You are on page 1of 35

Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

In General
 Evidence
- means sanctioned by these rules of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
respecting a matter of fact
- provides the methods of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion,
as distinguished from substantive law that defines and creates certain rights
 Proof vs Evidence
- Proof: result or perfection of evidence ; end result
- Evidence: means by which proof is established ; means to the end

What the rules of evidence determine?


1. Relevancy of Facts
- or what sort of facts may be proved in order to establish the existence of the
right, duty or liability defined by substantive law
2. Proof of Facts
- is what sort of proof is to be given of those facts
3. Production of Proof of Relevant Facts
- that is, who is to give it and how it is given; and the effects of improper admission
or rejection of evidence

 Purposes of Judicial Proceedings


a. Criminal: ascertain the liability to punishment of the person accused
b. Civil: ascertain some right of property or status, or the right of one party, and the
liability of the other, to some form of relief

Factum Probandum vs Factum Probans

Factum Probandum Factum Probans


 Proposition to be established  Material evidencing the
proposition
 Necessarily to be conceived as  Conceived for practical purposes
hypothetical as convenient
 One party affirms and the other  Offered as such for the
denies, the tribunal being as yet consideration of the tribunal.
not committed in either  Brought forward as reality for
discretion the purpose of convincing the
tribunal that the former is also a
reality

Classes of Evidence
1. Relevant: it has a tendency in reason to establish the probability or improbability of a fact
in issue
o Test of Relevancy:
a. Rules of logic
b. Human experience
2. Competent: not excluded by law in a particular case
3. Testimonial: the testimony of a witness, usually on oath or affirmation, given by his word
of mouth in the witness stand. It commands greater weight than sworn statements
because testimonies given during trial are more exact and elaborate
4. Documentary: consists of writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers, or
figures, symbols, or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of their contents
5. Object: which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption.
It is not limited to that which may be known by the senses, but it extends to that which is
perceived by the senses of hearing, taste, smell or touch
6. Direct: proves that fact in dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption
7. Circumstantial: proof of facts from which, taken collectively, the existence of the
particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence
- Consists of collateral facts and circumstances from which the existence of the
main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience
- Requisites:
a. There is more than one circumstance
b. The facts from which the inferences are derived have been established
c. The combination of the circumstances is such as to warrant a finding of
guilt beyond reasonable doubt
- For the circumstantial evidence to be sufficient to support a conviction:
a. All the circumstances must be consistent with each other, and consistent
with the hypothesis that accused is guilty
b. Inconsistent with the hypothesis that the accused is innocent, and with
every other rational hypothesis except of guilt
c. Thus, a judgment or conviction based on circumstantial evidence can be
sustained only when the circumstances proved form an unbroken chain

1|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

which leads to a fair and reasonable conclusion pointing to the Accused, to


the exclusion of all others, as culprit.
8. Primary: affords the greatest certainty of the fact in question
9. Secondary: which is inferior to primary evidence and shows on its face that better
evidence exists
10. Positive: when a witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur
11. Negative: when a witness states that he did not see or know the occurrence of a fact
12. Corroborative: Additional evidence of a different kind and character, tending to prove
the same point
13. Cumulative: Evidence of the same kind and character as that already given tending to
prove the same proposition
14. Prima Facie: That which suffices for the proof of a particular fact until contradicted and
overcome by the same proposition
15. Conclusive: that which is uncontrovertible
16. Rebuttal: evidence that is given to explain, repel, counteract or disprove facts given in
evidence by the adverse parties
17. Sur-rebuttal: when a plaintiff is permitted to introduce new matter, defendant should be
permitted to introduce evidence in sur-rebuttal, and to decline to permit him to do so is an
error, especially where the evidence offered is for the first time made competent by the
evidence introduced by the new matter
18. Expert: testimony of one possessing in regard to a particular subject or department of
human activity, knowledge not usually acquired by third persons
19. Substantial: is the amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept
as adequate to justify a conclusion
- it is more than a mere scintilla of evidence. It means such relevant evidence as
a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, even if
other minds equally reasonable might conceivably opine otherwise.

Scope
General Rule: The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings
Exception: as otherwise provided by law or these rules

 Differences between Criminal and Civil Proceedings

Civil Criminal
The party attends by accord The accused attends by compulsion
No presumption as to either party The presumption of innocence attends the
accused throughout the trial until the
same has been overcome by prima facie
evidence of his guilt
An offer of compromise does not, as a An offer of compromise is an implied
general rule, amount to admission of admission of guilt
liability
The plaintiff must prove his claim by The government must establish the guilt
preponderance of evidence of the Accused beyond reasonable doubt

 Rules of Evidence are not strictly applied in the ff:


a. Labor Arbiter
b. NLRC
c. Employees’ Compensation Commission
d. SEC
e. COMELEC
f. Agrarian Cases
g. Immigration proceedings
h. CTA
i. Probation Court
j. Board of Transportation
k. Police Commission
l. Oil Industry Commission
m. Other similar bodies

No vested right of property in the rules of evidence


 Hence, any evidence inadmissible according to the laws in force at the time, the action
accrued, but admissible according to the laws in force at the time of the trial, is receivable
 Reasons: Rules of evidence are merely methods for ascertaining facts. It must be supposed
that change change of law merely makes it more likely that the fact will be truly
ascertained, - either by admitting evidence whose former suppression or by suppressing
evidence whose former admission, helped to conceal the truth.

Rules of Evidence may be waived


General Rule: The parties may waive the rules during the trial of the case
Exception: public policy

2|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

Sources of Evidence
a. 1987 Constitution
b. Rules 128-134 of the Rules of Court
c. Bar Matter No. 411
d. Rules 115, Sec. 1 of the RoC
e. Substantive and remedial statutes
f. Judicial decisions
g. Rules on DNA Evidence

CHAPTER II: ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

When evidence admissible


 Requisites:
1. It is relevant to the issue
o Relevancy: an affair of logic and not by law
2. It is competent that is, it does not belong to that class of evidence which is excluded
by the law or by the Rules of Evidence

 It must be stressed that the rules governing the admissibility of evidence are not concerned
with the weight to be accorded the testimony or pertinent materials introduced
- The weight has to do with the effect of the evidence admitted, its tendency to
convince and persuade
- The weight of evidence is not determined mathematically by the numerical
superiority of the witnesses testifying to a given fact, but depends upon its
practical effect in inducing belief on the part of the judge trying the case

Relevancy of evidence
 It does not depend upon its effect or conclusiveness but upon its tendency to establish a
controverted fact. Its essential quality is persuasiveness as to the existence or non-
existence of the fact

Materiality of evidence
 Means its quality of substantial importance to the particular issue, apart from its relevancy.
 Relevancy or materiality of evidence is a matter of logic, since it is determined simply by
ascertaining its logical connection to a fact in issue in the case
 Degree of relevancy

Competency of evidence
 Take note the rules on
a. Best Evidence Rule
b. Parole Evidence Rules
c. Hearsay Evidence Rule
d. Offer of Compromise
e. Disqualification of Witness by reason of mental incapacity’
f. Disqualification by reason of marriage
g. Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party
h. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication
i. Exclusionary provisions in the constitution

Collateral matters
 Definition: those that are outside the controversy, or are not directly connected with the
principal matter or issue in dispute, as indicated in the pleadings of the parties
 General Rule: These are not allowed
- Rationale: They draw away the mind of the court from the point at issue, and
excite prejudice and mislead it.
- They are, however, admissible when they tend in any reasonable degree to
establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue

Facts in issue and Facts Relevant to the Issue


Facts in Issue Facts Relevant to the Issue
Those facts which a plaintiff must prove in Those facts which render probable the
order to establish his claim and those facts existence or non-existence of a fact in issue,
which the defendants must prove in order to or some other relevant fact.
establish a defense set up by him, but only
when the fact alleged by one party is not
admitted by the other party

Multiple Admissibility of Evidence


 Definition: an item of evidence may be logically relevant in several aspects, leading to
distinct inferences, or as bearing upon different issues
 The practice is to admit the evidence only for the allowable purpose

3|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

Conditional Admissibility of Evidence


 Very often, the relevancy or inadmissibility of evidence of a particular fact hinges upon
the proof of other facts not yet evidenced, and the party is unable to introduce them both
at the same moment. In handling the situation, when the adversary object to the relevancy
or the competency of the offered fact, is to permit it to come in conditionally, upon the
assurance, express or implied, of the offering counsel that he will connect up the tendered
evidence by proving, in the later progress of his case, the missing facts.

Curative Admissibility of Evidence


 Rule when a party offers an inadmissible fact:
a. Opponent objects, but was erroneously overruled: The claim to present similar
inadmissible facts would be untenable since his objection would save him, on appeal,
from any harm which may accrue
b. Opponent did not object: The protection is not extended to him on appeal
 Three Different Ways of Treating the Questions are offered by the courts:
1. The admission of an inadmissible fact, without objection, does not justify the
opponent in rebutting by other inadmissible facts
2. The opposite rule, namely, that the opponent may resort to similar inadmissible
evidence
3. What may be called the intermediate rule, or the “Massachusetts Rules”, namely, that
the opponent may reply with similar evidence whenever it is needed for removing an
unfair prejudice which might otherwise have ensued from the original evidence, but
in no other case.

Evidence Illegally seized not admissible


 Take note/Examples:
a. Art. III, Sec. 2
b. Art. III, Sec. 3
c. Art. III, Sec. 12
d. Art. III, Sec. 17

Policy to be observed by courts in cases of doubt as to the admissibility of evidence


 Reception of evidence of doubtful admissibility is in the long run the less harmful course,
since all the materials necessary for final adjudication would come before the appellate
tribunals.

CHAPTER III: JUDICIAL NOTICE, PRESUMPTIONS, JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

Judicial Notice

a. Definition: cognizance of certain facts which judges may property take and act on without
proof because they already know them
o Latin Maxim: What is known need not be proved
o When this rule is invoked, the court may dispense with the presentation of
evidence on judicially cognizable facts.

b. Objects of Judicial Notice


o To save time, labor and expense in securing and introducing evidence on matters
which are not ordinarily capable of dispute and are not actually bonafide
disputed, and the tenor of which can safely be assumed from the tribunal’s
general knowledge or from a slight search on its part
o It is based upon convenience and expediency
o It displaces evidence since, being equivalent to proof, it fulfils the object which
evidence is intended to achieve.

c. Requisites
1. The matter must be of common and general knowledge
2. It must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or uncertain
3. It must be known to be within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court

d. Kinds
1. Mandatory
2. Discretionary

e. Mandatory
1. Territorial Extent
2. General history
3. Forms of Government of States
4. Symbols of Nationality
5. Law of the Nations
6. Admiralty Courts and their Seals

4|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

7. Political Constitution and History of the Philippines


8. Matters relating to the legislative department
9. Matters relating to the executive department
10. Matters relating to the courts of justice
11. Laws of Nature
12. Measure of Time
13. Georgraphical Facts concerning the PH

f. Discretionary
o A court may take judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge, or are
capable of unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to judges
because of their judicial functions

Matters of Public Matters Capable of Matters ought to be


Knowledge Unquestionable known to judges
Demonstration because of their judicial
functions

g. When Hearing Necessary


a. During Trial: the court, on its own initiative, or on request of a party, may
announce, its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to
be heard thereon
b. After the Trial, and before the judgment, or on appeal: the proper court, on
its own initiative or on request of a party, may take judicial notice of any matter and
allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in
the case.
 An appellate court contemplating judicial notice should notify the
parties so that the propriety of taking notice and the tenor of the matter to
be noticed can be argued

o A hearing may be necessary, not for the presentation of evidence, but to


afford the parties reasonable opportunity to present information relevant to the
propriety of taking such judicial notice or to the tenor of the matter to be noticed

h. Rule on Judicial Notice not confined to courts of record


o To take judicial notice and to apply it to the decision of a case is a right which
appertain to every court of justice, from the lowest, to the highest. The
application of the doctrine is not confined to the courts of record.
o Certain boards and special tribunals which are not strictly courts, but which
partake of their nature and the findings of the nature partake of the nature of
judgments may take judicial notice of certain matters.

i. Power to take Judicial Notice must be exercised with caution


a. The doctrine of judicial notice rests on the wisdom and the discretion of the
courts. The power to take judicial notice is to be exercised by the courts with
caution; care must be taken that the requisite notoriety exist; and every
reasonable doubt upon the subject should be promptly resolved in the negative
b. Courts should be permitted to give a liberal interpretation to the law permitting
them to take judicial notice of the facts of public knowledge, especially, if a
technical interpretation would have the effect of defeating the very purpose and
object of the law.

Presumptions
a. Definition: defined as a rule of law that attaches probative value to specific facts, or
directs that an inference be drawn as to the existence of a fact, not actually known, arising
from its usual connection with other particular facts which are known or established.

5|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

- A conclusion or deduction drawn by reasonable and logical inference from the


usual probabilities attendant upon associated facts.
- Effects:
 Aids a party in the presentation of evidence
 It may take the place of specific evidence relating to particular mattes,
and may stand as such unless and until it is rebuted by contrary
evidence which neutralizes or defeats it.

b. Presumptions vs Inferences

INFERENCES PRESUMPTIONS
It is one which the fact finder may or may It is a deduction which the law requires
not draw according to his own conclusions
Presumption of inference is discretionary Presumption of law is mandatory
In defining inference, the emphasis seems
to be laid upon it as a process of reasoning,
a permissible deduction, judgment, or
conclusion drawn as a logical consequence
from other facts proved or admitted
Strictly, any real distinction in terms would lie only as to:
1. Positive rule of law (i.e: conclusive presumption)
2. Rebuttable presumption – a permissible inference of fact,
which yields to evidence bearing on the point involved

c. Kinds
1. Presumption Hominis, or of a fact
o Those which the experience of mankind has shown to be valid, founded on
general knowledge and information
o Inferences which naturally arise in common experience from particular
circumstances or known fact
o An inference as to the existence of one fact not certainly known from the known
or prove existence of some other fact, founded on previous experience or
general knowledge of their connection

2. Presumption Juris or Law


o Those which the law requires to be drawn from the existence of established facts
in the absence of contrary evidence on the subject deductions which the law
expressly directs to be made from particular facts
o It is said to be the only true presumption
o These are assumptions made by the law itself, deriving their force from the law,
rather than from common logic and probability

d. Presumption of Law, classified


1. Conclusive (presumption juris et de jure): is a rule of law, rather than a rile of evidence
2. Disputable or Rebuttable: is species of evidence that may be accepted and acted
when there is no other evidence to uphold the contention for which it stands; one
which may be overcome by other evidence

e. Conclusive Presumptions
1. Estoppel in Pais: Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or omission,
intentionally and deliberately led another to belive a particular thing true, and to act
upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or
omission, be permitted to falsify it.
o It is based upon the grounds of public policy, fair dealing, good faith and
justice, and its purpose is to forbid one to speak against his own act,
representations, or commitment to an injury of one to whom they were
directed and who reasonably relied thereon
o Elements as to the party estopped:
a. Conduct which amounts to a false representation or concealment of
material facts, or at least, which is calculated to convey the impression
that the facts are otherwise than, and inconsistent with, those which
the party subsequently attempts to assert
b. Intention, or at least expectation that such conduct shall be acted
upon by the other
c. Knowledge, actual or constructive, of the real facts
o Elements as to the party claiming estoppel:
a. Lack of knowledge and of the means of knowledge of the truth as to
the facts in question
b. Reliance upon the conduct of the party estopped
c. Action based hereon of such a character as to change his position
prejudicially
o Equitable Estoppel can be invoked by one who is in a position to be misled
by the misrepresentation with respect to which the estoppel is invoked; and

6|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

under circumstances where damage would result to him from the adoption by
the person estopped of a position different from that which has been held out
to be true
o Akin to estoppel in pais are:
i. Estoppel by Silence
ii. Estoppel by Laches
iii. Promissory Estoppel
iv. Estoppel on the question of jurisdiction

2. Estoppel against Tenant: The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his
landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant
between them
o To give rise to the estoppel of a tenant to deny his landlord’s title:
i. It must first be shown that the relation of landlord and tenant in fact
existed between the parties as regards the land in question
ii. Possession under the lease is also essential to give rise to an estoppel
of the lessee to deny the lessor’s title, in an action involving title or
possession

f. Disputable Presumptions
i. A person is innocent of a crime or wrong
ii. An unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent
iii. A person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act
iv. A person takes ordinary care of his concerns
v. The evidence wilfully suppresses would be adverse, if produced
vi. The money paid by one to another was due to the latter
vii. The thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter
viii. The obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid
ix. Prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later ones is
produced
x. A person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing a recent wrongful ac
is the taker and doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person
possess, or exercises acts of ownership are owned by hum
 Facts to be Proven:
a. The crime was committed
b. It was committed recently
c. The stolen property was found in the possession of the defendant
d. The defendant is unable to explain his possession satisfactorily
xi. A person in possession of an order on himself for the payment of money, or the
delivery of anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing accordingly
xii. A person acting in a public office was regularly appointed or elected to it
xiii. Official duty has been regularly performed
xiv. A court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, was
acting in the lawful exercise of his jurisdiction
xv. All the matters within an issue in a case were laid before the court and passed
upon by it; and in like manner that all matters within an issue raised in dispute
submitted for arbitration were laid before the arbitrators and passed upon by
them
xvi. Private transactions have been fair and regular
xvii. Ordinary course of business have been followed
xviii. There was a sufficient consideration for a written contract
xix. A negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient consideration
xx. An endorsement of a negotiable instrument was made before the instrument was
overdue and at the place where the instrument is dated
xxi. The writing is duly dated
xxii. A letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail
xxiii. Presumptive Death
xxiv. Things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary
habits of life
xxv. Persons acting as co-partners have entered into a contract of partnership
xxvi. A man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered
into a lawful contract of marriage
xxvii. Property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each
other and who live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the
benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, has been attained by their joint
efforts, work or industry
xxviii. In cases of cohabitation by a man and woman who are not capacitated to marry
each other and who have acquired property though their actual joint contribution
of money, property, or industry, such contributions and their corresponding
shares including joint deposits of money and evidences of credit are equal
xxix. If the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage within
300 days after such termination of the former marriage, these rules shall govern
in the absence of the proof to the contrary

7|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

a. Before 180 days after marriage: conceived during the former marriage,
provided it be born within 300 days after the termination of the former
marriage
b. After 180 days following the celebration of the subsequent marriage:
conceived during such marriage, even though it will be born within the 300
days after the termination of the former marriage
xxx. The thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with things of that
nature
xxxi. The law has been obeyed
xxxii. The printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by public
authority, was so printed or published
xxxiii. The printed or published book, purporting to contain report cases adjudged in
tribunals of the country where the book is published, contains correct reports of
such cases
xxxiv. The trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a
particular person has actually conveyed it to him when such presumption is
necessary to perfect title of such person or his successor interest
xxxv. Except for purposes of succession, when 2 persons perish in the same calamity,
such as a wreck, battle or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and
there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred the
survivorship is presumed from the probabilities resulting from the strength and
age of the sexes, according to the ff rules:
a. Under are 15 = older is presumed to have survived
b. Above 60 = younger
c. 1 is under 15, and 1 is above 60 = former
d. Both are over 15 and under 60, and the sexes be different =
male
e. If one be under 15 or over 60 and the other between those age
= latter
xxxvi. If there is a doubt, as between 2 or more persons who are called to succeed each
other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to
the other, shall prove the same, in the absence of proof, and it is presumed that
they died at the same time

g. No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy


- There is no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child born after 300
days following the dissolution of marriage or the separation of the spouses.
Whoever alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove the
allegation

h. Conflicting presumptions
- The weaker presumption should be deemed to be overcome by the stronger
- In case of equal presumptions, one in favor of innocence, and one in favor of
guilt, the one in favor of evidence is to be applied

Judicial Admissions
a. Definition, and as explained
- is one so made in pleadings filed or in the progress if a trial as to dispense with
the introduction of evidence otherwise necessary to dispense with some rules of
practice necessary to be observed and complied with

 Extrajudicial Confession
- One made out of court

Judicial Admissions Extrajudicial Admissions


Conclusive, upon the party making them disputable
Divided into formal and informal
 Formal: those which are usually
made in writing, such as
pleadings, stipulation of facts and
the like
 Informal: those which are in
general are made orally in the
course of the trial or proceeding,
in affidavit, deposition, or while
on witness stand
May be oral as a verbal waiver of proof Pleadings superseded or amended
made in open court, a withdrawal of a disappeared from the records as judicial
contention, or a disclosure made before the admission, and in order that any statements
court, or an admission made by a witness in contained therein may be considered as an
the course of testimony or deposition, or extrajudicial admission, said pleadings
may be in writing as in pleadings, bill of should be offered formally in evidence
particulars, stipulation of facts, requests for

8|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

admissions, or a judicial admission


contained in an affidavit used in the case
It conclusively binds the party making it The judicial admission made in another case
is an extrajudicial admission

CHAPTER IV: OBJECT (REAL EVIDENCE)

Definition
 Real Evidence is that which is addressed to the senses of the tribunal, as where objects
are presented for the inspection of the courts
- Is not limited to that which may be known by the senses of vision; it extends to
what is perceived by the senses of hearing, taste, smell, or touch
- Examples:
1. Singing of songs, when material to the case
2. When it is necessary to ascertain w/n the liquid is a fermented cider, the
judge may taste it
3. Exhibition of rupture as a defense in the prosecution of rape
4. Viewing of an allegedly lewd show by the court
5. Exhibition to show age, race, physical proportions or resemblance
6. Production of whiskey bottles and their contents to be looked at, smelled
and taste in court
7. Playing of detectographs and records
8. Weapons and bloody garments of participants in a felony
9. Ill-fitting clothes worn by purchaser in court to show their inept
manufacture
10. Use of courtroom furniture to reconstruct a scene
11. Use by a witness of his body to illustrate his testimony
12. whole area of accessorial real evidence in the form of photographs,
motion pictures and x-rays
 When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or
viewed by the court. The application for the production of real evidence is in the
first instance addressed to the discretion of the trial judge, who must first decide whether
or not there is a specific reason of policy or principle which urges against admitting the
exhibit
 Before an object may be exhibited or viewed by the court, it must be shown
that:
1. It is relevant to the fact in issue
2. The present condition of the object be the same as at the time in issue or so nearly
the same as to be proper evidence of its former condition
 Rules on Indecent or Improper Evidence
General Rule: It should be excluded
Exception: the same is necessary for ascertaining the truth
 Two Limitations that are appropriate in determining the question of indecency:
1. There should be fair necessity for inspection, the trial court to determine
2. The inspection should take place apart from the public courtroom, in the sole presence
of the tribunal and the parties
 Rules on Repulsive Object, Offensive to Sensibilities
General Rule: excluded
Exception: they are absolutely necessary for the administration of justice
 Jurisprudence: Physical evidence is evidence of the highest order. It speaks more
eloquently than a hundred witnesses. And the physical evidence in this case strongly
corroborates the testimony of the offended party that she was raped.

Presentation and inspection of objects in court


 In instances where it is necessary to show the condition or quality of a certain
article or substance, the thing itself is the most powerful evidence that can be produced;
it may be introduced in evidence as supplementing the testimony of witnesses, or as direct
evidence when properly identified
 The presentation of the object itself for personal observation by the court may
be resorted to a in great variety of instances. Example: to prove the color of the
hair, alteration of an instrument, kind of shoes or clothing worn by the accused, extent of
an injury, fact that clothes are blood-stained, weakness of a piece of iron
 When properly identified and where relevant to a material issue, objects such
as the following have been received as evidence:
a) Abortion: instrument or medicine with which the crime was committed, and the
clothing of the victim
b) Arson: articles used in starting the fire, and burned objects
c) In any case where weapon is used: the weapon, including the firearm,
bullets, and shells
d) Assault or Homicide: clothing of the victim to show the location of wounds,
the manner or means of death, the relevant positions of the victim and his

9|P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

assailant or the distance between them, or to throw light on any material issue;
also the clothing of the victim’s companion
e) Homicide: bones or flesh of a victim to show the character and location of
wounds, it is the within the court’s discretion to order the victim’s skull exhumed,
so it may be offered as evidence; objects used to hide the body
f) Theft: stolen goods, burglar tools
g) Hit and Run: headlights recovered
h) Drunken Driving Case: Liquor, car
i) ETC. SEE OTHER EXAMPLES SA BOOK

Inspection of places or objects outside the court


 Where the object in question cannot be produced in court because it is IM or
inconvenient to remove, the natural proceeding is for the tribunal to go to the object
in its place and there observe it. This process, known as the “VIEW” has been recognized
as the appropriate one.
 The judge before whom the trial of an action pending has discretion not subject
to review, unless abused, to view and inspect the premises or place or an article or object
involved in the action. But it is improper for the court to inspect places or objects outside
the courtroom without the previous knowledge or consent of the parties, for the inspection
is part of the trial inasmuch as evidence is being received thereby, and parties are entitled
to present at any stage of the trial.
 If it is made in the absence of the parties or at least without previous notice to
them, the court may view the wrong object or place, and it will be difficult for the parties
to ascertain whether mistake has been made.
 The fact that both parties apply for consent does not deprive the court to refuse it.
 As a general principle, a view or inspection should be granted only where it is
reasonably certain that it will be of substantial aid to the court in reaching a correct verdict,
and the court may refuse to make the inspection where it is already familiar with the
premises involved, or where photographs, diagrams or maps in evidence adequately
present the situation, or where changes have taken place since the time to which the action
relates, or where it is not shown that the conditions are the same. BUT, a view may be
granted, even though some of the conditions have changed, if the change is not material,
or if the character and extent of such changes are properly brought out in evidence, and
a change of some of the conditions in question in the action have not changed, or where
the changes have resulted from the act or omission upon which the action is based.

Photograph
 To be admissible as evidence, it must first be accepted by the judge as material and
relevant to the issues being tried.
- That is, the contents of the photographs must not only relate to the issues, but
the probative value of the photographic evidence must outweigh the policy
considerations against its admission
 Photographs are relevant if they assist witnesses in presenting and explaining their
testimony or aid the court in understanding the issues in the suit, but the trial judge must
determine whether the assistance and enlightenment offered by the a given photograph
outweigh the confusion and undue prejudice that might result from its admission
 Photographs are received in evidence for the following purposes:
a) To show the scene of the crime
b) To show the victim of an assault or homicide
c) To show the identity of persons alive or dead, including the defendant, the victim
of his remains, even when decomposed
d) To show wound or other physical injuries, or that a child or animal has been ill-
treated or not properly fed
e) To show the fruits of the crime
f) To supply facsimiles of public records
g) To illustrate handwriting testimony and fingerprint testimony
h) To rebut testimony of the other side
 Where relative sizes, distances of objects invisible to the naked eye are
intended to be proved by means of photographs, a layman is not competent to
testify as to them:
a) Use of devices to accentuate photographic evidence

b) Enlargments

c) Color Pictures

10 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

d) Aerial Photographs

X-ray
 Modality of medical treatment or diagnosis most commonly appearing in litigation
 Diagnostic X-Ray Films often provide counsel with his best source of objective proof of his
client’s injuries, establishing in a manner that all can see that plaintiff’s leg bones indeed
were fractured a year before trial, and the like.
 The same rules and principles which apply to ordinary pictures are applicable to an X-Ray
photograph, although subject to explanation or interpretation by experts in order to make
them intelligible to courts.
 General Rule: It is authenticated by showing that it was taken properly by a qualified
expert (a person familiar and experienced with X-ray filming techniques, and that the
person in question was the subject of the film)
- A witness authenticating the film, usually a technician, should describe the
time, place and other relevant circumstances surrounding the exposure and
processing of the film, as well as the part of the body the film represents.

Motion pictures
 It is admissible upon the same principle and subject to the same limitations as still pictures,
of which motion pictures are merely a series, the only substantial difference being in the
manner of their presentation
 Authentication of motion pictures ordinarily includes:
1. Evidence as to the circumstances surrounding the taking of the film
2. The manner and circumstances surrounding the development of the film
3. Evidence in regard to the projection of the film
4. Testimony by a person present at the time the motion pictures were taken that the
pictures accurately depict the events as he saw them when that occured

Video tape
 It may be received into evidence if the offering party lays the foundation necessary to
admit a sound recording. Thus, where it is testified that the video tape is a true and
accurate representation of what it is purported to represent, it is sufficient authentication.
 It has been admitted for:
- Confessions
- Admissions
- Lineups
- Crime scenes
- Witness’ testimony
- Drinking deliver’s condition
- Actual commission of a crime

Phonograph and tape recordings


 Requisites:
1. Showing that the recording device was capable of taking testimony
2. A showing that the operator of the device was competent
3. Establishment of the authenticity and correctness of the recording
4. Showing that changes, additions, or deletions have not been made
5. Showing of the manner of the preservation of the recording
6. Identification of the speakers
7. A showing that the testimony elicited was voluntarily made without any kind of
inducement
 Voice recording is authenticated by the testimony of a witness:
1. He personally recorded the conversation
2. The tape played in court was the one he recorded
3. The voices on the tape are those of the persons such are claimed to belong

Voiceprints (Spectograms)
 It is an established law that an accused person in lawful custody maybe required to
demonstrate his voice for identification purposes on the same grounds that he may be
subjected to fingerprinting, photographing, measurements and the like. This can be done
through:
- Lineups
- Tape recordings
- Video tape
- Other similar methods in addition to speaking in court
 Definition: it is consists of a magnetic recording device, a variable electronic filter, a paper
carrying drum which is coupled to the recording device, and an electronic stylus that marks
the paper as the drum rotates

11 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

- it is based on the theory that no 2 persons have exactly the same physical voice
properties

Maps, diagrams and sketches


 It is well-established rule applied in everyday practice in courts that maps, sketches,
diagrams, and other relevant drawings illustrating a scene of an event are admissible as
an aid to the court in understanding and applying the facts in the particular case.
 Their admissibility is conditioned upon a preliminary showing that they are reasonably
accurate
 Courts permit their use on the theory that they represent a method of pictorial
communication by a witness which he may use instead of, or in addition to, the ordinary
manner of giving testimony

Fingerprints, palm prints, foot prints, tracks


 It is a method of now commonly resorted to in proving identity as o the correspondence
or similarity of fingerprints, palm prints, or foot prints
 Authenticated ones may be introduced as evidence and compared with other fingerprints,
etc., found at or at near the scene of the crime. This comparison is usually made by experts.

Personal appearance of a person


 The accused cannot object if he be identified in open court without being required to stand.
A direction to a witness to look about the court and point out a person in court who he
thinks committed the crime is always proper

Experiments
 Experiments often furnish the court with such knowledge, indispensable to the
determination of issue under inquiry, which they could not so readily or accurately obtain
from oral testimony alone
 The courts permit experiments to be performed in court or out of it, when said experiments
are made under similar conditions and like circumstances to those existing in the case
under inquiry, for the purpose of proving facts in issue
 As a general rule, the measure of permissible variation of the conditions of the experiment
from those of the occurrence is measured by whether such variation is liable to confuse or
mislead the court

Experiments in criminal prosecution


 As in civil cases, experiments may be permitted in the course of trial of criminal
prosecutions
 Similarly, evidence may be given, in such cases, of experiments conducted outside of
court, subject, to the same rules and limitations governing the use of experiments and the
admissibility of evidence of experiments in civil cases
 The performance of experiments in criminal cases usually occurs when a weapon is
involved in a crime and such weapon needs to be tested and demonstrated. When
conducted as part of the trial of a case, such demonstration, may become a valuable
auxiliary in the discovery of the truth.
 Proof of experiments has also been held as admissible for other purposes such as for
the purpose of determining whether a witness could see the occurrence of the crime under
inquiry, by a demonstration of the relative positions of the parties to the crime and the
said witnesses.
 Exclusion of evidence is not required merely because they are not necessary in the
establishment of a fact shown by the prosecution, if they tend to corroborate a position
taken by an expert witness whose testimony has been received; for wherever the opinion
of a person is deemed to be relevant, the grounds upon which it is based are also relevant
 Evidence of tests are not admissible; however, where the conditions attending the
alleged occurrence and the experiments are not shown to be similar. The question of
similarity is one that lies within the discretion of the trial court to be decided in the light of
all the surrounding facts and circumstances.

Subject matter of experiments


 General Rule: the use of such rests entirely with the trial judge, and the only definite
limitation is that it must be relevant

a. Blood grouping tests


- Paternity: allowed, though there’s no express provision in the RoC, which only
expressly deals with blood grouping tests
- Blood Grouping Tests: admitted on the ground that such, being an
investigative results of science are matters of judicial notice
1) Landsteiner-Bernstein Classification: best known blood grouping
test; it divides all human beings into A, B, AB and O groups. The
identity of each is determined by placing he unknown blood in contact
with prepared serums, and watching for clumping reaction. (Dapat
may kaparehas ang child ng blood type, either sa nanay or sa tatay)

12 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

 This is an exclusory process that can exonorate over


60% of unjustly sued men, provided all acceptable system
of blood groupings are employed
 Precautions to eliminate doubts as to the results:
a) The tests should be carried out by a competent
and qualified pathologist although he need not be
licensed
b) The serum should be of high quality and potency
c) A detailed report should include a proper
identification of all individuals to eliminate the
substitution of one party for another
d) The results of every test should be included in the
report to afford reliable verification

b. Chemical tests to determine alcoholic intoxication


- These tests indicate the percentage of alcohol in the body substance analysed
and from this percentage the extent or inebriation at the time the tests is
administered can be calculated
- In this jurisdiction, the rule is well-settled that on proper showing and under
an order of the trial court, an ocular inspection of the body of a party to suit for
the purpose of ascertaining identity or for other purposes is admissible

c. Physiological or psychological deception tests


- These are used as instruments for the ascertainment of the truthfulness of a
witness – it’s use are still too much in the experimental fields for the courts to
approve of their general use
- Deception Tests devised by scientists are of the ff broad types:
1. The association reaction test in which time the subject takes to
think of words associated with those in the list given him, some of
which are neutral and some of which may evoke a guilty association,
is carefully measured
2. Respiratory Test: based upon the hypothesis that the breathing of
the subject varies according to whether he is telling the truth
3. Systolic Blood Pressure Test: determines the truthfulness of
testimony, but it has not yet gained such standing and scientific
recognition as to justify the admission of expert testimony deduced
from tests made under such theory
- Lie Detector Tests
 It has no proof of general scientific recognition of its efficacy, and the courts
cannot take judicial notice of the pathometer
 Its result is inadmissible in behalf of the defendant in a criminal case to
show he was telling the truth, where the general recognition of such tests
is not shown

d. Vehicular collision cases

Experiments made out of court


 General Rule: It is a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the court to decide the
admissibility of the kind of evidence in the light of all the surrounding facts and
circumstances
 Exception: Unless the testimony shows that the experiments were conducted under
conditions which tend to elucidate the matter in issue
 It should not be made ex-parte. It must be made with the presence consent of both
parties, unless in extraordinary circumstances, in the presence of both, also.
 In ordinary circumstances, when experiments are
 made in a pending litigation with a view of introducing testimony as to the result, the
opposite parties in the interest or their counsel should be notified of the proposed
experiments and afforded an opportunity to be present.
 Party’s failure to object: waiver

Experiments made in court


 General Rule: It is within the discretion of the trial court before which the trial is being
conducted to permit experiments as well as demonstrations to be conducted before it

DNA Evidence
 DNA: basic building block of life
- Information encoded in an organism’s DNA acts as a blueprint for the organism’s
biological development and functioning
 DNA Profiling/DNA Fingerprinting/DNA Testing/DNA Typing: forensic technique
used to identify individuals by characteristics of their DNA

13 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

- Small set of DNA variations that is very likely to be different in all unrelated
individuals, thereby being as unique to individuals as are fingerprints
- Used in parentage testing and criminal investigation, to identify a person or to
place a person at a crime scene to facilitate police detective work and help clarify
paternity and immigration disputes.

CHAPTER V: ADMISSIONS

Definition: mere acknowledgment of a fact or of circumstances from which guilt may be inferred,
tending to incriminate the speaker but not sufficient to establish his guilt

 Confession vs Admission
CONFESSION ADMISSION
It is the admission of guilt by the Merely admits some fact which connects
defendant of all the necessary elements or tends to connect the defendant with
of the crime of which he is charged, the offense but not with all the elements
including the necessary acts and intents of the crime
Direct acknowledgment of guilt on the Statement of the accused, director
part of the accused, and by the very implied, of acts pertinent to the issue, and
force of definition, excludes an admission tending, in connection with proof of other
facts, to prove his guilt, but of itself is
insufficient to authorize a conviction

 Admission vs Declaration Against Interest

ADMISSION DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST


Primary evidence, and is receivable, Secondary evidence, and is receivable
although the declarant, or someone only when the declarant is unavailable as
identified in legal interest with him, is a witness; it is competent in any action to
party to the action; and need not have which it is relevant, although the
been considered by the declarant as declarant is not a party to, or in privity
opposed to his interest at the time when it with, any party to the action; and it must
was made have been made, to the knowledge of the
declarant, against his obvious and real
interest
Classified as judicial or extrajudicial
 Judicial: made in a judicial
proceeding under consideration
 Extrajudicial: made out of
court, or in a judicial proceeding
other than the one under
consideration
Classified as express or implied
 Express: those made in
definite, certain and unequivocal
language
 Implied: those which may be
inferred from the acts,
declarations or omission of a
party. It may also be implied
from the conduct, statement or
silence of a party
Rules on Letters
General Rule: The failure
of a party to answer a
letter does not give rise to
an implied admission as to
the truth of the statements
contained therein, since
there is no duty upon the
addressee to reply
Exception: Good faith
requires that the addressee
state his position frankly so
that the addressor be not
misled, acquiescence may
be inferred from non-denial

Introduction of admission in evidence


 Two Ways to introduce admission as evidence
1. Independent Evidence: Admission are original evidence and no foundation is
necessary for their introduction in evidence

14 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

- If made orally, it may be proved by any competent witness who heard them
or by the declarant himself
- Admission is in private writing: there must be some proof of authenticity or
identity of the writing in accordance with Sec. 20, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court,
that is, the party offering it must prove its due execution and authenticity
- Admission is in public document: the same does not need any
authentication since Sec. 20, Rule 132, provides that public documents are
evidence, even against a third person, of the fact that gave rise to their execution
and of the date of the latter
2. Impeaching Evidence: If proof of the admission is sought for impeachment
purposes, a proper foundation must be laid for impeaching questions, by calling the
attention of such parties to his former statement so as to give him an opportunity to
explain before such admission are offered in evidence
- Rule 13, Sec. 132
 Before a witness can be impeached by evidence that he has made at
other times statements inconsistent with his present testimony, the
statements must be related to hi, with the circumstances of the times
and places and the persons present, and he must be asked whether
he made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them. If the
statements be in writing, they must be shown to the witness before
any question is put to him concerning him

Admission of party as to a relevant fact


 This rule is based upon the presumption that no man would declare anything against
himself, unless such were true
 Self-Serving Declarations
- These are unsworn statements made by the defendant out of court and which
are favorable to his interests
- General Rule: inadmissible as evidence
- Exceptions:
1. When they form part of res gestae, including spontaneous statements and
verbal acts
2. When they are in the form of complaint and exclamations of pain and
suffering
3. When they are part of a confession offered by the prosecution
4. Where the credibility of a party has been assailed on the ground that his
testimony is a recent fabriacation, in which case his prior declaration, even
of a self-serving character, maybe admitted, provided they were made at a
time when a motive to represent did not exist
5. Where they are offered by the opponent
6. When they are offered without objection

Admission by silence
 Any act or declaration made in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a
party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as naturally to call for
action or comment if not true, and when proper and possible for him to do so, may be
given in evidence against him (Rule 131, Sec. 32)
 This rule is founded on the maxim qui tacet consentire videtur (silence means consent)
 Requisites:
1. He heard and understood the statement
2. He was at liberty to interpose a denial
3. Statement was in respect to some matter affecting his rights or in which he was then
interested, and calling, naturally, for an answer
4. The facts were within his knowledge, and
5. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence would be material to
the issue
 No admission by silence can be implied from silence where the failure to answer was
caused by constraint, or the party was not aware at the time that he had an interest, or
believed that he had no interest, or was only indirectly affected, or where, as the matter
was presented, he had no interest to object, as for example, where the statement was not
addressed to him or was in his favor
- The same absence of relevancy occurs where an answer would be an
unseemly interruption for orderly proceedings then in progress, such as the
delivery of a sermon, the taking of a deposition or of a testimony in open court,
or the discharge by a judge, magistrate, counsel or other person, of his proper
functions in court proceedings
 In criminal cases, the doctrine of acquiescence by silence or conduct, is subject
to the ff limitations:
1. Such accusations or statements, in the presence of the accused, are competent only
when the accused hears them and fully comprehends their effect, and this means not
only in his, bodily presence, but in his hearing and understanding
2. Such accusation and statements are not evidence against the accused, where he
remains silent when they are uttered in the course of judicial proceedings, where he

15 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

is not a liberty to interpose and contradict them, and his silence cannot be considered
as an admission of their truth, even though he is not a party to an action
3. Such accusations and statements are not evidence against the accused where he
remains silent when they are uttered, at a time when he is in custody or under arrest
on a criminal charge, as he has the right to keep silent as to the charge
4. Such accusations and statements cannot be used as evidence against him where he
was silent through fear, or believed that his security was best promoted by silence,
or where he was silent under threats, or in the presence of an angry crowd, or had
promised to keep silent, or was under advise of his counsel
5. The statement or accusation must be direct, and of a character that would naturally
call for action and reply, and must relate to the offense charged, and must be
addressed to, and intended to affect, the accused and not arise in conversation or
discussion between third parties; and nor, generally, is such silence deemed to be an
assent when it is explicable on other grounds than those of consciousness of guilt.

Offer of compromise in civil cases


 It is not an admission of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror
 Every civil proceeding shall be suspended:
1. If willingness to discuss a possible compromise is expressed by one or both parties
2. If it appears that one of the parties, before the commencement of an action or
proceedings, offered to discuss a possible compromise but the other party refused
the offer
 No suit shall be filed or maintained between members of the same family, unless
it should appear that such efforts towards a compromise have been made, and that the
same have failed, subject to the limitations of Art. 2035
 No compromise upon the following questions shall be valid:
1. Civil status of persons
2. Validity of marriage or legal separation
3. Any ground for legal separation
4. Future support
5. Jurisdiction of courts
6. Future legitime
 Bare offer of compromise: does not constitute admission on the part of the person
making it, the fact that the writing contains an offer of compromise does not render it
inadmissible evidence if it is competent evidence for other purposes
 Express Admission of Liability made during negotiations for a compromise:
admissible
- Examples:
 Admission of interest involving an interest in property
 Admission affecting liability for a tort
 Trans-Pacific Industrial Supplies vs CA
- To determine the admissibility or non-admissibility of an offer of compromise,
the circumstances of the case and the intent of the party making the offer should
be considered

Offer of compromise in criminal cases


 General Rule: An offer of compromise by the accused may be received as evidence as
an implied admission of guilt
 Exceptions:
1. Quasi-offenses
2. Those allowed by law to be compromised
- Opium or
- Usury cases
 A plea of guilty withdrawn: not admissible in evidence against the accused who made
the plea
 Unaccepted Offer of Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offense: inadmissible evidence
against the accused who made the offer
 Payment of Offer: inadmissible as proof of criminal or civil liability. The traditional ground
is that such payment is usually made from humane impulses and not from an admission
of liability

Admission by third party


 The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another,
except as provided by the Rules in cases of admission by a co-partner or agent, conspirator,
or privies
 The rule is well-settled that a party is not bound by any agreement of which he has no
knowledge and to which he has not given his consent and that his rights cannot be
prejudiced by the declaration, act or omission of another, except by virtue of a particular
relation between them

16 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

 Exceptions:
1. Admission by partner
- Requisites:
a. the partnership be previously proven by evidence other than the admission
itself
b. admission refers to a matter within the scope of the partnership
c. admission was made while the party making it was still a partner
- Entries made in the partnership books by one of the partners during
the continuance of partnership: admissible against both or all members of
the firm
- Declarations made after the dissolution of the partnership: not
competent against the other partners in the absence of prior authority or
subsequent ratification even though such admissions or declarations relate to
matters pending at the time of the dissolution
2. Admission by agent
- The act or declaration of an agent of the party within the scope of his authority
and during the existence of the agency is binding upon the principal if it can be
shown by evidence other than such act or declaration
3. Admission by joint owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly interested
with a party
- Requisites:
a. There exists a joint interest between the joint owner, joint debtor, other
persons jointly interested with the party and such party, which joint interest
must first be made to appear by evidence other than the act or declaration
itself
b. The act or declaration was made while the interest was subsisting
c. The act relates to the subject matter of the joint interest, for otherwise it
would be immaterial and irrelevant
4. Admission by co-conspirator
- Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning
the commission of a felony and decide to commit it
 Requisites of Conspiracy:
1. Determination or decision to act, that is, a definite purpose to
commit a crime
2. An agreement or meeting of the minds of 2 or more persons
- A conspiracy having been established, the act or declaration of a
conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its existence is admissible
against the co-conspirator after conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such
act or declaration
- Requisites of an Admission by co-conspirator
1. Conspiracy must first be proved by evidence other than the admission itself
2. The admission relates to the common object in carrying out the conspiracy
3. It has been made while the declarant was engaged in carrying out the
conspiracy, or that it constitutes a part of res gestae
- A declaration made by conspirator before there was any conspiracy or
after the conspiracy has come to an end, it admissible against his co-
conspirators
5. Admission by privies
 Privity of Interests: mutual or successive relationship which permits one
person’s rights, obligations or remedies to be affected by the statements or acts
of such another person
 In order that it may be received in evidence as admissions, it must be
shown that the interest of the party making them is identified with the interest
of the party against whom they are sought to be introduced.
o The privity of interest may either be:
a. Privity of obligation
b. Privity of title

Admission of tape recording


 General Rule: admissible
 Requisites:
1. Recording device was capable of taking testimony
2. Operator of the device was competent
3. Establishment of the authenticity and correctness of the recording
4. Changes, deletions or additions have not been made
5. Manner of preservation of recording
6. Identification of the speakers
7. The testimony elicited was voluntarily made without any kind of inducement

17 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

CHAPTER VI: CONFESSIONS

Definition
 Confession is an acknowledgment in express words, by the accused in a criminal case,
of the truth of the offense charged, or of some essential part thereof.
 It is the declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged or any
offense necessarily included therein
 Classifications:
1. Judicial
- Plea of guilty made by an accused in a fit state of mind to plead before a
competent court to try the pending charge in which the proceedings have been
regularly instituted, and which upon entry of that plea is competent to enter
judgment and affix the penalty.
- Conclusive as to guilt in fact of the offense charged
2. Extrajudicial
- Those made, by any person, outside of the sitting of the court
- It is universally recognized as admissible evidence against the accused, and
this rule is based on the presumption that no one would declare anything against
himself unless such declarations were true
 Presumption of Law: in favor of the spontaneity and voluntariness
of the statement given by the accused, and it is incumbent upon him
to destroy that presumption
 Reversed by MIRANDA VS ARIZONA
o The prosecution must now prove that the extrajudicial
confession was voluntarily given, instead of relying on
the presumption and requiring the Accused to offset it
- To be admissible, the basic test of confession is
a. It was voluntarily and freely made
 Voluntary: means that the accused speaks of his free will and accord,
without inducement of any kind, and with a full and complete
knowledge of the nature and consequences of the confession, and
when the speaking is so free from influences affecting the will of the
accused, at the time the confession was made, that it renders it
admissible in evidence against him
 The general rule that the confession of the accused may be given in evidence
against him, but that it is not competent evidence against his co-accused
recognizes various EXCEPTIONS:
1. When several of the accused are tried together, the confession made by one of them
during trial implicating the others is evidence against the latter
2. When one of the defendants is discharged from the information and testifies as
witness for the prosecution, the confession made in the course of his testimony is
admissible against his co-defendants, if corroborated by indisputable proof
3. If the defendant after having been apprised of the confession of his co-defendant,
ratifies or confirms said confession, the same is admissible against him
4. Where several extrajudicial confessions had been made by several persons charged
with an offense and there could have been no collusion with reference to said several
confession, the fact that the statements therein are in all material respects, identical,
is confirmatory of the confession of the co-defendant and is admissible against his
other co-defendants. This is commonly known as interlocking confession
5. A statement made by one defendant after his arrest, in the presence of his co-
defendant, confessing his guilt and implicating his co-defendant who failed to
contradict or deny it, is admissible against his co-defendant
6. When the confession is of a conspirator and made after conspiracy and in furtherance
of its object, the same is admissible against his co-conspirator
7. The confession of one conspirator made made after the termination of a conspiracy,
is admissible against his co-conspirator if made in his presence and assented to by
him, or admitted its truth or failed to contradict or deny it
8. A confession is admissible as circumstantial evidence to show the probability of the
co-conspirator having actually participated in the commission of the crime
9. A confession made by a defendant is admissible as corroborative evidence of other
facts that tend to establish the guilt of his co-defendant
10. A confession of defendant is admissible against the other defendant if the latter did
not protest or object thereto
11. Where the recitals in the extrajudicial confession of one of the conspirators are
corroborated in its important details by other proofs in the record, it may be
considered as part of the evidence against the parties concerned
 Oral confessions
- May be proved by anyone by whom they were heard, the same as any other fact
 Written Confessions
- It must be proved by the production of writing, with proof of its execution
 Confessions NOT made in the language known to the accused
- Allowed, provided that:
a. it has been translated to him, and

18 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

b. that such was signed by him or otherwise admitted by him to be correct,


as much as his confession was made entirely by his own hands;
c. and when it was freely and voluntarily made

Extrajudicial Confession alone not sufficient basis for conviction


 General Rule: Extrajudicial confession shall not be a sufficient ground for conviction
 Exception: corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti
 Corpus Delicti: not necessarily the body of a crime, but may consists of
facts and circumstances tending to corroborate the confession
Rights of a person under investigation
1. The person in custody must be informed in clear and unequivocal terms that he has
a right to remain silent
- Purpose: not to incriminate himself
2. He must be warned that anything he will say can and will be used in court against
him
3. Assistance of a counsel
 The rights to be given these warning cannot be waived
 Rights that can be waived: 1 & 3

Inadmissibility of confession obtained in violation of the constitution


 Section 20, Art. III, 1987 Constitution:
“No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Any person under
investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to remain silent and to
counsel, and to be informed of such right. No force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any
other means which vitiates the free will shall be used against him. Any confession obtained
in violation of this section shall be inadmissible as evidence”

Custodial interrogation
 Questioning interrogated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way

Inadmissibility of extrajudicial confession where accused was not informed that if he


cannot get a lawyer, State will provide him one

Presence of counsel during custodial investigation not fulfilled

Where there is no waiver of constitutional rights to remain silent and to counsel

Waiver of right to counsel must be made with assistance of counsel

Constitutional provision on extrajudicial confession has no retroactive effect


 Confession obtained after the effectivity of the New Constitution on January 17,
1973, wherein the person has not been informed of his rights to silence and
counsel: INADMISSIBLE
 Confession obtained before the effectivity of the New Constitution on January
17, 1973: ADMISSIBLE

Confessions to the media


 Jurisprudence states that statements spontaneously made by a suspect to news
reporters on a televised interview are deemed voluntary and are admissible as evidence

CHAPTER VII: CHARACTER

Definition: possession by a person of certain qualities of mind and morals, distinguishing him from
others. It is the opinion generally entertained of a person derived from the common report of the
people who are acquainted with him, his reputation

Character in criminal cases


 General Rule: Character is never an issue in a criminal case
Exception: Accused elects to make it one
 It is only after he has introduced evidence of his good character may the prosecution
rebut such claims by introducing evidence of his bad character. This is what is meant by
“placing one’s character in issue.”
- Thus, the rules provides that the accused may prove his good moral character
which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged
- UNLESS IN REBUTTAL, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral character,
which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged

19 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

 When character evidence is introduced in a criminal case, it must be limited to the


traits and characteristics involved in the type of offense charged.
 Evidence of non-related traits is excluded because they offer no enlightenment in that
respect

Character of offended person in criminal cases


 The good or bad moral character of the offended person may be proved IF it may
establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged.
This rule is applied in frequency in cases of homicide and sex offenses

Character of the deceased in homicide


 Evidence of the bad character of the deceased is irrelevant, for the law protects
anyone from unlawful violence, regardless of character, and the service done to the
community in ridding it of a violent and dangerous man, is in the eyes of the law, no
justification of the act
 Exceptions:
1. Issue of self-defense is raised and the character of the slaying is doubtful, evidence
of the violent and the dangerous character of the deceased is incompetent for the
purpose of determining whether the deceased or the accused was the aggressor
2. Where the evidence tends to prove that the accused acted in self-defense, evidence
of the violent and dangerous character of the deceased, known to the defendant, is
admissible as tending to characterize the acts of the deceased, as bearing on the
reasonableness of defendant’s apprehension of danger at the time of the homicide

Character of the deceased in murder


 While the good or bad character of the victim may be availed of as an aid to determine the
probability or improbability of the commission of an offense, such is not necessary in a
crime of murder where the killing is committed with treachery or premeditation

Character of party in civil cases


 It is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case
 The moral character of a party in civil cases in NOT admissible unless the issue
involved is character because the character of a party to an action is not a proper subject
of inquiry, for which it is recognized that ground for an inference of some logically probative
force as to whether or not a person did certain act may be furnished by the fact his
character is such as might reasonably be expected to predispose him toward or against
such act, this consideration is outweighed by the practical objections to opening the door
to this class of evidence
 Examples of Cases wherein character is in issue:
1. Breach of promise of marriage
 Not admissible in actions involving fraud

Character of third persons not parties to a cause


 An issue in civil case sometimes involves a third person’s act having moral quality. On
such issue, the third person’s moral trait would have probative value, and there is no
practical policy against it. Court’s sometimes admit it and sometimes exclude it.

Character in mitigation of damages or in excuse or defense of the action


 In some civil cases, the measure of compensation may be affected by the plaintiff’s
character
 Examples:
1. Defamation
2. Breach of promise to marry
3. Malicious prosecution

Character of witness
 Evidence of good character of a witness may not be given in evidence until such character
has been impeached
 The character of the witness must be attacked or impeached before the testimony
sustaining his character may properly be admitted
- it is not necessary that there shall be a successful impeachment of witnesses
- a mere attempt to impeach his character, even though unsuccessful,
warrants the introduction of testimony as to his good character

20 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

CHAPTER VIII: EVIDENCE OF SIMILAR ACTS

As explained
 General Rule: The law will not consider evidence that a person has done a certain act at
a particular time as probative of a contention that he has done a similar act at another
time. This is the rule of res inter alios acta.
 Rule 130, Sec. 34
- “Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible
to prove that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time; but
it may be receive to prove a specific intent or knowledge, identity, plan, system,
scheme, habit, custom, or usage and the like

Unaccepted offer
 An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or to deliver a written
instrument or specific personal property is, if rejected without valid cause, equivalent
to the actual production and tender of the money, instrument or property

CHAPTER IX: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE


Basis
 Test of Determining Probative Value of Evidence when offered in the usual
inductive form
1. Proponent’s desired inference from his supposed evidential fact
2. The opponent may attempt to explain away the effect of this fact by pointing out
some other and more plausible inference
3. Opponent may deny that this supposed evidential fact is a fact
4. Opponent, neither denying nor explaining away the first fact, may set up a rival fact

As defined and explained:


 Circumstantial Evidence is that which relates to a series of other facts other than the
fact in issue, which by experience have been found so associated with that fact that in the
relation of cause and effect they lead to satisfactory conclusion
 Circumstantial Evidence vs Direct Evidence
Circumstantial Evidence Direct Evidence
is equally direct evidence of a minor fact is intended evidence which applies
or facts of such a nature that the mind is directly to the fact which forms the
led intuitively, or by a conscious process of subject of an inquiry, the factum
reasoning, towards or to the conviction probandum
that from it or them some other fact may
be inferred
Advantage: Advantage:
1. The evidence commonly comes from 1. It is the direct testimony of a witness
several witnesses and different to the fact to be proved, and who, if
sources, a chain of circumstances is he seeks the truth, saw it done
less likely to be falsely prepared and
arranged

Disadvantage: Disadvantage:
1. The court has not only to weigh the 1. The witness may be corrupt or false,
evidence of facts, but to draw just and that the case may not afford the
conclusions from them, in doing means of detecting his falsehood
which, they may led by prejudice or
partiality, or by want of due
deliberation and sobriety of
judgment, to make hasty and false
deductions, a source of error not
existing in direct evidence

When circumstantial evidence is sufficient to sustain conviction


 Requisites:
1. There is more than one circumstance
2. The facts from which the inference are derived are proven
3. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt
 People vs Ludday
- “No general rule can be laid down as to the quantity of circumstantial evidence
which in any case will suffice. All the circumstances proved must be consistent
with each other, consistent with the hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and
at the same time inconsistent with the hypothesis that he is innocent, and with
every other rational hypothesis except that of guilt.”

21 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

CHAPTER X: OPINION EVIDENCE


Definition
 Opinion: inference or conclusion drawn by a witness from facts, some of which are known
to him and others assume, or drawn from facts, which although lending probability to the
inference, do not evolve by a process of absolutely necessary reasoning.
 General Rule: The opinion of a witness is inadmissible
Exception: as otherwise provided by the rules

Opinion of expert witness


 Expert Witness:
- a witness who is shown to be learned, skilled, or experienced in a particular art,
science, trade or business
- a person who by study or experience upon matters of technical knowledge and
skill relating to specific business or employment
 Rule 130, Sec. 49:
- “The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
experience or training which he is shown to possessed may be received in
evidence.”
 Requisites to justify the admission of the testimony of an expert witness:
1. The subject under examination must be one that requires that the court has the aid
of knowledge or experience
2. The witness called as an expert must possess the knowledge, skill or experience
needed to inform the court in the particular case under consideration
3. Expert testimony is not admissible as to a matter not in issue
 Before presenting an expert witness, the party presenting him must first establish
that he is an expert on the subject upon which he is called to testify
 If the expert has no personal knowledge of the fact on which his opinion is
based, they should be given to him hypothetically, that is, they must assume the state of
facts upon which his opinion is desired
- Hypothetical Questions: must include only facts that are supported by
evidence and should embody substantially all facts relating to the particular
matter upon which an expert opinion is sought to be elicited, but they need not
include all facts pertinent to the ultimate issue.
 Generally, it should state all relevant facts to the formation of an
opinion, and then, assuming the facts stated to be true, ask the
witness whether he is able to form an opinion therefrom, if so, to state
such opinion
 Elements:
a. Premise
b. Inference or conclusion based on a premise
 Common subjects of expert testimony:
1. Typewritten documents
2. Ballistic
3. Mental Condition
4. Cause of Death or Injury
5. Value of RP

Opinion of ordinary witnesses


 General Rule: A witness must testify to facts and is not permitted to state his conclusions
or opinion
Exception:
a. Such testimony will aid the court in reaching a judgment
b. If the subject matter of the testimony cannot be reproduced and described
to the court precisely as it appeared to the witness, a witness who has
means of personal observation may state his opinion, conclusion and
impressions formed from such facts, and circumstances as they may came
under his observations
 The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given may be received in
evidence regarding:
1. Identity of person whim he has adequate knowledge
2. Handwriting with which he has a sufficient familiarity
3. Mental sanity of person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted
4. Impressions of the emotion, behaviour, condition or appearance of a person

22 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

CHAPTER XI: HEARSAY RULE AND ITS EXCEPTIONS

As explained
 Hearsay:
- signifies all evidence which is not founded upon the personal knowledge of the
witness from whom it is elicited and which consequently does not depend for its
credibility and weigh upon the confidence which the court may have in him
- information relayed from another person to the witness before it reaches the
ears of the court
- may also consist of written statements, letters, or document
- General Rule on Hearsay Evidence: inadmissible
- Rule 130, Sec. 36:
 “A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his
personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own
perception
 Double Hearsay or Multiple Hearsay
- Testimony based upon third-hand information, related to the witness by
someone who heard it from others
 Chief Reasons against the admissibility of hearsay evidence:
1. In its nature, hearsay supposes that better evidence exists
2. It is given without the sanction of an oath and without the opportunity of cross-
examination
3. It is intrinsically weak and incompetent to satisfy the human mind
4. The fact that fraud would be encouraged and supported by its admission
5. It would be a violation of the constitutional provision that the accused shall enjoy the
right of being confronted with the witness testifying against him;
 It is important to note that the hearsay rules bar information relayed from one
person to another when offered to prove the truth of the matter presented
therein. Consequently, the hearsay rules does not apply independently relevant
statements, or those statements which are relevant independently of whether they are
true or not. They may be roughly grouped in two classes:
1. Those statements which are the very facts in issue
 Where the statements or utterances of specific words, are the
facts in issue, the testimony of the witness thereto is not hearsay
2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the facts
in issue
 The statements from which the facts in issue may be inferred,
may be testified to by witnesses without violating the hearsay
rule
 Examples:
a. Statements of person showing his state of mind, that is, his
mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will and
other emotions
b. Statements which may identify the date, place and
condition, as illness and the like
c. Statements of a person from which an inference may be
made as to the state of mind of another, that is, knowledge,
belief, motive, good or bad faith, etc., or the latter
d. Statements which may identify the date, place and person
in question
e. Statements showing the lack of credibility of witness

Exceptions to the Hearsay Rules


1. Dying Declaration
- Declaration made by a dying person, made under the consciousness of an
impending death, may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject
of an inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such
death
 Reasons for its Admissibility
a. Necessity
b. Trustworthiness
 Requisites:
a. The declaration must concern the cause and the surrounding
circumstances of the declarant’s death
b. At the time the declaration was made, the declarant was under
a consciousness of an impending death
c. The declaration must have been made freely and voluntarily, and
without coercion or suggestion of improper influence
d. The declarant must have been competent to testify as a witness
if he had been called upon to give testimony in court
e. The dying declaration is offered in a case in which the subject of
the inquiry involves the declarant’s death

23 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

- A dying declaration may be a communication by means of signs, an oral


statement or ejaculation, a mere formal statement, or partly written and partly
oral, or answers to questions put up by the person to whom the declaration is
made, a writing signed by the declarant or an affidavit
- If made orally, it may be proven by the testimony of the witness who heard
the same or to whom it was made
- If made in writing, it must be proved by the writing itself which must be
authenticated and proved as may document offered in evidence
2. Declaration against interest
- The declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to testify, against the
interest of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration was at the time
it was made so far contrary to declarant’s own interest, that a reasonable man
in his position would not have made the declaration unless he believed it to be
true, maybe received in evidence against himself or his successors in interest
and against 3rd persons (Rule 130, Sec. 38)
- Requisites:
1. Declarant is already dead or unable to testify
2. Declaration was against his own interest
3. A reasonable man in declarant’s position would not have made the
declaration unless he believed it to be true
 Reasonable Man: denote a person exercising those qualities of
attention, knowledge, intelligence and judgment which society
requires of its members for the protection of their own interests and
in the interests of others
3. Act or declaration about pedigree
- Pedigree: history of a family descent which is transmitted from one generation
to another by both oral and written declarations and by traditions
 Rule 130, Sec. 39
o Includes relationship, family, genealogy, birth, marriage,
death, the dates and places where these facts occurred, and
the name of the relatives
- A person’s pedigree may be proved by the act or declaration of a person
related to him, by birth or marriage, who is deceased or unable to testify; or by
the reputation or tradition existing in the family in respect to the pedigree of
such person
- Requisites:
1. Declarant must be dead or outside the Philippines or unable to testify
2. Pedigree is in issue
3. Those persons whose pedigree is in question must be related to the
declarant by birth or marriage
4. The declaration must be made ante litem motam or before the controversy
occurred
5. The relationship between the declarant and the person whose pedigree is
in question must as a general rule be shown by evidence other than such
act or declaration
- Oral Declarations: may be proved by the testimony of a person who is a
competent witness, and who has heard such declarations of the defendant
regarding pedigree
- Written Acts or Declarations: may be proved by the statements in writing
relating to pedigree made or recognized by the defendant, or made under his
declaration, except where the writing is in the form of an entry in a family bible
or testament which is produced from the proper custody in which the event the
assent of the family is presumed.
 It may consists of entries in family bibles or other family books, or
charts; engravings or rings, family portraits and the like;
memorandum, inscription on tombstones, public registers of birth,
marriages and deaths required to be kept; recitals and descriptions in
deeds and wills; or correspondence of deceased members of the
family
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
- General Rule: admissible as proof of genealogical and other issues connected
with the history of the family
- Rule 130, Sec. 40
“The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy, in
respect to the pedigree of any one of its members, may be received in evidence
IF the witness testifying thereto be also a member of the family, either by
consanguinity of affinity. Entries in family bibles or other family books or charts,
engravings, or rings, family portraits and the like, may be received as evidence
of the pedigree.
 Reputation or tradition in matters of pedigree is meant such
declarations and statements as have come down from generation to
generation from deceased relatives in such a way that even though it
cannot be said or determined which of the deceased relatives

24 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

originally made them, or was personally cognizant of the facts therein


stated, yet it appears that such declarations and statements were
made as family history, ante litem motam by a deceased person
connected by blood or marriage with the person whose pedigree is to
be established.
- Requisites:
a. The reputation or tradition must be existing in the family of the
person whose pedigree is in question
b. The reputation or tradition must be one existing previous to the
controversy, for the reason that common reputation or tradition
arising after the controversy is supposed to be tainted with bias
and therefore unreliable
c. The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition is a surviving
member of the family, either by consanguinity or affinity
- Illustrations:
a. Marriage

b. Age

c. Death

d. Birth

e. Paternity and Filiation

5. Common reputation
- General Rule: It may be received as evidence of matters in which the public
has interest, or which directly concern and affect the mass of the people of a
town or locality
- As used in the rules, it means general or undivided reputation
- Admissible on 2 grounds:
a. Necessity arising from the inherent difficulty of obtaining any other
evidence than that in the nature of common reputation
b. Trustworthiness of the evidence arising from:
I. Supposition that the public is conversant with the subject to be
proved because of their general interest therein
II. The fact that the falsity of error of such evidence could be
exposed or corrected by other testimony since the public are
interested in the same
- Requisites:
a. The facts to which the reputation refers are of public or general interests
b. The reputation must have been ancient, that is 30 years old or one
generation old
c. The reputation must have been one formed among a class of person who
were in a position to have some sources of information and to contribute
intelligently to the formation of the opinion
d. The rereputation must exist ante litem motam and must have been existing
previous to the controversy

6. Res gestae
- Rule 130, Sec. 42
“Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances
thereof, may be given evidence as part of res gestae”
- Statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it
legal significance, may be received as part of res gestae
- General Classes of Declarations to which the term “res gestae” is
applied:
a. Spontaneous Statements
 Reasons for its Admissibility:
1. Trustworthiness
2. Necessity

25 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

 Requisites for Spontaneous Declarations:


1. There must be a startling occurrence
2. Statement must relate to the circumstances of the event
3. Statement must be spontaneous and unpremeditated
 The factors that would be considered in determining whether
statements offered in evidence as part of res gestae have been
spontaneously made or not:
1. The time that has elapsed between the occurrence of the act or
transaction and the making of the statement
2. Place where the statement was made
3. The condition of the declarant when he made the statement
4. The presence or absence of intervening occurrences between the
occurrence and the statement relative thereto
5. The nature and circumstances of the statement itself
b. Verbal Acts
 Statements accompanying an equivocal act and giving it a legal
significance, may also be received as res gestae
 Refers to such statements or any other declaration which tend to
characterize a particular act or transaction, or show the intention in
with it which it was done
 Requisites:
1. The act characterized by the verbal act, must be unequivocal or
ambiguous in tenor
2. The verbal act must characterize or explain the equivocal or
ambiguous act
3. The equivocal or ambiguous act must be material to the issue
4. Verbal act must be contemporaneous with and should
accompany the equivocal or ambiguous act
- Differences between SS and VA
Spontaneous Statements Voluntary Acts
Equivocal act Contemporaneous with or
May be prior to, simultaneous with, must accompany the equivocal act to
or subsequent to the startling be admissible
occurence

7. Entries in the course of business


- Rule 130, Sec. 43
“Entries made at, or near the time of the transactions to which they refer, by a
person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a position to know the facts
therein stated, may be received as a prima facie evidence, if such persons made
the entries in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty and in the
ordinary or regular course of business or duty.”
- Requisites:
1. The entrant must be deceased or unable to testify
2. The entries must have been made at or near the time of the transaction to
which they referred
3. The entries must have been made by the entrant in his professional
capacity or in the performance of his duty
4. The entries must have been made in the ordinary or regular course of
business or duty
5. The entrant must have been in a position to known the facts therein stated
- Regular Course of Business: record setting forth a fact or transaction made by
one in the ordinary and usual course of one’s business, employment, office or
profession, which it was the duty of the enterer in such manner to make, or
which it was commonly or regularly made, or which it was convenient to make
in the conduct of the business to which they pertains.
- An entry is competent as original and independent evidence only when the
enterer had personal knowledge of the facts entered, and when it was his duty
to inform himself of the truth of the matters he has undertaken to record.

8. Entries in official records


- Rule 130, Sec. 44
“Entries in official records made in the performance of his duty by a public officer
of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty especially enjoined
by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein.”
- Requisites:
1. The entry must have been made by a public officer of the Philippines or by
a person by law especially enjoined to make such entry
2. The entry must have been made in the performance of a duty
3. The entrant must have sufficient knowledge of the facts entered by him
- These are admissible as evidence without the necessity of calling the respective
officers to testify the facts stated in the certificates issued by a public officer in
the performance of his duties

26 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

- General Rule: enterer must have had personal knowledge of the facts entered
- It may be proved by:
 The production of the books or records themselves or by a copy
certified by the legal keeper

9. Commercial list and the like


- Rule 130, Sec. 45
“Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an
occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published compilation
is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated if
that compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and
is generally used and relied upon by them therein
- Examples:
a) Trade journals
b) Reporting prices current and other market data
c) Mortality tables compiled for life insurance
d) Abstracts of title compiled by reputable title examining institutions or
individuals, business directories, animal pedigree registers and the like
- These must be:
 Accurate
 And based upon reliable sources of information
- Newspapers containing market reports and quotations
 General Rule: admissible, without proof of their accuracy, and without
requiring evidence as to how the information published is obtained
 In order for a newspaper to qualify as evidence of price commodities
on a particular date:
a. It should be published for the enlightenment of persons dealing
in the articles to prove the value of which the paper is offered,
and
b. Persons generally must have been in the habit of dealing in such
commodities in reliance upon its market quotations

10. Learned treaties


- Rule 130, Sec. 46
“A publish treaties, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law, science,
or art is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein if the
court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject, testifies that the
writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in
his profession or calling as expert in the subject.”
- It is a well-settled general rule that scientific books and treatieses are not
admissible in the trial of an action, as independent evidence of the facts stated
therein, although such fact may be relevant to the issues of the case, and
opinions therein may be given by qualified expert witnesses whose knowledge
is based in part at least, and sometimes entirely, upon such treatises
- A general exception to the rule excluding scientific books as
independent evidence exists with reference to books or publications on
topics of such exact science which contains statements of ascertained facts
rather than of opinions, or which, by long use in the practical affairs of life, have
come to be accepted as standard and varying authority in determining the action
of those who use them.
 Publications of this kind, when authenticated, are generally admissible
as evidence
o Examples:
a. Almanacs
b. Table of logarithms
c. Weights
d. Measures and interest
e. Similar compilations
f. Encyclopedias
g. dictionaries
- When the law involved in a controversy is a domestic law, the court is bound to
take judicial notice, and no proof is necessary whatsoever
- When the law involved is a foreign law, distinction must be made
a. Written Law – may be evidenced by an official publication or by a copy
attested to by the officer having legal custody of the record, or by his
deputy, and must be accompanied with a certificate that such officer has
he custody
o Certificate may be made by:
1. Secretary of Embassy
2. Legation
3. Consul general
4. Consul
5. Vice Consul

27 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

6. Consular Agent, or
7. Any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in the foreign country in which the record is
kept, and authenticated by the seal of this office
b. Unwritten Law –
o Oral testimony of expert witnesses is admissible
- Examples:
1. Printed and published books of report of
decisions of the courts of the country
concerned if proved to be commonly
admitted in such courts
11. Testimony at a former proceeding
- General Rule: Testimony of a witness at a former case or proceeding may
always be presented in a subsequent case or proceeding for the purpose of
impeaching his credibility
- Rules provide that:
“The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or unable to testify, given
in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same
parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party
who had the opportunity to cross-examine him.”
- Requisites:
1. The witness whose testimony is offered in evidence is dead or unable to testify
2. The party against whom the evidence is offered, or his privy, was a party in the
former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative
3. The testimony or deposition relates to the same subject matter
4. The adverse party had an opportunity of cross-examination
- In order to establish a right to introduce a testimony of a witness given at
a former trial, it is incumbent upon the proponent of such evidence to lay on proper
predicate for its introduction by showing the unavailability of the witness sought to
produce. It must be shown that the witness is dead or unable to testify. In the
absence of proof of such circumstance, testimony of his character will be rejected.
- Grounds which made a witness unable to testify in a subsequent case that
warrant the admission of his testimony in a former trial:
1. Insanity or mental incapacity, or the former witness’ loss memory through old
age or disease
2. Physical disability by reason of sickness or advanced age
3. The fact that the witness has been kept away by contrivance of the opposite
party
4. The fact that after diligent search the former witness cannot be found
- Privity, as applied to admissibility of evidence:
 Denotes mutual or successive relationship to the right of property or
subject matter or partakes in an interest in any action or thing
- It is a rule that no assertion offered as testimony can be received unless it has been
open to test by cross-examination

CHAPTER XII: DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

In general
 Documentary Evidence
- Consists of writing or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures,
symbols or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of their contents.
- Kinds: public or private

Public documents
a. Written acts or records of the sovereign authority, of official bodies and tribunals, and
public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country
b. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments
c. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be entered
therein

- Need not be authenticated


- These are admissible without further proof of due execution or genuineness
- Reasons for ^
1. Said documents have been executed in the proper registry and are presumed to
be valid and genuine until the contrary is shown by clear and convincing proof
2. Public documents are authenticated by the official signature and seals which
they bear and of which seals, courts may take judicial notice
- Prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein

 Records of Public Documents when admissible for any purpose, may be


evidence by:

28 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

1. Official publication or by a copy attested by the officer having legal custody of the
record or by his deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines,
with a certificate that such officer has the custody
2. If the record is kept in a foreign country, the certificated may be made by a secretary
of the embassy, or legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent or
by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country
in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office
3. Whenever a copy of writing is attested for the purpose of evidence, the attestation
must state in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific
part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be under the official seal of
the attesting officer, if there by any, or if he be the clerk of court having a seal, under
the seal of such court.

 Public Official Documents, as enunciated by SC:


1. Any instrument notarized by a notary public, or a competent public official with the
solemnities required by law
2. Blank forms prepared by the Auditor of the PH
3. Receipts issued by the Department of Assessment and Collections of the City of Manila
for taxes collected
4. A burial permit issued by the Board of Public Health
5. Official receipts prescribed by the government to be issued upon receipts of money
for public purposes
6. Official cash book kept by the disbursing office of the Coast Guard and Transportation
Department
7. Cash book of public official in which entries are made of account of public moneys
received
8. Official receipts printed in accordance with standard forms
9. Copy of the record of possessory information, the original of which was filed in the
registry of property, partakes of the character of a judicial proceeding and of public
document
10. Legislative acts
11. Parish records of birth, marriages and death made before the promulgation of General
Orders No. 58 and the passage of Act No. 190
12. Civil Service examination papers
13. Record of a private documents kept by a justice of the peace court during the Spanish
regime
14. Certificate of Admission of Attorneys admitted to practice
15. Cedula
16. Examination papers of bar candidates
17. Certificate of land registration
18. Personnel information sheet of NBI

 Notarial Documents
- General Rule: public documents, as long as it is acknowledged

 Public Document vs Private Document


Public Private
Admissible, without further proof of their must be proved as to their due execution
due execution or genuineness and authenticity before they may be
received as evidence
Evidence against third person of the fact Bind only the parties who executed them
which gave rise to their due execution and or their privies, insofar as due execution
to the date of the latter and date of the documents are concerned
Substantive law requires that certain
transactions must be in public docs

Public record of a private document


 It may be proved by the original record, or by a copy thereof, attested by the legal
custodian of the record, with an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody
(Rule 132, Sec. 27)

Irremovability of public record


 Rule 132, Sec. 26
“Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible in evidence, must not be removed
from the office in which it is kept, except upon order of a court where the inspection of
the record is essential to the just determination of a pending case.”

Proof of lack of record


 Rule 132, Sec. 28
“A written statement made by an officer having legal custody of an official record or by his
deputy that after diligent search, no record or entry of a specified tenor is found to exist

29 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

in the records of his office, accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is admissible


as evidence that the records of his office contain no such record or entry.”

Private documents
- Are all other documents which are not embraced in the definition of public writings
just given
- Every deed or instrument executed by a private person, without the intervention of a
public notary or other person legally authorized, by which document some disposition
or agreement is proved, evidence or set forth
- Examples:
1. Theatre ticket
2. Time record, time sheet or time report
3. Document executed in a certain municipality outside the territorial limits of the
officer’s jurisdiction
4. Entry in the register of marriages kept by the Catholic church
5. Public documents which have been defectively executed
6. Church registries of births, marriages, and deaths

 Rule 132, Sec. 20:


“Before any document may be received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity
must be proved.”
- Exceptions:
1. Ancient documents
o Rule 132, Sec. 49
“Where a private document is more than 3o yeas old, is produced from a
custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished
by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its
authenticity must be given.”
2. Acknowledged Private Writings
o Rule 132, Sec. 30
“”Every instrument acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by
law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the instrument or the
document involved”
3. Documents admitted to have been executed by adverse party
o Rule 132, Sec. 56
“Neither is there a need for evidence of execution and authenticity with
respect to documents the genuineness and due execution of which are
admitted by the adverse party. Such an admission may arise from the
pleadings of the parties or in the case of actionable document, from the
failure of the adverse party who is alleged to have executed it, to specifically
deny under oath its genuineness and due execution in his pleading. The
admission of genuineness of a document may also be obtained through a
written request for such admission addressed to the adverse party.”

How due execution and authenticity of a private writing is proved


1. By anyone who saw the writing executed
2. By evidence of the genuineness of the handwriting of the maker
- Rule 132, Sec. 22
“The handwriting of a person may be proved by any witness who believes it to be the
handwriting of such person, because he has seen the person write, or has seen
purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged, and has thus
acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence respecting the
handwriting may also be given by a comparison made by the witness or by the court,
with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence
is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge
- Rule 130, Sec. 50
“The opinion of an ordinary witness regarding the handwriting of a person, when he
has knowledged of the handwriting may be received as evidence.”

Alteration in document
 Rule 132, Sec. 31
“The party producing the document as genuine which has been altered and appears to
have been altered after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must
account for the alteration. He may show that the alteration was made by another, without
his concurrence, or was made with the consent of the parties affected by it, or was
otherwise properly or innocently made, or that the alteration did not change the meaning
or language of the instrument. If he fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible
in evidence”
 Rule 132, Sec. 32
“There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents insofar as
their admissibility as evidence is concerned.

30 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

Best evidence rule


 The general proposition is that when the subject of the inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the original document itself. (Rule
130, Sec. 3)
 In other words, the original writing also called the primary or best evidence – as a general
rule must be produced and proved
 ORIGINAL (Rule 130, Sec. 4)
1. The original copy of a document is one of the contents of which
are the subject of an inquiry
2. When a document is in 2 or more copies executed at or about
the same time with identical contents
3. When an entry is repeated in the regular course if business, one
being copied from another at or near the time of the transaction
 In the following cases, the originals need not be produced:
1. When the original has been lost, destroyed or cannot be
produced in court without bad faith on the part of the offeror
2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the
party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails
to produce it after reasonable notice
3. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss
of time and the fact sought to be established from them is the
general result of the whole (Sec. 3, Rule 130)
4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public
officer

Secondary evidence rule


 is meant any evidence other than the document itself
 it may consist of a copy, or by a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or by
the testimony of witnesses in the order stated (Rule 130, Sec. 5)
 In proving the contents of the original in some authentic document, it is sufficient if it
appears in a private document which is proved to be authentic
o Authentic: document should be genuine, it need not be a public document
 In order that the contents of a document in the possession of an adverse party
may be proved by secondary evidence, the ff facts must be shown by the party
offering the secondary evidence:
1. Opponent’s custody or control of the original document
2. Reasonable notice was given to the adverse party who has the custody or control of
the document
3. Satisfactory proof of its existence
4. Failure or refusal by the adverse party to produce it in court
 Before the contents of the original may be proved, satisfactory proof must be
made of the ff:
1. Execution and existence of the original
2. The loss and destruction of the original or its non-production in court
3. Unavailability of the original is not due to bad faith on the part of the offeror

Parole evidence rule


 Rule 130, Sec. 9
“When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and their
successors-in-interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written
agreement. s
 Admissible when any of the following has been put in issue:
a. Intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement
b. Failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the
parties
c. Validity of the written agreement or existence of other terms agreed by the parties or
their successors-in-interest after the execution of the written agreement

Intrinsic Ambiguity
o Uncertainty which does not appear on the face of the instrument, but which
is shown to exist for the first time by matter outside the writing – may be
explained or clarified by parole evidence
Extrinsic or Patent Ambiguity
o An uncertainty that arises at one on the reading of the contract
Mistake
o To justify the reformation of a written instrument upon the ground of
mistake, the concurrence of these 3 things are necessary:
1. Mistake should be of facts
2. Mistake should be mutual or common to both parties to the instrument
3. Mistake should be alleged and proved by clear and convincing
evidence

31 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

Imperfection
o General Rule: When the contract between the parties is reduced to
writing, the trial court should not admit oral evidence over the objection of
the defendant (Sec. 9, Rule 130)
Exceptions:
 Writing is erroneous, imperfect or fails to express the true intent
and agreement of the parties
Validity of Written Agreements
o The rule that evidence of a parole cannot be shown for the purpose of
enlarging or changing the written contract, where the action is one to
enforce the contract is however, not applicable where the action is in fraud
to rescind the contract and to prove oral promise as the fraudulent
representation which acted as the inducement of the sale
o The prohibition does not apply when the purpose of the parole evidence is
to show that no written of the parole contract ever existed, that the minds
of the parties never met on the terms of such contract and that there
existed any consideration upon which such an agreement could be founded
Subsequent Agreement
o

Interpretation of Documents

 Article 1379 of the NCC


- The principles of interpretation stated in Rule 130 of the RoC shall likewise be
observed in the construction of contracts

a. Law and Contract
- It must be read into it just as if an express provision to that effect were inserted
therein, except when the contract discloses a contrary interpretation

b. Law at the time of execution governs

c. Law where contract executed governs

d. Civil code provisions

Article 1370. If the terms of a contract are clear and leave no doubt upon the intention of the
contracting parties, the literal meaning of its stipulations shall control.

If the words appear to be contrary to the evident intention of the parties, the latter shall prevail
over the former. (1281)

Article 1371. In order to judge the intention of the contracting parties, their contemporaneous
and subsequent acts shall be principally considered. (1282)

Article 1372. However general the terms of a contract may be, they shall not be understood
to comprehend things that are distinct and cases that are different from those upon which the
parties intended to agree. (1283)

Article 1373. If some stipulation of any contract should admit of several meanings, it shall be
understood as bearing that import which is most adequate to render it effectual. (1284)

Article 1374. The various stipulations of a contract shall be interpreted together, attributing
to the doubtful ones that sense which may result from all of them taken jointly. (1285)

Article 1375. Words which may have different significations shall be understood in that which
is most in keeping with the nature and object of the contract. (1286)

Article 1376. The usage or custom of the place shall be borne in mind in the interpretation of
the ambiguities of a contract, and shall fill the omission of stipulations which are ordinarily
established. (1287)

32 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

Article 1377. The interpretation of obscure words or stipulations in a contract shall not favor
the party who caused the obscurity. (1288)

Article 1378. When it is absolutely impossible to settle doubts by the rules established in the
preceding articles, and the doubts refer to incidental circumstances of a gratuitous contract, the
least transmission of rights and interests shall prevail. If the contract is onerous, the doubt shall
be settled in favor of the greatest reciprocity of interests.

If the doubts are cast upon the principal object of the contract in such a way that it cannot be
known what may have been the intention or will of the parties, the contract shall be null and
void. (1289)

Article 1379. The principles of interpretation stated in Rule 123 of the Rules of Court shall
likewise be observed in the construction of contracts. (n)

e. Rules of court provisions

Section 10. Interpretation of a writing according to its legal meaning. — The language of a
writing is to be interpreted according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution,
unless the parties intended otherwise. (8)

Section 11. Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions. — In the construction
of an instrument, where there are several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if
possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all. (9)

Section 12. Interpretation according to intention; general and particular provisions. — In the
construction of an instrument, the intention of the parties is to be pursued; and when a general
and a particular provision are inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the former. So a particular
intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it. (10)

Section 13. Interpretation according to circumstances. — For the proper construction of an


instrument, the circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject
thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position
of those who language he is to interpret. (11)

Section 14. Peculiar signification of terms. — The terms of a writing are presumed to have
been used in their primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show that
they have a local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so used and
understood in the particular instance, in which case the agreement must be construed
accordingly. (12)

Section 15. Written words control printed. — When an instrument consists partly of written
words and partly of a printed form, and the two are inconsistent, the former controls the latter.
(13)

Section 16. Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining certain writings. — When the
characters in which an instrument is written are difficult to be deciphered, or the language is
not understood by the court, the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or
who understand the language, is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the
language. (14)

Section 17. Of Two constructions, which preferred. — When the terms of an agreement have
been intended in a different sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to prevail against
either party in which he supposed the other understood it, and when different constructions of
a provision are otherwise equally proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the
party in whose favor the provision was made. (15)

Section 18. Construction in favor of natural right. — When an instrument is equally susceptible
of two interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to be
adopted. (16)

Section 19. Interpretation according to usage. — An instrument may be construed according


to usage, in order to determine its true character. (17)

33 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

CHAPTER XIII: WITNESSES AND THEIR QUALIFICATIONS

Testimonial Duty of citizens

Witness defined
 Person who testifies in a cause or gives evidence before a judicial tribunal

Competency of witness
 Legal fitness or ability of a witness to be heard on the trial of a cause

Persons qualified to be a witness


 Rule 130, Sec. 20
“Except as provided in the next succeeding section, all persons who can perceive and
perceiving, can make known their perception to others may be witnesses. Religious or
political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise
provided by law, shall not be a ground for disqualification.”
 Conviction of a crime is not a ground for disqualification, unless otherwise provided by
law
 NOT disqualified from becoming witnesses:
1. Accused
2. Co-defendant
3. Accomplice
4. Detective, policemen and other officers
5. Persons convicted of a crime
6. attorneys

Presumption of competency of witness


 General Rule: When a witness takes the stand to testify, the law, on grounds of public
policy, presumes that he is competent

Objection to the competency of a witness necessary


 When a witness is produced, it is a right and privilege accorded to the adverse party
to object to his examination on the ground of incompetency to testify
 If a party knows before trial that a witness is incompetent, objection must be
made before he has given any testimony; if incompetency appears on the trial, it must be
interposed as soon as it becomes apparent
 Where timely objection is made to a witness testifying on the grounds of
incompetency, it is unquestionably the duty of the court to make such examination as
will satisfy him as to the competency or incompetency of the witness to testify in the case,
and thereupon to rule on the objection accordingly

Waiver of objection
Disinterested person
General grounds for the disqualification of a person from being a witness

a. Mental Incapacity
 Rules disqualifying persons of unsound mind from becoming witness
 Test of Competency
b. Mental Immaturity
 Rules disqualifying a witness by reason of infancy
 Rules on examination of a child witness
c. Marital privilege
 Rules regarding marital privilege, as explained
d. Death or insanity
 Rules rendering surviving parties incompetent
e. Privileged communication
 In general
 Privilege communication between husband and wife
 Privilege communication between attorney and client
 Privilege communication between physician and patient
 Privilege communication between minister or priest and penitent
 Privilege communication made to public officer
f. Parental and filial privilege
 Rules regarding filial privilege
g. Other Privileged Matters
 Souces of News Report
 Trade Secrets
 Bank Deposits

CHAPTER XIV: BURDEN OF PROOF


Burden of Proof
Burden of evidence
Burden of Proof vs Burden of Evidence

34 | P a g e
Rules on Evidence -- (Summarized - Francisco

Rules as to burden of proof in civil cases


Rules as to burden of proof in criminal cases
Effect of a legal presumption upon burden of proof and burden of evidence

CHAPTER XV: EXCLUSION AND SEPARATION OF WITNESSES


Rule on exclusion and separation of witness
Parties not ordinarily excluded
Party in Interest although not of record may not be excluded
Agent of parties
Expert witnesses not generally excluded
Character witnesses are ordinarily allowed to remain
Witness in rebuttal many not be xcluded
When policemen, detectives or other police officers may be allowed to remain although
they are witnesses
Effect of the violation of the rule on the right of witness to testify

CHAPTER XVI: OFFER AND OBJECTION OF EVIDENCE

A. Offer of Evidence
Offer of Evidence Explained
Offer of Testimonial Evidence
Offer of Documentary and Object Evidence
Reason for Requiring that evidence be formally offered
Reason for requiring that the purpose for which the evidence is presented must
be specified
Imperfect offer of evidence
Formal offer of rejected exhibits
Renewal of offer
Failure to renew offer is waiver
Withdrawal of evidence
Tender of excluded evidence (offer of proof)
Offer of proof of documentary or object evidence
Offer of proof of oral evidence
Presence of witness necessary
When statement of what counsel expects to prove unnecessary
Exceptions: Evidence formally offered before the trial court can be considered
is relaxed where 2 requisites concur

B. Objection to Evidence
Rule on Objection
Time for Interposing Objection
Right of a party’s counsel to object
Objection by trial judge not commendable
Mode of making objections
Waiver of objection
Striking out answer
When motion to strike out improper
Time for motion to strike out
Form of motion to strike out
When repetition of objection is unnecessary
Where subsequent evidence is not of the same kind
Where evidence admitted on condition
Where the same evidence re-offered
Ruling of the court
New trial not generally allowed on improper admission or rejection of evidence

35 | P a g e