orbyevi dencet hathe
Q:When i s a witness an unwil
li
ng ora host il
e hasmadeatot hertimesst atementsinconsistent
witness? withhispr esent ,test
imony,butnotbyevi denceof
A:A wi tnessmaybeconsi deredasunwi ll
ingor parti
cularwr ongfulact s,exceptt hatitmaybe
hostil
e onlyifso decl ared by the cour
tupon shownbyt heexami nationoft hewi t
ness,ort he
adequate showi ng of hi s adv er
se interest, recordoft hej udgment ,thathehasbeenconvi cted
unjusti
fi
ed reluctance tot esti
fy,or his having ofanof fense.
mi sl
edt hepar t
yi nto cal
l
inghi m tot hewitness
stand.(Sec12( 2)
) Q:Whati
simpeachment?
A:
Iti
sthedest
ructi
onofthet
est
imonyofawi
tness
Q:Whati
sanAdver
seWit
ness?
A:
Theopposi
ngpart
ywhobecomey
ourwi
tness Q:Whatisthepurposeofimpeachment?
A:Toprovetothecourtthatt
hewitness’
test
imony
Q:Di r
ectExami nat
iononanor di
narywitness.The i
sunworthyofbeli
ef
questioni s,“
event houghyouknew youwer eat
fault
,y oust i
l
ldidnotst opyourv ehi
cle.
”Ist hi
s Q:Whataret
he4modesofi mpeachment?
objecti
onable? A:
A:Yes:( a)leadi
ng and (b)quest
ion cal
lsfora 1.Contr
adictoryEvi
dence
conclusion. 2.Evi
dence t hathis generalreput
ati
on f
or
tr
uth,
honest y,
orint
egr i
tyi
sbad
Q: Di
rectexami nationquesti
ononahost il
ewi tness. 3.Pri
orInconsist
entStatement
Thequest i
oni s,“eventhoughy ouknewy ouwer eat 4.Recor
dofPr i
orConvicti
on
fault
,youst i
lldidnotst opyourv ehicle.”Objection:
l
eadingandquest ioncallsf
oraconcl usion. Q:How arey ougoi ngtoimpeachbycont r
adictory
A:Ast oleading–i tshouldbeov errul
edsi ncea evi
dence?
hostil
ewitnessmaybeaskedl eadingquest i
ons.As A:To presentev idencet hatwi l
lcont r
adi
ctpr ior
tot he gr ound t hat the quest ion cal l
sf or a evi
dence presented by y ouradv er
sary( i
ndirect
conclusi
on–i tshouldbesust ained. i
mpeachment–i fAi stell
i
ngt hetruth,Bistel
linga
l
ie;andvi
cev er
sa); i
trequi
r esthecall
ingofanot her
Q: Dir
ectexami nat i
onquest i
ononahost il
ewi tness. wit
nesstocontradictwhatt heotherwi t
ness
Thequest i
oni s,“event houghy ouknew y ouwer e
drivi
ng att he r ightside oft he road,y ou st il
l Q:Whatdoy oumeanby“ gener
alr
eput
ati
onfor
stopped y our v ehicl
e.” Obj ecti
on:l eading and trut
h, honesty
,orint
egr
it
yisbad?”
questioncallsforaconcl usion.Rule A:Itmeanst hatthi
switnesshasabadreput
ati
on
A: Thequestioni snolongerobj ecti
onablesi nce:(a) forlackofv er
acit
y
ahost il
ewi tnesscanbeaskedl eadingquest i
ons
and ( b) the quest i
on no l onger callsf or a Note:Ev i
dence of GeneralI mmoral
it
y,Bad
conclusion;youar emer elystati
ngaf act. Charact
er, Part
icul
ar Wr ongful Act
, and
Part
icul
arCri
meisnotallowed
Q:“ Statewhet hert hedefendantpassedt
hrougha
red l i
ghti nt he inter
secti
on”– i sthe quest
ion Q:Cany oui mpeachawitnessunderthesecond
objectionable? modeont hegr oundofl
ackofmor al
it
y( ev
idence
A:Yes,ont hegr oundofl eading.–Thequestion ofbadcharacter
)?
mayber ephrasedasf ol
l
ows:“ Whatwasthecolor A:
oft het raff
icl i
ghtwheny oupassedt hr
ought he GR:No,t
hisisnotall
owed
i
nter secti
on?” XPN:
6

1.Iftheper sononthewi t
nessstandist he
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
accusedhimselfandy ouaskhim abouthi
s used si
nce in per
jury,you ar
eto pr
ovet
he
recordofpri
orconv i
cti
on di
shonestyofthewitness.
2.Ifwhaty ou’
regoingt oasktheCOCoft he
Judge who conv icted hi
m is aboutthe Q:Plaint
if
fv s.Def endant(Recov
eryofPar celof
person’
sr ecord ofpr iorconv
icti
on (t
he Land).Pl
aint
iffpresentedW whosaidt hatther eal
competentperson) ownerofthelandi stheplai
nti
ff
.Canthedef endant,
thr
oughY,pr esentev i
dencethatthereputationof
Q:Whatisnotal l
owedev
idenceofBadReput
ati
on Wi sbad?
vs.BadCharacter
? A:Yes.
A:BadCharacter
Q:Plai
nti
ffv s.Defendant(RecoveryofPar celof
Q:I mpeachmentoft hereputati
onofanor dinary Land)
.Plaint
iffpr
esentedW whosai dthatther eal
witnessvs.Impeachmentoft hereput
ati
onofan ownerofthelandistheplai
nti
ff.Canthedef
endant ,
AccusedWi t
ness thr
oughY,presentev i
dencethatthebadchar acter
A:ForanOr di
naryWitness,whatisimport
antishi s ofW?
reputat
ionatthetimet hathei scall
edtot estif
y. A:No.
ForanAccusedWi t
ness,itisast ohisreputati
on
whenhecommi t
tedthecrime Q:Pl ai
nti
ffv s.Defendant(Recov eryofPar celof
Land).Plaint
iffpr
esentedW whosai dthatther eal
Q:Twoki
ndsofpr
iori
nconsi
stentst
atement
? owneroft helandisthedefendant( hostil
ewitness).
A: The courtdecl ar
ed W a host i
le wi tness.Can Y
a.Or
al presentevidenceofthebadr eputationofW?CanY
b.Wri
tt
en presentevidenceofthebadchar acterofW?
A:Ast obadr eputat
ion,Yes;ast obadchar act
er,
Q:Howdoy oui mpeachawi tnessont hegroundof No.
pr
iori
nconsi
stentst at ement ?
A: Sec.12Par
tymaynoti
mpeachhi
sownwi
tness
a.Wr i
tt
enI nconsi stentSt atement( S-
R-A)
i. Showt heswor nst atement Exceptwi thr especttowi tnessesr eferr
edt oi n
ii
. Readt hest atement par agraphs( d)and ( e)ofSect ion 10,thepar ty
ii
i.Askt hewi tnessoft hecont entsoft he produci ngawi tnessi snotallowedt oimpeachhi s
document – make hi m admi tt he credi bi
li
ty.
cont entsoft hedocument( ifhedeni es, A wi tnessmaybeconsi deredasunwi l
li
ngor
char gehi m wi t
hper j
ury;ifheadmi ts, host il
e onl yi fso decl ared by t he courtupon
therei snowani nconsi stentstatement ) adequat e showi ng of hi s adver se int erest,
Not e:Ift hewi tnessr efusest oanswer , unjust i
fi
ed r eluctance tot est i
fy,orhi s havi ng
makeamani festationofhi srefusalto mi sledt hepar t
yi ntocalli
nghi mt othewi tness
answer stand.
b.OralInconsist entSt atement( M-C-U) Theunwi l
lingorhost i
lewi tnesssodecl ared,or
i. Ask t he wi tness i f he Made such the wi t
ness who i s an adver se par t
y,may be
statement i
mpeached by t he par t
y pr esent i
ng him i n al l
ii
. Askhi m aboutt heCont ent s respect sasi fhehadbeencal l
edbyt headver se
ii
i.Under stand – di d t he wi tness par ty,exceptbyevi denceofhi sbadchar acter.He
under standaboutt hei nconsi stency mayal sobei mpeachedandcr oss- examinedbyt he
adver se par t
y,butsuch cr oss-exami nati
on must
Note: You cannot cont radi
ct by a pr i
or onlybeont hesubj ectmatterofhi sexami nation-in-
i
nconsistent st
atement i ft he issue is a chief .
coll
ater
almat t
er–y oucanonl ycontradi
cton
i
ssuest hatar
emat erialorgermanetothemain Q:Sec.11talksofBadReput
ati
on–Sec.12tal
ks
case. You now obj ect on the ground of ofBadChar acter
.Isther
eadi f
fer
encebet
ween
i
mpr operi mpeachment .Buti ft he case i
s thei
rappl
i
cati
ons?
perj
ury,anyPI S showi ng di
shonest
ymaybe
7

A:None.
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
i
nconsi
stentst
atement
s
Q:Canapar
tyi
mpeachhi
sownwi
tness?
A:
No. Beforeawi tnesscanbei mpeachedbyevi dence
thathe has made atot hertimes st at
ements
Q:Whati stheef fectonthepart
yoft hetest
imony i
nconsistent with his pr esent testi
mony, the
ofa wi t
nesswho wasnotdecl ar
ed hosti
le but statements mustbe r elat
ed to hi m,wi t
ht he
testi
fi
edadv ersel
yony ourcl
aim? cir
cumstancesoft hetimesand pl acesand the
A:I tisbindingont hepart
ywhopr esent
edt hat personspresent,andhemustbeaskedwhet herhe
witness. made such st atements,and i fso,al l
owed to
explai
nthem.I fthestatement sbei nwr i
ti
ngthey
Q:Whencanonebeconsi deredanunwi ll
i
ngora mustbeshownt othewitnessbeforeanyquest i
on
hostil
ewi t
ness? i
sputt ohim concerni
ngthem.
A:A wi tnessmaybeconsi deredasunwi ll
i
ngor
hostil
e onlyi fso decl ared by the courtupon Sec.14Ev
idenceofgoodchar
act
erofwi
tness
adequate showi ng of hi s adv er
se i nterest
,
unjusti
fi
ed reluctance tot esti
fy,or his hav ing Evi
denceofthegoodchar
act
erofawi
tnessi
snot
mi sl
edt hepar t
yi nto cal
l
inghi m tot hewi tness admissi
ble unt
il such char
act
er has been
stand. i
mpeached.
Q:Canapart
ycal
lhi
sopponentashisownwitness? Q:Whatist
her easonfortherule?
A:
Yes(becausey
oucannowaskl eadi
ngquesti
ons) A:Thelaw pr
esumesev erypersont
ober eputedl
y
tr
uthf
ulunt
ilt
heev idenceshallbeproducedt othe
Q:Pl ainti
ffv s.Def endant( Damages ar ising on contr
ary
Vehicular Acci dent)
. P pr esent ed W who i s
supposedt ot esti
fythatthePi snotnegl i
genton Q:Sec.14,Rule132vs.Sec.51,
Rul
e130
theacci dentBUTW wentagai nstt hePandsai d A:
thatDi snott heonedr ivi
ngthecar ; thelawyerofP a.Sec.14,Rul e 132 – the wit
ness whose
didnotdecl areW ahost il
ewi tness.Ppr esented charact
erisinvol
vedisnotapar t
yt othe
anotherwi tness,Y,whot estif
iedt hat( 1)thereal case
onedr ivi
ngt hecari sD,cont rar ytowhatW sai d b.Sec.51,Rul e 130 – the wit
ness whose
thatDi snott heonedr iv
ing.Ysai dthat( 2)W hasa charact
erisi
nvolv
edisapart
ytothecase
badr eputati
on,t hatheisal iar.Ywentf urt
herand
tol
dt he judge t hat (3) pr i
or t ot esti
fyi
ng,W Q:Pi sclaimi nginsuranceproceedsforhisburned
whisperedt ohi mt hatDi stheonedr i
vi
ngt hecar. house.Ddoesnotwantt opayont hegroundthat
AllofY’ stest i
monyi sobj ect ed t o,rule on the P’sson del iberatel
ybur ned t
hehouse.TheSon
objecti
on. test
if
ied thathedi d notdo such.P t esti
fi
ed to
A:Sust ained.A Par tymaynoti mpeachhi sown provethegoodchar act
erofhisson;Dobj ect
edon
witness. thegroundt hatPcan’ tdosuch,Rule.
A:Sust ai
ned.Ther eisy etanimpeachmentofP’ s
Q:Ontheabov eprobl
em,W wasdecl
aredahost
il
e SonsChar acter.
wit
ness;Ruleontheobj
ect
ions.
A:Overr
uled.Asanexcept i
ontoSec.12,apart
y Q:Intheabovepr
oblem,whatifDtest
if
iedthatP’
s
mayimpeachhi swi t
nessifsuchhasbecomea Sonhasabadr eput
ati
on?CanPnowpr ovetothe
host
il
ewi t
ness. Judgehisson’
sgoodcharact
er?
A: Yes. The Sons reputat
ion is now being
Q: I
ntheabov eprobl
ems,whati
fYisthewi t
nessof i
mpeached.
the def endant
; can he t esti
fy against the
statementsofW?
Sec.15Excl
usi
onandsepar
ati
onofwi
tnesses
A:Yes( Sec.11–I mpeachmentofAdverseParty’
s
Statement)
Onanytr
ialorhear
ing,t
hejudgemayexcl
udef
rom
t
he cour
tany wi tness notatthe ti
me under
Sec.13Howwi
tnessi
mpeachedbyevi
denceof
8

Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
exami nat
ion,sothathemaynotheart hetesti
mony t
he t
ime when the fact occur
red, or
ofot herwi tnesses.The judge mayalso cause i
mmedi
atel
yther
eaf
ter
,oratanyothert
ime
witnessestobekeptsepar ateandtobepr event
ed whent hef
actwasfreshi
nhismemor yand
fr
om conver sing with oneanotherunti
lallshall knewthatthesamewascorrect
lywri
tt
enor
havebeenexami ned. recor
ded;in here,the ev
idence i
st he
testimony – t he wr i
ti
ng bei ng a mer e
Q:Whatisther
easonf ort
herul
e? memor yaid
A:To av oidinf
luencing t
he test
imony of t
he Not e:The ev i
dence i s st i
l
lt estimoni ali n
wi
tness char acter.The memor andum wi llnotbe
consi deredasdocument aryev idence
Q:I st hereadi ff
erencebet weenexclusi
onf r
om 2.PastRecol lecti
on Recor ded – A wi t
ness
otherwi tnessfr
om exclusi
onfrom thepubl
i
c? mayt esti
fyf r
om such wr i
ti
ng orr ecor d,
A:Ift her eissomebodyt estif
yinginthewi t
ness though he r etai
n no r ecollect i
on oft he
stand,t henextpossi bl
ewitnesscanbeex cl
uded particularfacts,ifhei sabl et osweart hat
andsepar atedf
rom thepubli
c. thewr iti
ng orr ecord cor rectlyst ated t he
transact i
on when made; i n her e, t he
Q:Pv s.D.Thepl aint
iff
’switnessar eX,YandP ev i
dencei sthewr it
ingi tself,hav i
ngbeen
(plai
nti
ffhimsel f
).Xi snow testifyi
ng,thecounsel attestedt oascor rectbyt hewi t
ness
forthedef endantmov edt oexcludeYandPont he Not e:Si nce therei s a compl etel oss of
groundt hatt heyarethenextwi tnesses,cant hey recollecti
onormemor yont hepar toft he
bebot hsentoutoft hecour t
? wi t
ness,t heni tist hememor andum i tsel f
A:Onl yYmaybeexcl udedandnotP( theplai
ntiff
) thatwi l
lserveasev i
dence.I twi l
lnow be
duet ohisConst i
tuti
onalri
ghttobepr esentatevery consi deredasdocument aryev idence.
stagesoft heproceedingandt her ighttoheart he
accusati
onsagai nsthim becauset heConst it
ution Q:Whatisadmi
ssibl
ebetweenthetwopar
ts?
i
ssupr emeov ertheRulesofCour t. A:
OnlythePastRecol
lect
ionRecor
ded

Sec.16Whenwi
tnessmayr
efert
omemor
andum Q:Whyi sitthatPr esentRecol lectioni nadmi ssible
andt hepastrecol l
ectionrecordedadmi ssible?
A wi tness may be al l
owed t or efr
esh hi s A:I nt he Pr esent Recol l
ection Recor ded,t he
memor yr espectingaf act,byanyt hingwr it
tenor characteroft heev idencei sstilltestimoni al–t he
recordedbyhi mselforunderhi sdi recti
onatt he memor andum ornot es i
si nadmi ssible because
ti
me when t he fact occur red,or i mmedi atel
y that memor andum cannot cor roborat e t he
thereafter,oratanyot hert i
mewhent hef actwas test
imony of t he wi t
ness who pr epar ed t hat
freshinhi smemor yandknew t hatt hesamewas memor andum.I nt hePastRecol l
ectionRev ived,it
correctl
ywr i
ttenorr ecor ded;buti nsuchcaset he i
sadmi ssibl
esi ncei nhere,itist hememor andum
wr i
ti
ngorr ecor dmustbepr oducedandmaybe i
tsel
f whi ch ser v
es as ev i
dence – i ti s now
i
nspect ed byt headver separ ty,who may,i fhe consideredasdocument aryevidence.
chooses,cr ossexami net hewi tnessuponi t,and
mayr eadi tinevi dence.So,al so,awi tnessmay Q:Wi t
hr especttot he ti
me f rame when t he
testi
fyfrom suchwr i
ti
ngorr ecor d,thoughher etai
n memor andum wasmade, whatisthediff
erence?
nor ecollect i
onoft hepar ticularf acts,i
fhei sable A:InPresentRecollect
ionRev i
ved, t
henoteismade
tosweart hatt hewr i
tingorr ecor dcor r
ectlyst at
ed atthetimewhent hefactoccur red,ori
mmedi atel
y
the transact i
on when made;butsuch evi dence ther
eafter,oratanyot herti
me.Ont heotherhand,
mustber eceivedwi thcaut ion. thePastRecol l
ect
ionRecor ded,thetimef r
amei s
i
mmat erial.
Q:Whatarethe2partsofSecti
on16?
A:
1.PresentRecoll
ecti
onRev ived– A wi t
ness Sec.17Whenpar
toft
ransact
ion,
wri
ti
ngorr
ecor
d
may be al l
owed t orefresh hi
s memor y gi
veni
nevi
dence,
ther
emainder
,ther
emai
nder
respecti
ng a fact
,byany thi
ng wri
tt
en or admissi
ble
9

recordedbyhimselforunderhisdir
ecti
onat
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
When par tofan act ,decl ar
ation,conver sati
on, A:Adocumenti sanydeed,i
nst
rument,oranyduly
wr i
ti
ngorr ecordisgiveninevi dencebyonepar t
y, aut
hori
zed paperbywhi chsomethi
ng isproved,
thewhol eofthesamesubj ectmaybei nqui
redi nt
o evi
dencedorsetfor
th.
byt heother,andwhenadet achedact ,declarati
on,
conversati
on,wr i
ti
ngorr ecordisgiveni nevidence, Q: Whatdoy oumeanbydocument aryevi
dence?
anyot heract,declar
ation,conversati
on,wr iti
ngor A:Itconsist
sofwr i
ti
ngsoranymat eri
alcont
aining
recordnecessaryt oi
tsunder standingmayal sobe l
etters,words,numbers,fi
gur
es,symbolsorot her
giveninevidence. modesofwr i
tt
enexpressi
onsoffer
edaspr oofof
theircont
ents.
Q:Does t he word “part
”i ncl
ude 2 separ
ate
documentsbutf or
mingonedocument ,
butnoti
na Q:Whatar
ethecl
assesofdocument
s?
seri
esofpaginati
on? A:
Publi
candPri
vateDocuments
A:Yes,itisapar tofthewhol eortotal
i
tyofthe
pages,
transacti
on,decl
arat
ion,
etc. Q:UndertheRPC, howmanycl
assesofdocument
s
ar
et her
e?Whataret hey
?
Sec.18Ri
ghtt
oinspectwr
it
ingshownt
owi
tness A:
1.Of f
ici
al
Wheneverawri
ti
ngisshowntoawi
tness,i
tmaybe 2.Publ i
c
i
nspect
edbytheadver
separt
y. 3.Commer ci
al
4.Pr i
vate
Q:Rel ateSec.8,Rul e130 (Par t
ywho cal l
sf or
Documentnotboundt oof f
erit)t oSec.18,Rul e Q:Whatistheimport
anceofdist
ingui
shi
ngpubli
c
132( Ri
ghtt oi
nspectwri
ti
ngshownt owitness) fr
om pr
ivat
edocuments?
A:Whenev erawr i
ti
ngisshownbef oret hecour t
, A:Fort
hepurposeoft
heirpr
esent
ati
oninevi
dence
theadv er
separtymayexami nethatwr i
ti
ng.Butt he
person who cal l
ed forthe pr oducti
on oft hat Q:Whatar ePubli
cDocument s?
documenti snotobli
gedtopresentitinevidence. A:Anydocumenti ssued byan offi
cermade i
n
accordancewi t
hlaw;Document sissuedwi
ththe
Q:Whati
sthepurpose? solemnit
iesrequi
redbylaw
A:
Tobeabletoinspecti
fiti
sgenui
ne.
Q:Whatar
et heclassesofPubl icdocument s?
B.Aut
hent
icat
ionandPr
oofofDocument
s A:
(
a)Thewr i
tt
enof f
ici
alacts,orr ecordsoft he
Sec.19Cl
assesofDocument
s off
ici
alact s of t he sov ereign authority,
off
ici
albodi es and tri
bunal s,and publ i
c
off
icers,whet herofthePhi l
ippines,orofa
Fort he pur pose oft heirpr esentation evidence,
for
eigncount ry;
document sareei t
herpublicorpr i
vate.
(
b)Document sacknowl edgebef orea not ary
Publi
cdocument sare:
publi
cexceptl astwil
lsandt estament s;
and
(a)Thewr i
ttenof f
ici
alact s,orr ecordsoft he
(
c)Publicrecor ds,keptint hePhi li
ppines,of
officialactsoft hesover eignaut hori
ty,official
pri
vatedocument srequi r
edbyl aw t ot he
bodi es and t ri
bunals, and publ i
c of fi
cer s,
enter
edt herein.
whet heroft he Phil
ippi
nes,orofa f oreign
count ry;
Q:Isal astwil
landtest
amentapublicdocument?
(b)Document sacknowl edgebef or
eanot ar y
A:No,becauseundert helawonSuccession,wil
ls,
publ i
cexceptl astwill
sandt est
ament s;and
even though notari
zed,t hei
rdue execut
ion and
(c)Publ i
cr ecords,kepti nt hePhi li
ppines,of
authentici
ty shoul
d st i
l
l be prov
ed by t he 3
private document sr equired by l aw t ot he
witnesses
ent eredtherein.
Allot herwri
t i
ngsarepr i
vate.
Q:Whatdoy oumeanbydueexecution?
A:Nothingmor ethanthattheinstr
umentisnot
Q:
Whati
sadocument
?
01

spur
ious,count
erf
eitorofadif
fer
entimpor
tonits
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
facefrom t
heoneexecuted andpr
oofofpr
ivat
edocument
s
Q: Whatarepri
vatedocuments?
A:Anydeedori nst
rument,bywhi
chsomet
hingi
s Q:How do y ou provet he due execut
ion and
proved,ev
idencedorsetfor
th. aut
hent
icit
yofapr i
vatedocument?
A:
Q:How woul dyou compar e a publi
cdocument (
a)Byany onewhosawt hedocumentexecuted
fr
om apr
ivat
edocument ? orwr i
tten;or
A: (
b)By ev idence oft he genuineness ofthe
1.Astoauthentici
ty signat
ur eorhandwr it
ingoft
hemaker .
a.Publ i
c–noneedt opresentproofofit
s
dueexecut i
onandauthenticit
y,bef
oreit Q:How ar eyougoi
ngt oprov
eorestabl
i
shthe
mayber eceivedi
nev i
dence genui
nenessofthesi
gnatur
eoft ?(
hemaker Sec.
b.Pr i
vate– y ou need t o proveitsdue 22)
execut
ionandaut hent
ici
ty,befor
eitmay A:
bereceiv
edi nevi
dence a.Byany onewhosaw
b.Test imonyofawi t
nesspurpor
ti
ngt oshow
2.Ast
oper sonsbound thatt he signatur
eist he si
gnatur
e ofthe
a.Publ i
c – ev i
dence even against 3rd maker
persons,ofthef actwhichgaveriseto c.Byt hecompar i
sonofthehandwriti
ngofthe
i
tsdueexecut ionandtot hedateofthe witnessbyt hecourt
document d. ByEx per
tWi t
ness
b.Pri
v ate – bi
nds onlythe part
ies who
executeditorthei
r Q:Whataret heself-aut
hent i
catingdocument s?
A:
Q:I s an SPA executed abroad acknowl
edged 1.Publ icDocument s
befor
e a not ary publ
ic abr
oad admi ssi
ble i
n 2.Anci entDocument s( Sec.21, Rule132)
evi
denceaspublicdocumentsi
nourcour t
s? 3.Not arizedDocument s
A:Yes(Sec.19(a)) 4.Document s whose aut hent i
cit
y has been
admitted under t he Rul es on Actionable
Note:Anyfor
eigndocumentt
obeadmi
ssi
blei
n Document s(Rule8,Sect ion8)–i fyouf ai
lto
ourcourt
smusthav ea“r
edri
bbon” ver
ifyy ouranswer ,any thingat t
achedt othe
documenti sdeemedadmi tted
Q: What i s t he evidenti
ary val
ue of publ i
c 5.Repl yt ot he LetterRul e – conf i
rmation
document s? made t he counselt hatdemand l etterhas
A:Itmustbesust ai
nedi ntheabsenceofst r
ong, beenr eceived
completeproofofitsnull
it
yorfalsi
ty.Itmeansthat
merepr esentat
ionther
eofi spri
maf aci
eevidence Q:How wi llyout emporari
lyhav eaphotocopied
ofthefactstherei
nstat
ed. documentt emporari
l
ymar ked?
A:You say ,“YourHonor ,mayImov ethatthis
Sec.20Pr
oofofpr
ivat
edocument documentbet emporari
lymar ked.
”Thent henext
heari
ng,
y ounowaskt hecourttotransf
ert
hemar k
Bef
or eanypr i
vatedocumentof f
eredasauthenti
c totheor
iginaldocument.
i
sr eceived i n evidence,its due execut
ion and
aut
hent i
citymustbepr ovedeither: Sec.21Whenev
idenceofaut
hent
ici
tyofpr
ivat
e
(a)Byanyonewhosawt hedocumentexecuted documentnotnecessar
y
orwr i
tten;or
(b)By evi dence oft he genuineness ofthe Whereapr i
vatedocumentismor ethanthi
rt
yyears
signatureorhandwr i
ti
ngoft hemaker. ol
d,isproducedfr
om thecust odyinwhichitwould
Anyot herprivatedocumentneedonl ybeidenti
fi
ed nat
urall
ybef oundifgenuine,andi sunblemished
asthatwhi chitisclaimedt obe. byanyal t
erati
onsorcircumst ancesofsuspicion,
nootherevi
denceofit
saut hentici
tyneedbegiven.
11

Not
e:Sec.21-
23ar
ether
ulesont
heaut
hent
icat
ion
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
Q:Doancientdocument
scoverpubl
i
cdocument
s? keptinthePhili
ppines,withacer t
ifi
cat
ethatsuch
HowaboutPr i
vat
eDocument
s? offi
cerhast hecustody.Iftheof f
iceinwhicht he
A:Pr
ivat
eDocument s recordiskeptisinf orei
gncount r
y,thecerti
fi
cate
maybemadebyasecr et
aryoft heembassyor
l
egation,consulgener al
,consul ,vice consul,or
Q:WhatisanAnci
entDocument
? consularagentorbyanyof ficerint he f
oreign
A:Documentswhi
chhavebeeninexi
stencef
or30 servi
ceoft hePhili
ppinesstationedi ntheforeign
year
sormore. country in which t he r ecor d is kept, and
authenti
cat
edbyt hesealofhisof fi
ce.
Q:Whati sthereasonwhyananci entdocument Q:DoesSection24cov
erbot
hlocalandf
orei
gn
need notbe pr oved ofits due executi
on and of
fici
alr
ecor
ds?
authenti
cit
y? A:Yes.
A:Becauseoft hedif
fi
cult
yofgetti
ngwi t
nessesto
testi
fyastothedueexecuti
onofthedocument . Q:Howcany ouprov eof fi
cialr
ecor
ds?
A:
Sec.22Howgenui
nenessofhandwr
it
ingpr
oved a.LocalOff
icial Records
1.ByOf ficial Copy
Thehandwr it
ingofaper sonmaybepr ovedbyany 2.ByOf ficial Publi
cati
on
wi t
nesswhobel ievesi ttobet hehandwr i
ti
ngof 3.ByCer tifiedTr ueCopy
suchper sonbecausehehasseent heper sonwr i
te, b.Forei
gnOf fi
ci alRecords
orhasseenwr i
tingpur porti
ngtobehi suponwhi ch 1.ByOf ficial Copy
thewi t
nesshasact edorbeenchar ged,andhas 2.ByOf ficial Publi
cati
on
thus acqui r
ed knowl edge oft he handwr i
ti
ng of 3.ByCer tifiedTr ueCopy
suchper son.Evidencer especti
ngt hehandwr i
ti
ng
mayal sobegi venbyacompar i
son,madebyt he Q:How do y ou pr ove Certif
ied Tr ue Copies;
wi t
ness ort he cour t
,wi th writ
ings admi tt
ed or requi
rements?
treatedasgenui nebyt hepar t
yagai nstwhom t he A:
evidencei soffered,orpr ovedt obegenui net othe a.Local Offi
cialRecor ds
satisfacti
onoft hejudge. 1.At t
estation
2.Aut hentication
Sec.23Publ
i
cdocument
sasevi
dence 3.Document ary Stamp ( w/o such,i tis
i
nadmi ssible i n ev i
dence) ; provi
ded
undertheNI RC
Document sconsisti
ngofent ri
esinpublicrecords
b.ForeignOf fi
cial Records
madei nt heper f
ormanceofadut ybyapubl i
c
1.At t
estation–ast atementt hatthisi
sa
offi
cerar
e pri
maf acie 
evi
denceofthef act
st herei
n
cert
ifi
edt ruecopy
stat
ed.Allot herpubli
cdocument sar eevidence,
2.Cer ti
fi
cat i
on – a st atementt hatt he
evenagainstat hi
rdperson,ofthefactwhichgave
ori
ginalcopy i si nt he custody ofa
ri
setotheirexecuti
onandoft hedateofthelatter.
publi
cof fi
cer
3.Aut hentication–pr oofofdueexecut i
on
Q: Bet
ween a publi
c document and a bar
e
al
l
egati
on,
whichshal
lpr
evai
l
?
Note:Cer t
if
icati
onisusedonlyforcer
ti
fi
ed
A:Publ
i
cDocument
t
ruecopi eswhi l
eAcknowledgmenti
sforan
Ori
ginal; al though t hey ar e used
Sec.24Pr
oofofof
fi
cialr
ecor
d
i
nterchangeably

The record ofpubl i

c documentsr eferr
ed toi n Q:Howdoy ouprov eanOr i
ginalDocument?
paragr
aph( a)ofSect i
on19,whenadmi ssi
blefor A:
any purpose,may be evi denced by an of fi
cial a.LocalOffi
cialRecords
publi
cati
ont hereoforbyacopyat t
estedbyt he - No mor e need f or any at
test
ati
on,
off
icerhavi
ngt helegalcust
odyofther ecord,orby acknowledgement ,andauthent
icat
ion
hi
sdeput y,andaccompani ed,ift
her ecordi snot
21

b.Forei
gnOf f
icialRecords
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
1.By an Acknowledgement– t hatt he
documentis duly execut
ed befor
ea Sec.27Publ
i
crecor
dofapr
ivat
edocument
publ
icof
fi
cer
2.By an Aut henti
cati
on – t hat t he Anaut hor
izedpublicr ecordofaprivat
edocument
documenti
ssealed maybepr ovedbyt heor igi
nalr
ecord,orbyacopy
thereof
,attested by t he l
egalcustodian ofthe
Q:
Aret
hef ollowingpubl icorpr i
vat
edocument s? record,with an appropriat
ecerti
fi
catet hatsuch
1.Appl i
cat i
onf orregistrat
ionofaTI NinBI R– offi
cerhasthecust ody.
public( Sec.19a)
2. SealedOr igi
nalSt ockCer t
ifi
cate–pr i
vate Q:Isapubl icrecordofapr iv
atedocumentpr oofof
(apr i
v ateindiv
idual causedtheseal) i
tscont ents,dueexecut ionandaut hent
ici
ty;does
3. Certi
ficationoft heCl er
kofCour t–publ i
c thepriv
at edocumentacqui rethestatusofapubl i
c
4.Recei ptoft heTreasur er’
sOffi
ce–publ ic documentunderSec.27?
5.Un-Not ar
izedSeal edTi t
leofaLand–publ i
c A:No,t hewr iti
ngsr emain pri
vat
e– i twillonly
6.Certifi
cat i
onf r
om Bi ñan,Laguna–publ ic acquir
et hechar acterofapubl i
cdocumentBUTi t
7.Arti
clesofI ncorporation–publ i
c(issuedby remains t o be pr ivat
e document s which due
theSEC) executi
on, contentsandauthenti
cit
ymustbepr ov
e.

Sec.25Whatat
test
ati
onofcopymustst
ate Sec.28Pr
oofofl
ackofr
ecor
d

Whenevera copy ofa documentorr ecordis Awr i

tt
enst at
ementsi gnedbyanof f
icerhavingt he
attested f or the pur pose of evi dence, the custodyofanof fi
cialrecor
dorbyhi sdeputyt hat
attestat
ionmustst at
e,insubstance,thatt hecopy afterdi l
igentsearch no r ecor
d orent r
y ofa
i
sacor r
ectcopyoft heori
ginal
,oraspeci f
icpart specifi
edt enorisfoundt oexistintherecor dsof
thereof,ast hecasemaybe.Theat testati
onmust hisof fi
ce,accompani edbyacer ti
fi
cateasabove
beundert heof f
ici
alsealoftheattesti
ngof fi
cer
,if provided,i s admissible as evi
dence t hat t he
therebeany, ori
fhebet hecl
erkofacour thavinga recordsofhi soffi
cecont ainno suchr ecor d or
seal,undert hesealofsuchcourt.(
26a) entry.

Sec.26I
rr
emovabi
l
ityofpubl
i
crecor
d Not
e:A cl
assi
cexampl
eoft
hisi
stheNDI– No
Der
ogat
oryRecor
d
Anypubl i
cr ecord,an of f
ici
alcopyofwhi ch is
admissibl
einevidence,mustnotber emovedfrom Sec.29Howj
udi
cialr
ecor
dimpeached
theoff
iceinwhichi tiskept
,exceptuponorderofa
court wheret he i nspect
ion of the recordi s Anyj udicialrecordmaybei mpeachedbyevi dence
essent
ialtot hej ustdeterminat
ionofapendi ng of:( a)wantofj uri
sdict
ioninthecourtorj udi
cial
case. officer ,(b)col l
usion between t
hepar t
ies,or( c)
fraudi nthepar tyofferi
ngtherecord,i
nr espectto
Q:Whati
sther
easonbehi
ndtherul
e? thepr oceedings.
A:
Toenableot
her
stousetherecor
d
Q:Howar ejudi
cialr
ecordsimpeached?
Q:Aret
hereexcepti
onst otherule? A:
Byev i
denceof:
A: (a)Wantofj uri
sdi
ctioninthecourtorjudi
cial
1.OrderoftheCour t(
Rule136, Sect
ion26) offi
cer
2.Rule136,Section14( Takingofrecor
dfrom (b)Coll
usi
onbetweent hepart
ies
thecler
k’soff
ice (c)Fraud i
nt hepar tyoff
eri
ng therecor
d,in
respectt
otheproceedings.
Q:Whatifapublicoff
icervi
olat
esSection26,i
she
cri
minal
lyl
iabl
e? Sec.30Pr
oofofnot
ari
aldocument
s
A:Yes.UnderSecti
on2,Chapter5,RPC( I
nfi
del
it
yin
thecust
odyofdocument s)–Arti
cles226,227,
228
31

Ever
yinst
rumentdul
yacknowl
edgedorpr
ovedand
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
cert
if
iedaspr ovi
dedbyl aw,maybepr esentedi n admi
ssi
bil
i
tyasevi
dencei
sconcer
ned.
evi
dencewi thoutfurt
herproof,t
hecer tif
icateof
acknowledgmentbeing pr
imafaci
e evi
denceoft he Q:Doyoust i
ll
needtoprov
ethedueexecuti
onand
executi
onoftheinstr
umentordocumenti nvolved. aut
henti
cit
yofaSealedPri
vat
eDocument ?
A:Yes,
foritsti
ll
remai
nsaPriv
ateDocument
Q:Whyar e documents notar
ized bythe Notary
Publ
icgiv
enthest at
uesofapubl icdocument? Q;How do y ou pr ov et he due execution and
A:BecauseNot aryPubl
ics,asof fi
cer
soft helaw, aut
henti
cit
yofaPr i
vateDocument ?
aregi
venacer tai
ndegreeofr espectandacer t
ain A:Byaski
ngt hesetwoquest i
ons:
degr
eeofconf i
dence 1.Whati sy ourev idence?(agener alquesti
on
topr ovedueex ecutionandauthenti
cityofa
Sec.31Al
ter
ati
oni
ndocument
,howt
oexpl
ain PrivateDocument )
2.Whose si gnatur ei st hi
s? (Provi
ng due
Thepar typroducingadocumentasgenui newhich execut i
on) How di d you know whose
hasbeenal teredandappear st ohavebeenal t
ered signaturethisis?( Provi
ngAuthenti
city
)
afteri
tsexecution,i
napar tmat eri
altothequesti
on
i
ndi spute,mustaccountf ort heal t
erat
ion.Hemay Sec.33Document
aryevi
dencei
nanunof
fi
cial
show t hatthe alter
ation was made byanot her, l
anguage
withouthi sconcur r
ence,orwasmade wi t
ht he
consentoft he par t
ies af f
ect ed by it
,orwas Document swr i
tt
eninanunof fi
ciall
anguageshal l
otherwiseproper l
yori nnocentmade,ort hatthe notbeadmi t
tedasevidence,unl
essaccompani ed
al
terati
ondi dnotchanget hemeani ngorlanguage withat ransl
ati
onintoEngli
shorFili
pino.Toavoid
oft he instr
ument .I fhe f ailst o do that,the i
nterrupt
ion of pr oceedi
ngs, part
ies or t heir
documentshal lnotbeadmi ssiblei
nevidence. attor
neys are dir
ected t
o have such transl
ati
on
preparedbeforetr
ial
.
Q:Whatt odowheny ouradversar
ypresent
edan
alt
ereddocument? Q:Whati fXkill
edY.Xadmi t tedguil
tinaCebuano
A:Makeamani f
estat
iontotheJudgesay i
ngthat di
alect
,ishisadmi ssionadmi ssibl
einevi
dence?
thedocumentisalter
edsot hatwheny ouobject
, A:Yes,sincethesel ocaldi
alectsareconsideredas
thecourtwil
lremembert hatthedocumentisan auxi
li
aryof f
ici
all anguages– t heyareno l onger
alt
eredone needed to be translated.(Pp v.Tomaqui n;435
SCRA23)
Not
e:Anal
ter
eddocumentcannotbecur
ed
Q:WhatifXkil
ledY.Xadmit
tedguil
tinaRussi an
Q:I
fy ouarethepr esenterofthealter
eddocument , l
anguage,i
shi
sadmissi
onadmissi
blei
nev i
dence?
whatarey ousupposedt odoinor derforittobe A:No,f
orei
gnl
anguagesmustbetr
anslat
ed.
admissi
bleinevidence?
A:Hemayshowt hat: C.Of
ferandObj
ect
ion
1. The alterat i
on was made by anot her,
wit
houthi sconcur r
ence,or Sec.34Of
ferofevi
dence
2. Thealterationwasmadewi ththeconsent
ofthepartiesaffectedbyit
,or Thecourtshal
lconsi
dernoevi
dencewhichhasnot
3. The al
teration waspr operl
yori nnocentl
y beenformall
yoffer
ed.Thepurposeforwhichthe
made,or evi
denceisoff
eredmustbespeci
fi
ed.
4. Thealterationdidnotchanget hemeani ng
orl
anguageoft heinstr
ument . Sec.35Whent
omakeof
fer

Sec.32Seal Asr egar

dsthetest
imonyofawi t
ness,t
heoff
er
mustbemadeatt hetimet hewit
nessiscall
edto
Thereshal
lbenodiff
erencebet
weenseal
edand t
esti
fy.
unseal
ed pri
vat
e documents i
nsof
ar as t
hei
r Document ar
y and objectevi
dence shallbe
41

Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
offer
ed af t
er the pr
esentat
ion of a party'
s i
dentif
ied,marked and l
ostbutf or
mall
yof f
ered;
testi
monialevi
dence.Such offershal
lbe done admissibl
eorinadmissi
ble?
orall
yunlessal
lowedbyt hecourttobedonei n A:Inadmissi
ble,si
nceal ostdocumentcannotbe
writi
ng. off
ered

Q:Whenshouldyoumakeanof fer
? REGALADO: (
sirdonotagree)
A: GR: Ev idence not f ormall
y of f
ered is
a.Document ary and Objectev i
dence – t he i
nadmissible
offer must be made af ter the party’
s XPN:Thoughnotf ormall
yoffer
ed,aslongasit
presentat
ionoft hetest
imonialevidence i
s mar ked and i dent
ifi
ed as borne by t
he
b.TestimonialEvidence– t heof f
ershal lbe st
enographicnotes,iti
sadmissibl
e
madeatt hetimet hewi t
nessiscal ledto
testi
fy Q:Shoul
dt heofferbespeci
fi
c?
A: Because of t he doctr
ine of t
he Mul
ti
ple
Q:Why shoul d evi
dence be for
mall
y off
ered; Admissi
bil
ityofEvidence
purpose?
A:Noev i
denceshal
lbeconsi
der
edunlessf
ormally Q:Canapar
tywi
thdr
awhi
sev
idence?
off
eredincour
t. A:
No.

Q:Whatar
et hety
pesofEv
idence? Q:Ident
if
icati
onofEv idencev s.FormalOf ferof
A: Evi
dence
1.Testi
monial A:Ident
if
icati
onofEv idenceismadedur i
ng the
2.Object/
Real cour
seoft hetri
alwhi
leformalofferofevidenceis
3.Documentary madeaftertheparty’
spr esent
ati
onoft esti
moni al
evi
dence
Q:Befor
easkingt
hewi t
nessonstand,
whatshould
thel
awyerst
atefi
rst? Sec.36Obj
ect
ion
A:Thepurposeoft hetest
imony–aftert
his,y
ou
cannowaskthewitness Objecti
ont oevi denceof f
eredor allymustbe
madei mmedi at
elyaftertheof f
eri smade.
Not
e: Objecti
on to a quest i
on pr opounded int he
Youcannotaskquest i
ons,i fyoudi dnot courseoftheoralexami nationofawi t
nessshal lbe
statethepur poseofthet est
imony–t hus,i
f made as soon as t he gr ounds t heref
orshal l
youar eanadv ersar
y,youcanobj ect becomer easonablyappar ent.
Aftert helastwi t
nessunder wentt heq&a, Anof f
erofevi denceinwr it
ingshal lbeobjected
thel awyernowshal lmakeaf or
malof ferof towi t
hinthree( 3)daysaf ternot i
ceoft heof f
er
evidencewi thi
n3day sf rom thest at
ement unl
essadi ff
erentper i
odisal l
owedbyt hecourt.
oft helastwi t
ness–whi chshallconsistof In anycase,t he grounds f orthe objections
the di f
fer
entdocument ary exhibi
ts( fr
om mustbespeci fi
ed.
thistime,theotherpart
ymaynowobj ect)
Q:Whatshouldthe par
ty do i
fhe want
sthe
Q:Ifthe document,whi
ch wasat tached t othe evi
denceoft
headver
separt
ynotbeaccept
edby
compl
aint but not i
denti
fi
ed nor mar ked but thecourt
?
for
mall
yoffer
ed;i
sitadmissi
bleori
nadmi ssibl
e? A:Object
A:Admissi
ble
Q:Giv
eme10ki ndsofObject
ion
Q:Ifthedocumentisnotattachedtothecomplai
nt A:
butwasi dent
if
ied and marked butnotfor
mally 1.Quest
ionisAmbiguous
off
ered;admissi
bleorinadmissi
ble? 2.Quest
ionisArgumentati
ve
A:Inadmissibl
e 3.Quest
ionisvi
olat
iveoftheBER
4.Quest
ionisCompound
51

Q:I
fthedocumenti
sat
tachedt
othecompl
aint
, 5.Quest
ioncall
sforConclusi
on
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
6.Questioni
stooGener al sust
ainedorover
rul
ed”
7.Questioni
sHy potheti
cal
8.Questioni
sLeading Sec.38Rul
i
ng
9.Questioni
sMi sl
eading
10.Quest
ionMisquotesawitness The r uling of t he cour t must be gi ven
i
mmedi at
elyaf t
ertheobjectioni smade,unlesst he
Q:WhathappenedonJul
y13,2001?– i
sitt
his cour tdesirest otakear easonabl etimet oinf or
m
obj
ecti
onable? i
tselfont hequest ionpresented;butt herul
ingshal l
A:Yes. alwaysbemadedur i
ngthet rialandatsucht i
meas
1.Leading willgivet hepar t
yagai nstwhom i ti smadean
2.Misleading oppor t
unityt omeett hesituat i
onpresentedbyt he
3.Narrati
ve rul
ing.
The r eason forsust aining orover ruli
ng an
Note:I
nordertoobvi
atetheobj
ect
ion,add“
if objection need notbe st ated.However ,ift he
any
”af t
erthequesti
on,t
heobject
ioncanno objectionisbasedont woormor egrounds,ar uli
ng
l
ongerbesust
ained sustainingt heobjecti
onononeorsomeoft hem
mustspeci fythegroundorgr oundsr eli
edupon.
Q:Whent omakeanobj ect
ion?
A: Q:I
ftheobj
ecti
onwasbasedon2ormor egrounds,
a.Or alTest imony – af tert he offeroft he mustthej
udgestatehisbasi
sofhi
srul
i
ng,ifhewill
evidencei smade( alsoaf terthepur pose ov
errul
eall
theobject
ions?
wasst ated) A:No.
b.I nWr it
ing(Document aryEv idence)–wi t
hin
3day saftertheformal offer Q:Iftheobject
ionwasbasedon2ormor egrounds,
c. Quest i
onPr opoundedi nt hecour seoft he mustt hejudgestat
ehi
sbasisofhi
sr ul
i
ng,ifhewill
oralexami nati
on–whent heobj ecti
onable sustainoneofthe2ormoreobject
ions?
porti
onbecomesappar ent( dur
ingt hetrial A:Yes.
stage)
Sec.39St
ri
ki
ngoutanswer
Sec.37Whenr
epet
it
ionofobj
ect
ionunnecessar
y
Shouldawi tnessanswert hequesti
onbef ore
When i t becomes r easonably apparent int he theadver separ t
yhadt heoppor tuni
tyt
ovoi cefull
y
courseoft heexami nati
onofawi tnesst hatt he i
tsobj ect i
ont ot hesame,andsuchobj ecti
oni s
questi
onbei ngpr opoundedar eoft hesamecl ass foundt obemer itori
ous,thecour tshal
lsustainthe
as those to whi ch obj ect
ion has been made, objectionandor dert heanswergi ventobest r
icken
whethersuchobj ecti
onwassust ai
nedorover r
ul ed, offther ecord.
i
tshallnotbenecessar yt orepeattheobj ecti
on,i t Onpr opermot i
on,thecour tmayalsoor derthe
bei
ngsuf f
icientfortheadver separtyt orecordhi s stri
king outofanswer s which areincompet ent,
conti
nuingobj ecti
ont osuchcl assofquest ions. i
rrelevant,orotherwiseimpr oper.
(
Cont
inui
ngObj
ect
ion)
Q:Whatt o do when the answerwasmade so
Q:Whati sy ourremedyf orsamekindsofquestion quickl
y?
propoundedt oy ourwit
ness? A:Shouldawi t
nessanswert hequesti
onbef or
et he
A:Objection,thequestionisrepet
it
ive;andi
fsuch adversepart
yhadt heopportuni
tytovoicefull
yits
wasst i
lldone,nowaskt hecourtt
omakear ecord objecti
ontothesame,andsuchobj ect
ionisfound
ofyourcont i
nuingobjecti
on to be mer i
tor
ious,t he courtshallsustaint he
objecti
onandor dertheanswergiventobest r
icken
Q:Whati f,wheny ouobject
edf i
rst
,theobject
ion offtherecor
d.
wasov err
uled.Andthenont hesecondt i
me,your
objecti
on was sustai
ned.Can y ou movef ora Q:Whatar
etheothergr
oundsf
ory
out
omov
efora
recordofyourcont
inui
ngobject
ion? moti
ontostr
ikeout
?
61

A:Yes,Sec.37sai d“whethersuchobjecti
onwas
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad
 Ev
idence
A:I
ftheansweri
sot
her
wisei
mpr
oper
,ir
rel
evantor supposedt
est
imonyofmywi
tness.
i
mmat er
ial
.
Q:Whati
sthepurposeoftheabove?
Sec.40Tenderofexcl
udedevi
dence A:I
twil
lber ecor
dedal
ready–t hentheJudgewi
l
l
beabl
etoreaditwhenmakinghideci
sion
Ifdocument s ort hi
ngs offer
ed in evi
dence are
excludedbyt hecour t,theofferormayhavet he Q:Whati ftheobject i
onagainsty ouwassust ained
sameat tachedt oormadepar toftherecor
d.Ifthe bytheJudgesot haty ouwerenotabl et opresent
evi
denceexcl udedi soral,t
heof f
erormaystatefor yourwitness’wr itt
en orobj ectorr ealev i
dence;
the r ecord t he name and ot her personal whatisyourr emedy ?
cir
cumst ancesoft hewi t
nessandt hesubst
anceof A:Theof ferormayhav ethesameat tachedtoor
theproposedt esti
mony. madepar toft herecord;how:
Makeamani f
estationinwriti
ngthaty ouwillbe
Q:Whati s off
erofpr oof,tenderofexcluded making a pr of f
erofev idence to hav et he
evidence,
orprof
ferofevidence? documentf orpartoft hewhol er ecordoft he
A:Thisistheoff
erofevidenceexcludedbythetr
ial case
courtfortheconsider
ati
onbyt heappell
atecourt
(Sec.40) Q:Whatifthevalueoftheproff
erofev
idence?
A:Sothatt heappell
atecourtmaybeabl etoread
Q: Whati
sof
ferofev i
dence? ther
ecordsofexcludedevidence
A:Of f
erofevidencefort heconsi
der
ati
onofthe
tr
ialcour
t–thi
si stheonet hatmaybeobj
ect
edto
withi
n3days(Sec.34)

Q:Whatar ethekindsofev i
dence?
A:
1.Obj ect/Real–y ouobjectduringtheFor
mal
Offer(3day saftertheof f
er)
2.Test imonial/Oral– y ou objectduri
ng t
he
courseoft heexami nation
Q:Whatar ethe3way st oobject?
A:
1.Obj ectont hePur pose
2.Obj ectionduringtheFor malOf f
er
3. Objection dur ing t he cour se of the
exami nati
on

Q:Whati ftheobj ect

ionagai nsty ouwassust ained
byt heJudgesot haty ouwer enotabl etopr esent
yourwi t
ness’oralort estimoni alev i
dence;whati s
yourr emedy ?
A:Say ,“Yourhonor ,mayIbeal lowedt omakea
proffer of ev idence” ( or t ender of excl uded
evidenceorof ferofpr oof).Thenpr esentsuch:
a.Thenameofmywi tnessisMs.X
b.Her per sonal ci rcumst ances ar e t he
f
oll
owing:
xxx( also statet he pur pose of t he
t
esti
mony )
c. Andt hatifIwer etobeal l
owedt ocont inue
wit
hmyquest ioning,Iwi llbeabl etopr ove
71

t
he fol
lowi ng xxxand t hatwi l
lbe t he
Ampuan, KevinJohnDL.
2014-0230
*basedont helect
uresofAt
ty.Li
onel
lMacababbad