Evidence (Reviewer)

RULES OF EVIDENCE
Based on the Book of Regalado

Other Laws Governing Evidence
[RULE 128] - GR: Rules of evidence is governed by the Rules of Court (RoC)
GENERAL PROVISIONS - EXC: Application of other laws
Examples:
Sec 1. Evidence defined. - RA 4200 (Anti Wiretapping),
- Code of Commerce (weight of entries in merchant books)
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial - Electronic Commerce Act
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (1) - NCC, RPC
- Constitution: Bill of Rights - Art III
Sec. 2. Scope. o Sec 2: The right of people against unreasonable searches and
seizures
The rules of evidence shall be the same: o Sec 3: The privacy of communication and correspondence
- in all courts and shall be inviolable (EXC. By order of court or when
- in all trials and hearings, provided by law for safety and public order)
- EXCEPT as otherwise provided by law or these rules. (2a) o Evidence obtained in violation of such provisions shall be
INADMISSIBLE
Notes: Applicability of the Rules of Evidence:
- GR: Applicable ONLY in judicial proceedings
Evidence, defined: Bustos v. Lucero: Evidence is the mode and manner of - EXC: In quasi-judicial proceedings
proving competent facts in judicial proceedings. o The same apply by analogy, or in a suppletory character and
Proof is the result or effect of evidence. whenever practicable and convenient.(Rule 1 Section 4)
- This is the result when the requisite quantum of evidence of a o It shall apply also when the governing law of such
particular fact has been duly admitted and given weight. proceeding specifically adopts such rules
Factum Probandum o Note: NOT applicable in agrarian cases
- Ultimate fact or the fact sought to be established Classification of Evidence According to Form
- Refers to the proposition 1. Object (Real) Evidence: directly addressed to the senses of the court
Factum Probans and consist of tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court, in
- The evidentiary fact or the fact by which the factum probandum is to an ocular inspection, or at place designated by the court for its view or
be established. observation of an exhibition, experiment or demonstration.
- Refers to the materials which established the proposition - This is referred to as “autoptic proference” since it proffers or
presents in open court the evidentiary articles for observation or
Rules of Evidence as Procedural Law inspection
- Amendments in such rules may validly be made applicable to cases 2. Documentary Evidence: Evidence supplied by written instruments or
pending at the time of such change. Parties have no vested right in derived from conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are
the rules of evidence. represented on material substances
- HOWEVER, in criminal cases, if the amendment would permit the - Rule 130 Sec 2: writings or any material containing letters, words,
reception of a lesser quantum of evidence to convict, retroactive numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written expression
application would be unconstitutional for being ex post facto. offered as proof of their contents
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the book of regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 1|Patiño,Erica
3. Testimonial Evidence: That which is submitted to the court through the 6. Positive and Negative Evidence
testimony or deposition of a witness. - Positive: when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur.
o Entitled to a greater weight since the witness represents of
Other Classification of Evidence: his personal knowledge the presence or absence of a fact.
1. Relevant, Material, and Competent Evidence - Negative Evidence: when the witness did not see or know of the
- Relevant: evidence having any value in reason as tending to prove occurrence of a fact.
any matter provable in an action. o Lesser weight since there is a total disclaimer of personal
o TEST: The logical relation of the evidentiary fact to the fact knowledge, hence without any representation that the fact
in issue, whether the former tends to establish the probability could or could not have existed or happened.
or improbability of the latter. o It is admissible only if it tends to contradict positive
- Material: evidence directed to prove a fact in issue as determined by evidence of the other side or would tend to exclude the
the rules of substantive law and pleadings. existence of fact sworn to by the other side.
o TEST: w/n the fact it intends to prove is an issue or not.
o W/N a fact is in issue: Determined by substantive law, Sec. 3. Admissibility of evidence.
pleadings, pre-trial order and by admissions or confessions
on file. Evidence is admissible when:
o Evidence may be relevant BUT may be immaterial. - it is relevant to the issue AND
- Competent: one that is not excluded by the Rules, statutes or the - is not excluded by the law or these rules. (3a)
Constitution.
2. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence Sec. 4. Relevancy; collateral matters.
- Direct: that which proves the fact in dispute w/o the aid of any
inference or presumption Evidence must have such a relation TO:
- Circumstantial: proof of a fact or facts from which, taken either - the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
singly or collectively, the existence of a particular fact in dispute Evidence on collateral matters:
may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence. - shall NOT be allowed,
3. Cumulative and Corroborative Evidence - EXCEPT when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the
- Cumulative: evidence of the same kind and to the same state of probability or improbability of the fact in issue. (4a)
facts.
- Corroborative: additional evidence of a different character to the Notes:
same point.
4. Prima Facie and Conclusive Evidence Evidence is ADMISSIBLE when: 2 Requisites (see codal)
- Prima Facie: that which, standing alone, unexplained or - When it is Relevant
uncontradicted, is sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed. o it must have a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief
- Conclusive: the class of evidence which the law does not allow to be of its existence or non-existence
contradicted. o Determined by the rules of logic and human experience.
5. Primary and Secondary Evidence - When it is Competent
- Primary: that which the law regards as affording the greatest o When not excluded by the law or by the RoC
certainty of the fact in question. Also known as “best evidence”. o Determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules on evidence
- Secondary: that which is inferior to the primary evidence and is Note: The weight however of admissible evidence depends on judicial
permitted by law only when the best evidence is not available. Also evaluation within the Rule 133 and rules of the SC.
known as “substitutionary evidence”.
o While evidence is admissible, it may be entitled to little or - REQUISITE: There should be no bad faith on the part of the
no weight at all. proponent. (necessary to avoid unfair surprises)
o Conversely, evidence of great weight may also be 2. Multiple Admissibility
inadmissible. - When the evidence is relevant AND competent for two or more
purposes, such evidence should be admitted for any or all the
purposes for which it is offered
Requisites of Admissibility of Evidence According to Professor Wigmore - PROVIDED it must satisfy all the requirements for its admissibility.
1. That none but facts having rational probative value are admissible & 3. Curative Admissibility
2. That all facts having rational probative value are not forbidden by - The right of the party to introduce incompetent evidence in his behalf
specific rules where the court has admitted the same kind of evidence adduced by
Note: Here, Relevant Evidence means any class of evidence which has the adverse party.
“rational probative value” to establish the issue in controversy - 3 Theories of Curative Admissibility cited by Wigmore
o American rule – the admission of incompetent evidence
When is admissibility determined? – At the time it is OFFERED to the w/out objection by the opponent, does not justify rebutting it
court by similar incompetent evidence.
- Real Evidence: offered o English rule – if inadmissible evidence is admitted, the
o when the same is presented for its view or evaluation adverse party may resort to similar inadmissible evidence
o when the party rests his case and the real evidence consists o Massachusetts rule –similar incompetent evidence may be
of objects exhibited in court admitted in order to avoid a plain and unfair prejudice
- Testimonial Evidence: offered by the calling of the witness to the caused by the admission of the other party’s evidence
stand - What should be determined to apply the curative admissibility
- Documentary Evidence: offered by the proponent immediately rule?
before he rests his case 1. w/n the incompetent evidence was seasonably objected to
 Lack of objection: waiver of the right to object admissibility
When should admissibility be objected? BUT does NOT deprive him to introduce similar rebutting
- At the time evidence is offered to the court OR evidence
- As soon thereafter as the objection to its admissibility shall have 2. w/n the admission of such evidence will cause a plain and
become apparent unfair prejudice to the party against whom it was admitted
o Objection to the qualification of the witness: made at the  When the admissible evidence has been improperly
time such person is called to the stand excluded, the other party should not be permitted to
o Objection to the testimony: made at the time the question is introduce similar evidence
asked or after the answer is given when the objectionable
features become apparent by reason of the answer Stonehill, et al. v. Diokno: Documentary evidence illegally obtained, is
Note: if not done within such time – right to object is deemed WAIVED inadmissible on a timely motion or action to suppress. (Applies to illegally
obtained confessions)
Doctrines and Rules of Admissibility Sanctioned by the Supreme Court
1. Conditional Admissibility Collateral Matters, defined: Matters other than the facts in issue and which
- When the evidence at the time it is offered appears to be immaterial are offered as a basis for inference as to the existence or non-existence of the
or irrelevant, such evidence may be received on condition that the facts in issue
other facts will be proved thereafter - GR: Collateral matters are INADMISSIBLE or not allowed
- IF not proved subsequently: evidence given will be stricken out.
- EXC: when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the - allow the parties to be heard thereon.
probability or improbability of the fact in issue (“Circumstantial
Evidence” or evidence of relevant collateral facts) AFTER the trial and BEFORE judgment OR ON appeal, the proper court:
Note: What is prohibited – IRRELEVANT collateral facts - on its own initiative OR on request of a party,
may:
4 Main Divisions of the Rules of Evidence: (1) Admissibility of Evidence - take judicial notice of any matter and
Rule 130; (2) Burden of proof and what need not be proved Rule 131 & 129; - allow the parties to be heard thereon IF such matter is decisive of
(3) Presentation of Evidence Rule 132; (4) Weight and Sufficiency of a material issue in the case.
Evidence Rule 133; Note: Rule 134 has been transposed to Part I as Rule 24
[RULE 129]
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED Notes:
Sec 1. Judicial notice, when mandatory. Judicial Notice (JN), Defined: cognizance of certain facts which judges
may properly take and act on without proof.
A court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence: - JN is based on convenience and expediency.
- of the existence and territorial extent of states, their political - JN relieves the parties from the necessity of introducing evidence to
history, forms of government and symbols of nationality, prove the fact noticed. The fact is proven by JN.
- the law of nations, - The stipulation and admission of the parties or counsel cannot
- the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals, prevail over the operation of the doctrine of judicial notice, and such
- the political constitution and history of the RP, are all subject to the operation of the doctrine.
- the official acts of legislative, Two kinds of JN:
- executive and judicial departments of the RP, - Mandatory
- the laws of nature, - Discretionary
- the measure of time, and How JN May be Taken by the Court:
- the geographical divisions. (1a) 1. On its own initiative or motion
2. When it is requested or invited by the parties
Note: In Either Case, the court may allow the parties to be heard on the
Sec. 2. Judicial notice, when discretionary. matter in question
- The purpose of the hearing: NOT for the presentation of evidence
A court MAY take judicial notice of matters which: o but to afford the parties reasonable opportunity to present
- are of public knowledge, or information relevant to the propriety of taking such JN or to
- are capable to unquestionable demonstration, or the tenor of the matter to be noticed
- ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions. o Also to notify them of the court’s intention to take JN
(1a) (no notice = improper JN)
What stage may the court take judicial notice of a fact?
Sec. 3. Judicial notice, when hearing necessary. - During trial;
- After trial and before judgment;
During the trial, the court: - On Appeal
- on its own initiative, OR on request of a party, Republic v. CA: JN must be exercised with caution and every reasonable
may: doubt on the subject must be resolved in the negative.
- announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the bo ok of regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 4|Patiño,Erica
Judicial Notice of Laws They have been actually ruled upon in other cases
- GR: courts of justice are required to take JN of the laws before it and none of the parties object
- EXC: In case of ORDINANCES, the rule is different How WRITTEN Foreign Law May be Proved
o MTCs: Required to take JN of the ordinances of the - Requirements in Sec 24 and 25 of rule 132 must be complied w/:
municipality or city wherein they sit. o BY an official publication
o RTC however, they must take such JN ONLY when: o BY a duly attested and authenticated copy thereof
 Required to do so by statute (ex. city charter); and - Absent the above evidence: The Doctrine of Processual
 In a case on appeal before them and wherein the Presumption shall apply
inferior court took JN of an ordinance involved in o The foreign law is presumed to be the same as that in the RP
said case. (only to determine the propriety of taking - Note: Exceptions to the required proof in Sec 24 and 25:
JN) o Testimony of a witness who was an active member of the
- Appellate courts may also take JN of municipal and city ordinances California Bar and who is familiar with the laws with a full
not only where the lower courts took JN BEC these are facts capable quotation of the cited law was accepted as sufficient proof.
of unquestionable demonstration. o An affidavit of an US attorney which does not state the
- For the same reason, Courts may take judicial notice of specific law but merely contained his interpretation of the
administrative regulations facts of the case is NOT sufficient proof.
How UNWRITTEN Foreign Law May be Proved
Rule on JN of Decisions of Courts - Rule 130, Sec 46: A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a
- ALL courts are required to take judicial notice of the decisions of the subject of such law or a testimony of a written expert
Supreme Court
- Lower courts are to take JN of decisions of higher courts (ex. CA) Sec. 4. Judicial admissions.
BUT NOT of the decisions of coordinate trial courts NOR even of a
decision or the facts involved in another case tried by the same court An admission verbal or written,
o EXCEPT when: - made by the party in the course of the proceedings in the same
 Parties introduce the same in evidence case,
 The court as a matter of convenience, decides to do does not require proof.
so
The admission may be contradicted ONLY by showing:
Judicial Notice vs. Personal Knowledge of a Judge - that it was made through palpable mistake or
- The 2 should not be confused - that no such admission was made. (2a)
- It is not essential that matters of JN be actually known to the judge.
The judge may at his discretion, inform himself in any way which Notes:
may seem best to him, and act accordingly. Judicial Admissions May be Made IN:
1. The pleadings filed by the parties
Foreign Laws may NOT be Taken Judicial Notice 2. In the course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or
- Existence of foreign laws is one of FACT and NOT of LAW stipulations
- It MUST BE PROVED like any other fact: 3. In other stages of the judicial proceeding, as in pre-trial of the case
o EXCEPT: when the laws are within the actual knowledge of Note: Depositions, written interrogatories, or requests for admission are also
the court either because: considered judicial admissions
 They are generally known OR
To be considered a judicial admission:
- GR: It must be made in the SAME case in which it is offered o No such admission was made or
- EXC: It may be made in another case or another court PROVIDED: o In the case of a pre-trial admission in a civil case, to prevent
o It be proved as in the case of any other fact manifest injustice (Sec 7, Rule 18) – Note: applies to
 IF the judicial admission was made in a judicial criminal cases if the pre-trial admission is reduced into
proceeding, it is entitled to greater weight. writing and signed by the accused and his counsel.
o It is pertinent to the issue involved
o There must be no objection
- EXC to EXC:
1. The said admissions were made only for purposes of the first
case as in the rule on implied admissions and their effects under
Rule 26
2. The same were withdrawn with the permission of the court
therein
3. The court deems it proper to relieve the party therefrom.
Judicial Admissions v. Extrajudicial Admissions:
- Judicial: Those so made in the pleadings filed or in the progress of a
trial.
- Extrajudicial: Those made out of court, or in a judicial proceeding
other than the one under consideration
Rules on Extrajudicial Admissions:

- Extrajudicial admissions or other admissions are, as a rule and where
elements of estoppel are not present, disputable.
- Admissions in a pleading withdrawn are considered extrajudicial
admissions – must be proved by a formal offer in evidence of the
original pleading
- Admissions in a pleading superseded by an amended pleading
although filed in the same case are:
o judicial admissions (Note: Based on Regalado on his
interpretation of Sec 4 as amended, p. 792)
o still extrajudicial (If based on Torres v. CA, et al. G.R.
No. L-37420-21, July 31, 1984) – also Judge B.
Note: When the parties agree on what the foreign law provides, these are
admission of facts that the court may rely upon, and hence, they are in
estoppel to take a contrary position.
Rules on Contradicting Judicial Admissions

- GR: Judicial Admissions cannot be contradicted by the admitter
who is the party himself
- EXC: May be contradicted when:
o Such is made through palpable mistake or
- An OI conducted by the judge w/o notice to or the presence of the
parties is invalid, as an OI is part of the trial.
- W/N an OI is to be made lies in the discretion of the court.
When can a Court Refuse the Introduction of Object (real) Evidence and
Rely on Testimonial Evidence Alone:
1. When the exhibition of such object is contrary to public policy,
morals or decency
2. When to require its being viewed in court or in an ocular inspection
would result in delay, inconvenience, unnecessary expense out of
proportion to the evidentiary value of such object
3. When such object (real) evidence would be confusing or misleading,
as when the purpose is to prove the former condition of the object
and there is no preliminary showing that there has been no
substantial change in said condition
4. The testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly
[RULE 130] portrays the object in question as to render a view thereof
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY unnecessary
When may object (real) evidence which is repulsive or indecent still be
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE viewed by the court?
- IF the view of the same is necessary in the interest of justice
Sec 1. Object as evidence. - In such case, the court may exclude the public from such view
- Note: The view may NOT be refused IF the indecent or immoral
Objects as evidence are: objects constitute the very basis of the criminal or civil actions
- those addressed to the senses of the court. (ex. case against obscene exhibits)
When an object is relevant to the fact in issue: -
- it may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (1a) What does object (real) evidence include?
- Such evidence includes any article or object which may be known or
Notes: perceived by the use of any of the senses of: hearing (auditory),
- When an object is relevant to a fact in issue, the court may acquire touch (tactile), taste (gustatory) or smell (olfactory)and sight
knowledge thereof by actually viewing the object – the object is - It may include:
called real evidence o Examination of the anatomy of a person or any substance
- Also known as autoptic proference, physical or demonstrative taken therefrom
evidence o Conducting tests, demonstration or experiments
- It is the highest form of evidence o Examination of representative portrayals of the object in
- Even if other evidence have been introduced, it will not prevent the question provided the same are properly authenticated (ex.
court from viewing an object to resolve the issue maps, diagrams, sketches, pictures, audio-visual records)
- Also, the fact that an ocular inspection has been held does not - Note: Such real evidence may be amplified by interpretations
preclude a party from introducing other evidence on the same issue. afforded by testimonial evidence especially by experts (x-ray
Requirements of an Ocular Inspection (OI) interpreted by doctors)
Documents are Considered:
- Object (real) Evidence IF their Purpose is: To prove their (b) When the original:
existence or condition, or the nature of the handwritings thereon or to - is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the
determine the age of the paper used, or the blemishes or alterations evidence is offered, and
thereon. - the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice;
- Otherwise, They are Considered Documentary Evidence IF their
Purpose is: to establish the contents or tenor thereof. (c) When the original:
- consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be
Physical Examination of a Person May be Conducted: examined in court without great loss of time and
- BY the court OR under its direction - the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result
- TO show the nature, extent or location of injuries, facial features, his of the whole; and
resemblance or possibility of relationship to another, or his racial
origin, his probable age, fact of pregnancy (d) When the original:
- is a public record
- in the custody of a public officer OR is recorded in a public office.
(2a)
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Sec. 4. Original of document.
Sec. 2. Documentary evidence.
(a) The original of the document is:
Documents as evidence consist of: - one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry.
- writing or
- any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or (b) When a document:
- other modes of written expression - is in two or more copies executed at or about the same time, with
offered as proof of their contents. (n) identical contents,
all such copies are equally regarded as originals.
1. BEST EVIDENCE RULE (Primary Evidence Rule)
(c) When an entry:
Sec. 3. Original document must be produced; exceptions. - is repeated in the regular course of business,
- one being copied from another at or near the time of the transaction,
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document: all the entries are likewise equally regarded as originals. (3a)
- no evidence shall be admissible other than the original document
itself, Notes:
EXCEPT in the following cases:
Document, defined: A deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by
(a) When the original: which something is proved, evidenced or set forth.
- has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, Documentary Evidence, defined: That which is furnished by written
- without bad faith on the part of the offeror; instruments, inscriptions and documents of all kinds.
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the bo ok of regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 8|Patiño,Erica
Best Evidence Rule, defined: that rule which requires the highest grade of When “Other Copies of a Document” are Considered Originals (Sec 4)
evidence obtainable to prove a disputed fact. - It includes regular entries in journals and ledgers.
- Purpose: To prevent fraud, perjury, and To exclude uncertainties in - A signed carbon copy executed at the same time as the original is
the contents of a document known as a “duplicate original” and may be introduced w/o the
Best Evidence Rule is Applied to Documentary Evidence ONLY original
- Operates as a rule of exclusion Rules on Carbon Copies Considered as Originals
- GR: Original writing itself must be produced in court. - Documents prepared in several copies through the use of carbon
Secondary/substitutionary evidence cannot inceptively be introduced sheets are considered originals:
o Effect: The non-production of the original document gives o PROVIDED that the writing of a contract upon the outside
rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence (Sec 131) sheet, including the signature of the party sought to be
- EXC: Secondary evidence may be produced in 4 Instances in Sec 3 charged thereby, produces a facsimile upon the sheets
Note: In case of real evidence, secondary evidence may be introduced w/o beneath, such signature being thus reproduced by the SAME
having to account for the non-production of such primary evidence stroke of the pen
- Even if the signature was made through separate acts or separate
Best Evidence Rule is Applicable ONLY: when the contents of the occasions, ALL the CARBON COPIES are considered originals
document is the subject of inquiry. o IF each copy was intended as a repository of the same legal
- It does NOT apply when the issue is only as to: act of the party thereto.
o w/n the document exists or w/n it was actually executed or - BUT imperfect carbon copies are merely secondary evidence
o the circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution even if the text was made at the same time as the signed original
Note: Here, testimonial evidence or other evidence will suffice. o Ex. incomplete signatures, something else is left to be done
When a document is presented to prove existence or condition – It is in order that a document could evidence a binding obligation
offered as REAL evidence, NOT documentary evidence Rules on Telegrams and Cables – W/N the dispatch sent or the dispatch
- Parol evidence of the fact of execution is allowed received is the best evidence of the message (depends on the issue)
- HOWEVER, in criminal cases, where the issue is not only with - IF the issue is the contents of the telegrams
respect to the contents of the document but also as to whether such o as received by the addressee - original dispatch received is
document actually existed with the participation as imputed to the the best evidence
accused – the original must be produced (ex. in libel, the o as sent by the sender – the original is the message delivered
newspaper must be presented) - IF the issue is the inaccuracy of the transmission
o In this case, the presentation of the original should affect o BOTH the sent and received dispatch are originals.
ONLY the weight of the evidence intended to establish the Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga v. Reyes: in case of libel IF the issue is:
execution of the document - On the contents of the articles sent by the accused for publication
o The manuscript is the best evidence
Affidavits and depositions are not best evidence and hence not - On what was actually published
admissible, IF the affiants or deponents are available as witnesses o A copy of the newspaper is the best evidence
- It is not best evidence ONLY when the contents of the affidavits or
depositions are NOT the issues in the case BUT are merely used to 2. SECONDARY EVIDENCE
establish the issues in controversy
o Affidavits are regulated by the hearsay evidence rule (Rule Sec. 5. When original document is unavailable.
130 Sec 26) to safeguard the right of cross examination.
o Depositions are regulated by Rule 23 Sec 4 When the original document:
- has been lost or destroyed, or
- cannot be produced in court,
the offeror, upon proof of: What Constitutes Secondary Evidence? (Note: Applies to BOTH 1st and
- its execution or existence and 2nd Exceptions to the Primary Evidence Rule)
- the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his part, 1. A copy of said document
may prove its contents: 2. A recital or its contents in an authentic document or
- by a copy, or 3. The recollection of witnesses
- by a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or GR: Availment of such secondary evidence MUST be in the aforesaid
- by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (4a) order
EXC: Definite Evidentiary Rule When the law specifically provides for the
Notes: class and quantum of secondary evidence to establish the contents of a
document or bars secondary evidence such requirement is controlling
1st Exception to the Best Evidence Rule: When the original is lost or - Example. Lost holographic will must be proved only by a copy, lost
destroyed notarial will may be proved by the testimony of credible witnesses
What Must be Proved by Satisfactory Evidence in Order for Secondary Contents of a Document may be Proven BY:
Evidence May be Admissible: 1. Any person who read it
1. Due execution of the original : proved through the testimony of either: 2. Any person who heard it read knowing or it being proved from other
a. The person/s who executed it sources that the document so read was the one in question
b. The person before whom its execution was acknowledged or 3. Any person who was present when the contents of the document were
c. Any person who was present and saw it executed and delivered or talked over between the parties thereto to such an extent as to give him
who thereafter saw it and recognized the signatures, or reasonably full information as to its contents
d. One to whom the parties previously confessed its execution 4. Any person to whom the parties to the instrument have confessed or
2. Loss, destruction or unavailability of all such originals stated the contents thereof.
- The cause must NOT be due to the offeror’s bad faith
- Loss or Destruction may be Proved BY: Sec. 6. When original document is in adverse party's custody or control.
o Any person who knew of such fact
o Anyone who, in the judgment of the court had made a IF the document is in the custody or under the control of adverse party:
sufficient examination in the places where the document or - he must have reasonable notice to produce it.
papers of similar character are usually kept by the person in IF after such notice AND after satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to
whose custody the document was and had been unable to produce the document:
find it - secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss. (5a)
o Anyone who has made any other investigation which is
sufficient to satisfy the court that the document is indeed
lost. Notes:
- Duplicates must be accounted for: Only when ALL cannot be
presented can it be considered unavailable/lost/destroyed 2nd Exception to the Best Evidence Rule: Original is in the custody or under
3. Reasonable diligence and good faith in the search for or attempt to the control of the adverse party who fails to produce it
produce the original
Facts Which Must be Shown by the Party Offering Secondary Evidence
PNB v. Olila: When the original is OUTSIDE the jurisdiction of the court 1. The adverse party’s custody or control of the original document;
(ex. Abroad), secondary evidence is ADMISSIBLE
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the book of regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 10 | P a t i ñ o , E r i c a
o No need to prove actual possession. It is enough to show the produced is intended as evidence the document is either assumed to
circumstances that would indicate his possession. be favorable to the party in
2. That reasonable notice was given to the adverse party who has the possession thereof or that the party
custody or control of the document; seeking its production is not
3. Satisfactory proof of the document’s existence; sufficiently informed of the
4. Failure or refusal by the adverse party to produce it in court. contents of the same
Requirement of “Notice” Demanding the Original Document:

- No particular form of notice is required, as long as it fairly apprises 3rd Exception to the Best Evidence Rule: When the original consists of
the other party as to what papers are desired. Even an oral demand in numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in court
court will suffice. w/out great loss of time
- HOWEVER, notice must be given to the adverse party or his
attorney even if the document is in the actual possession of a 3rd Requisites for the 3rd Exception to Apply:
party 1. The voluminous character of the records must be established and
- Notice is done by: Motion or Subpoena duces tecum 2. Such records must be made accessible to the adverse party so that
Notice is NOT Required: their correctness may be tested on cross examination
- When the receipt of the original document is acknowledged on a
carbon copy. (The duplicate itself is an original copy and the only Instances When the Original Must STILL be Produced
issue is the receipt of the original) 1. When the detailed contents of the records of accounts are challenged
- When the nature of the action is in itself a notice, as when it is for the for being hearsay or
recovery or annulment of documents wrongfully obtained or 2. Issues are raised as to the authenticity or correctness of the detailed
withheld by the other party entries
*See Notes on Section 8 as it relates to Section 6 Note: Here, a summary of the voluminous records can be considered as
secondary evidence
Effect of JUSTIFIED Refusal of the Adverse Party to the Produce the
Document Sec. 7. Evidence admissible when original document is a public record.
- Does NOT give rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence or
create an unfavorable inference against him When the original of document:
- IT only authorizes the introduction of secondary evidence - is in the custody of public officer or
- is recorded in a public office,
Rules on Production of Documents: Rule 130 v. Rule 27 its contents may be proved:
Rule 130 Rule 27 - by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof.
Production is procured by mere notice Production is in the nature of a (2a)
to the adverse party mode of discovery
Requirements of notice must be Can be sought only by proper Notes:
fulfilled as a condition precedent for motion and only upon good cause
the subsequent presentation of 4th Exception to the Best Evidence Rule: When the original is a public
secondary evidence record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office
Presupposes that the evidence to be Contemplates a situation wherein
Such Document may be Evidenced BY: (a)An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;
- An official publication or (b)The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
- A copy attested by the officer having legal custody and agreement of the parties thereto;
- In the case of an authorized public record, by a copy thereof attested (c))The validity of the written agreement; or
by its legal keeper (d)The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in
interest AFTER the execution of the written agreement.
Sec. 8. Party who calls for document not bound to offer it.
The term "agreement" includes wills. (7a)
A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same
- is not obliged to offer it as evidence. (6a) Notes:
Note: Parol Evidence, defined: Any evidence aliunde (oral or written), which is
intended or tends to vary or contradict a complete and enforceable agreement
When the document is produced, it must fulfill the requisites of admissibility in a document
to be admitted. The party demanding it is also NOT obliged to offer it.
Basis and Effect of the Parol Evidence Rule
- Basis: When the parties have reduced their agreement into writing,
all their previous and contemporaneous agreements on the matter are
merged therein.
- Effect: Hence, a prior or contemporaneous verbal agreement is not
admissible to vary contradict or defeat the operation of a valid
instrument.
When Can Parol Evidence of a Collateral Agreement (CA) Between the

Same Parties on the Same or Related Subject Matter Still be Admissible
Notwithstanding the Existence of a Written Agreement?
1. When the CA is not inconsistent with the terms of the written contract
2. When the CA has not been integrated in and is independent of the
3. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE written contract as where it is suppletory to the original contract
3. When the CA is subsequent to or novatory of the written contract
Sec. 9. Evidence of written agreements. 4. When the CA constitutes a condition precedent which determines
whether the written contract may become operative or effective.
When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing: o No. 4 does not apply to a condition subsequent not stated in
- it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and the agreement
- there can be, between the parties and their successors in interest, no NOTE: In order to apply the above exceptions, evidence thereon may be
evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written allowed PROVIDED they have been put in issue (as part of Sec. 9, Par. d)
agreement.
HOWEVER, a party may present evidence to: Parol Evidence Rule Also does NOT APPLY (may not be invoked
- modify, explain or add to the terms of written agreement against the other):
- IF he puts in issue in his pleading:
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the boo k of regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 12 | P a t i ñ o , E r i c a
- When at least 1 party to the suit is not a party or privy to the written it varies the contents of the original
instrument in question and does not base a claim or assert a right Applies ONLY to documents which Applies to all kinds of writings
originating in the instrument. are contractual in nature or “written
- A stranger may introduce extrinsic evidence against the written agreement (EXC. It applies to wills)
agreement Can be invoked ONLY when there is Can be invoked by ANY party
- a controversy bet. the parties to the regardless of w/n such party has
Parol Evidence is Admissible PROVIDED Section 9 Paragraphs A to D written agreement and their privies participated in the writing involved.
are put in issue or any party directly affected thereby
- GR: Such facts must be put in issue by the pleadings 1st Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule: An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or
- EXCEPTION: Parol Evidence may still be admitted even if the imperfection in the written agreement (Sec 9 Par A)
required matters are not put in issue by the pleadings:
o If such facts are invoked in his answer (since it also puts it in Ambiguities in the Written Agreement or Will
issue) 1. “Latent or Intrinsic Ambiguity” – Contemplated in Sec 9 – Curable
o When parol evidence is NOT OBJECTED to (waiver of right by Parol Evidence
to object inadmissibility) - When the writing on its face appears to be clear and unambiguous
but there are collateral matters or circumstances which make the
Requisites for the Admissibility of Parol Evidence meaning uncertain
1. There is a valid contract - When a writing admits of 2 or more constructions
2. The terms of the agreement were reduced into writing - Ex. “I give my estate to my cousin Jimmy Ibarra” (I have 2 cousins
3. The controversy must be between the parties of the agreement of with that same name)
their successors in interest (parties to the agreement must be the 2. “Patent or Extrinsic Ambiguity” – NOT contemplated, Cannot be
parties to the suit) Cured by Parol Evidence
4. There is a dispute as to the terms of the agreement - That which is apparent on the face of the writing and requires
something to be added in order to ascertain the meaning. Ex. “I give
Rule on Express Trusts Concerning an Immovable or Any Interest my estate to my first cousin”
Therein 3. “Intermediate Ambiguity” – May also be Cured by Parol Evidence
- Cannot be proved by parol evidence PROVIDED it is also put in issue
- Relief: Reformation of contracts - Because of the words of the writing, though seemingly clear and
with a settled meaning, is actually equivocal and admits 2
interpretations
Note: False description shall not vitiate a document IF the subject is

Parol Evidence Rule v. Best Evidence Rule: sufficiently identified.
Parol Evidence Rule Best Evidence Rule Note: When the terms of the agreement are clear – the courts have no right to
Presupposes that the original Contemplates a situation where the interpret it
document is available in court original writing is not available
and/or there is a dispute as to w/n “Mistake” means “Mistake of Fact”
the said writing is the original - Such mistake may be a mutual mistake between the parties OR
Prohibits the varying of the terms of Prohibits the introduction of - Where an innocent party was imposed upon by unfair dealing of the
the written agreement secondary evidence regardless of w/n other.
- Such mistake should be alleged and proved by clear and convincing - UNLESS the parties intended otherwise. (8)
evidence
“Imperfection” Includes: Sec. 11. Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions.
- An inaccurate statement in the agreement or
- Incompleteness in the writing or In the construction of an instrument, where there are several provisions or
- Presence or inconsistent provisions therein particulars:
- such a construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to
Note: Art. 1363 NCC: When one party was mistaken and the other party all. (9)
knew that the instrument did not state the real agreement and concealed such
fact – the instrument may be reformed. Sec. 12. Interpretation according to intention; general and particular
provisions.
2nd Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule: Failure of the written agreement
to express the true intent and agreement of the parties In the construction of an instrument:
- the intention of the parties is to be pursued;
Purpose: to enable to court to ascertain the true intention of the parties or the and when a general and a particular provision are inconsistent,
true nature of the transaction - the latter is paramount to the former.
- So a particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent
3rd Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule: The validity of the written with it. (10)
agreement
Sec. 13. Interpretation according to circumstances.
In the inquiry into the Validity if the Agreement, Parol Evidence may be
Admitted to Show: For the proper construction of an instrument:
- The true consideration of the contract or the want or illegality thereof - the circumstances under which it was made,
- The Incapacity of the parties - including the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it,
- W/n the contract is fictitious or absolutely simulated may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of those
- W/n there was fraud in inducement whose language he is to interpret. (11)
4th Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule: The existence of other terms Sec. 14. Peculiar signification of terms.
agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest AFTER the execution
of the written agreement The terms of a writing:
- are presumed to have been used in their primary and general
Note: Amendment in Section 9 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
4. INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS the agreement must be construed accordingly. (12)
Sec. 10. Interpretation of a writing according to its legal meaning.

Sec. 15. Written words control printed.
The language of a writing is to be interpreted:
- according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution,
When an instrument consists partly of written words and partly of a printed
form, AND the two are inconsistent: Sec. 20. Witnesses; their qualifications.
- the former controls the latter. (13)
EXCEPT as provided in the next succeeding section:
Sec. 16. Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining certain writings. - all persons who can perceive, and
- perceiving, can make known their perception to others,
When: may be witnesses.
- the characters in which an instrument is written are difficult to be
deciphered, or - Religious or political belief,
- the language is not understood by the court, - interest in the outcome of the case, or
the evidence: - conviction of a crime
- OF persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or who understand UNLESS otherwise provided by law, shall not be a ground for
the language disqualification. (18a)
- is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the
language. (14) Notes:
Sec. 17. Of Two constructions, which preferred. Witness, defined: Reference to a person who testifies in a case or gives
evidence before a judicial tribunal
When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different sense by Competence of a Witness, defined: The legal fitness or ability of a witness
the different parties to it: to be heard on the trial of a case.
- that sense is to prevail against either party in which he supposed the
other understood it, and Rule on Competency of Witness
when different constructions of a provision are otherwise equally proper: - GR: A person who takes the witness stand is presumed to possess
- that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the party in the qualification of a witness (Presumption of Competency)
whose favor the provision was made. (15) - EXC: Prima Facie Presumption of Incompetency when:
o The person has been recently found to be of unsound mind
Sec. 18. Construction in favor of natural right. by a court of competent jurisdiction or
o One is an inmate of an asylum for the insane
When an instrument is equally susceptible of two interpretations: Note: The burden is upon the party objecting to the competency of a witness
- one in favor of natural right AND the other against it, to establish the grounds of incompetency.
- the former is to be adopted. (16)
When are the Qualifications and Disqualifications of Witnesses
Sec. 19. Interpretation according to usage. Determined?
- At the time the witnesses are produced for examination in court
An instrument may be construed according to usage, in order to determine (called to the stand) OR
its true character. (17) - At the time of the taking of their depositions.
Note: If they are children of tender years – the time of the occurrence to be
testified to should also taken into account
C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
Note: According to Judge B (different view from other authors) – You must
1. QUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES consider the qualifications of the witness BOTH at the time of the occurrence
to be testified to and at the time the witness is offered to determine his/her 1. Absolute: Forbidden to testify in any matter
competency. o By reason of mental incapacity or immaturity (sec 21)
o By reason of marriage (sec 22)
Instances When a Witness is NOT Disqualified from Being a Witness: 2. Relative: Forbidden only on certain matters
- Interest of a Witness in the Subject Matter of the Action or its o By reason of death or insanity of adverse party (Dead Man’s
Outcome Statute) sec 23
o GR: Does NOT disqualify a witness from testifying. It o By reason of Privileged Communication (Sec 24)
affects only his credibility but NOT his competency
o EXC: He will be disqualified under those covered by the Sec. 21. Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity.
rule on surviving parties, also known as the “Dead Man
Statute” or the “Survivorship Disqualification Rule” (Sec The ff persons cannot be witnesses:
23)
- A Co-defendant Being Declared in Default (a) Those whose mental condition:
o GR: A defendant is NOT disqualified from testifying for his - at the time of their production for examination,
non-defaulting co-defendant although he has an interest in - is such that they are incapable of intelligently making known their
the case perception to others;
o Ratio: He may still testify because he is not considered as
taking part in trial as understood in the rule on default. (b) Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable:
- A Witness Being Convicted of a Crime - of perceiving the facts respecting which they are examined and
o GR: A person convicted is NOT disqualified from being a - of relating them truthfully. (19a)
witness (it only affects his credibility) BUT:
 He must answer to the fact of a previous final Notes:
conviction (sec 3(5), Rule 132) or
 Such fact may be shown by his examination or the Unsound Mind, defined: That which affects the competency of the witness
record of the judgment (sec 11) which includes any mental aberration, whether organic or functional, or
o EXC: When otherwise provided by law (ex. Those guilty of induced by drugs or hypnosis.
perjury, falsification or false testimony are disqualified from
being witnesses to a will) Rules on the Qualification of Soundness of Mind
- A Lawyer Being a Witness for his Own Client - GR: Unsoundness of mind does not per se render a witness
o GR: In such instance, the lawyer must leave the trial of the incompetent, one may be medically insane but in law capable of
case to other counsel giving competent testimony.
o EXC. When it concerns merely formal matters Note: As long as the witness can convey ideas by words or signs and give
sufficiently intelligent answers to questions propounded, she is competent as
When Objection to a Witness be Made: a witness EVEN if one is feeble-minded, a mental retardate, or is
- GR: Objection to the qualification of the witness must be made schizophrenic.
before he has given any testimony
- EXC: IF the incompetency appears during the trial, the objection When Should a Witness be of Sound Mind?
must be made as soon as it becomes apparent. - ONLY at the time of their production for examination
Note: If not made w/in the said time: right to object is deemed WAIVED - Mental unsoundness of the witness at the time the fact to be testified
occurred – Affects ONLY his credibility.
2 Kinds of Incompetency to Testify
When are Deaf-mutes Competent Witnesses? facilitator
- When they: (1) Can understand and appreciate the sanctity of an Sec. 22. Disqualification by reason of marriage.
oath; (2) Can comprehend facts they are going to testify to and; (3)
Can communicate their ideas through a qualified interpreter. During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or
Presumption of Soundness of Mind against the other:
- GR: Every person is presumed to be of sound mind and the person - without the consent of the affected spouse,
challenging such has the burden of proving otherwise EXCEPT:
- EXC: Prima Facie Presumption of Incompetency when: - in a civil case by one against the other, or
o The person has been recently found to be of unsound mind - in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or
by a court of competent jurisdiction the latter's direct descendants or ascendants. (20a)
o One is an inmate of an asylum for the insane
Notes:
In the Case of a Child Witness, the Court in Determining his
Competency Must Consider his Capacity: Rule on Marital Disqualification (Spousal Immunity):
- At the time the fact to be testified to occurred, such that he could - GR: During the marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may
receive correct impressions thereof; testify for or against the other w/o the consent of the affected spouse
- To comprehend the obligation of an oath; and EXCEPTIONS: Rule on Disqualification does NOT Apply When:
- To relate those facts truthfully at the time he is offered as a witness. 1. When the testimony was made outside the marriage
Hence, the court should take into account his capacity for observation, 2. In a civil case by one spouse against another
recollection and communication. 3. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one spouse against the
other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants
When is a Child Considered a Competent Witness o Reason: The crime may be considered as having been
- GR: A child is competent if he can perceive and make known his committed against the spouse and hence, the conjugal
perception harmony sought to be protected no longer exists)
- EXC: IF the child’s testimony is punctured w/ serious o Limited only to direct ascendants and descendants + spouse
inconsistencies as to lead one to believe that the child was coached. 4. People v. Castañeda: A complaint filed by a wife against her
An Intelligent Boy is Undoubtedly the Best Observer husband for falsification of her signature in a deed of sale involving
- A child is little influenced by the suggestions of others and describes their conjugal property.
objects and occurrence as he has really seen them 5. Ordonio v. Daquigan: When the marital relations are so strained,
- Children of sound mind are likely to be more observant of incidents there is no more consideration for applying the said rule. To apply
which take place within their view than older people. the exception there must be an offense that directly attacks, or
directly and vitally impairs, the conjugal relations.
Child Witness Ordinary Witness 6. When there is imputation of a crime by one spouse against the other
Only the judge is allowed to ask Opposing counsels are allowed to Note: “Direct Ascendants and Descendants” = Parents and Children ONLY
questions to the child during ask
preliminary examination Nature of Prohibition: Absolute disqualification or prohibition against the
Leading questions are allowed They are generally not allowed spouse’s testifying to any fact affecting the other spouse however the fact
Testimony in a narrative from is It is NOT allowed may have acquired
allowed
The child witness is assisted by a An ordinary witness is not assisted Requisites in Order for Marital Disqualification Rule to Apply:
1. The marriage is valid and existing at the time of the offer of - Incompetency to Testify Applies: w/n the deceased died before or
testimony; and after the commencement of the action against him provided he is
2. The other spouse is a party to the action. dead at the time of the testimony
Who may Object: Only the other spouse who is a party to the case.
- Note: Objections to the competency of the witness-spouse may also
be waived. (Ex. Testimony against a spouse is a waiver of a
testimony in rebuttal) Requirements for the Dead Man Statute to Apply:
1. The witness offered for examination is a party plaintiff, or the
Rationale For Having Such Rule assignor of said party, or a person in whose behalf a case is
- Considering the identity of interest between the spouses, there is prosecuted;
consequent danger of committing perjury 2. The case is against the executor or administrator or other
- Also, the rule is in order to guard marital confidence and to prevent representative of a person deceased or of unsound mind;
domestic disunion 3. The case is upon a claim or demand against the estate of such person
who is deceased or of unsound mind
This should NOT be confused w/ “Marital Privilege” (see sec 24 notes) 4. The testimony to be given is on matter of fact occurring before the
death, of such deceased person or before such person became of
unsound mind.
Sec. 23. Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party.
Requirement No. 1: The witness offered for examination is a party plaintiff,
Parties or assignor of parties to a case, OR persons in whose behalf a case is or the assignor of said party, or a person in whose behalf a case is
prosecuted: prosecuted
- against an executor or administrator or other representative of a
deceased person, or - Such plaintiff must be the real party in interest and not a mere
- against a person of unsound mind, nominal party.
upon a claim or demand against the estate of: - The disqualification does NOT apply:
- such deceased person or against o when the counterclaim has been interposed by the defendant
- such person of unsound mind, as the plaintiff would thereby be testifying in his defense
cannot testify as to any matter of fact OCCURRING: o when the deceased contracted with the plaintiff through an
- before the death of such deceased person or agent and said agent is alive and can testify, but the
- before such person became of unsound mind. (20a) testimony of the plaintiff should be limited to acts performed
by the agent.
Notes: - Assignor, defined: Assignor of a cause of action which has arisen,
and not the assignor of a right assigned before any cause of action
Survivorship Disqualification Rule or Dead Man Statute has arisen
- Constitutes only a partial disqualification: A witness is not - Interest in the outcome of the suit, per se, does not disqualify a
completely disqualified BUT is only prohibited from testifying in witness from testifying
certain matters specified
- Disqualification ONLY applies to: A civil case or special Requirement No. 2: The case is against the executor or administrator or
proceeding over the estate of a deceased or insane person other representative of a person deceased or of unsound mind;
- It is necessary that the said defendant is being sued and defends in o or offers evidence to rebut such prohibited testimony
such representative capacity and not in his individual capacity
- Even if the property has been judicially adjudicated to the heirs, they Reason for the Rule:
are still protected under the rule 1. To prevent perjury
- The protection would extend to the heirs of the deceased and the 2. To protect the estate from fictitious claims
guardians of persons of unsound mind 3. To give the parties an equal opportunity to present evidence
Requirement No. 3: The case is upon a claim or demand against the estate
of such person who is deceased or of unsound mind Sec. 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication.
The ff. persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the
- The rule does not apply where it is the administrator who brings an ff. cases:
action to recover property allegedly belonging to the estate or the
action is by the heirs of a deceased who represented the latter (a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage:
- This is restricted to debts or demands enforceable by personal - cannot be examined w/out the consent of the other
actions upon which money judgments can be rendered. - as to any communication received in confidence by one from the
- An action for damages for breach of agreement to devise property for other during the marriage
services rendered is a claim against an estate EXCEPT:
- in a civil case by one against the other, or
Requirement No. 4: The testimony to be given is on matter of fact occurring - in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or
before the death, of such deceased person or before such person became of the latter's direct descendants or ascendants;
unsound mind.
(b) An attorney cannot:
- Negative testimony (testimony that a fact did not occur during the - without the consent of his client,
lifetime of the deceased) is NOT covered by the prohibition – as be examined as to:
such fact exists even after the decedent’s demise - any communication made by the client to him, or his advice
- given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional
The Rule Does NOT Apply: employment,
1. Land registration cases instituted by the decedent’s representatives NOR can an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined:
(since the oppositors are considered defendants and may therefore - without the consent of the client AND his employer,
testify against the petitioner) - concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in
2. It does not apply in cadastral cases – since there is no plaintiff or such capacity;
defendant
3. When the testimony is offered to prove a claim less than what is (c) A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics
established under a written document or is intended to prove a cannot in a civil case:
fraudulent transaction against the deceased - without the consent of the patient,
o Provided such fraud is first established by evidence aliunde be examined as to:
o To apply the rule, the testimony must be against the estate - any advice or treatment given by him or any information
4. When the disqualification is waived - when the defendant: - which he may have acquired in attending such patient in a
o does not timely object to the admission of such evidence or professional capacity
o testifies on the prohibited matters or cross examines thereon which information:
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the book o f regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 19 | P a t i ñ o , E r i c a
- was necessary to enable him to act in such capacity, and o Provided: There must be no collusion between the 3rd person
- which would blacken the reputation of the patient; and one of the spouses.
4. In a conspiracy between spouses to commit a crime - since it is not
d) A minister or priest cannot: the intention of the law to protect the commission of a crime.
- without the consent of the person making the confession, 5. When the spouses are living separately and there is an active
be examined as to: hostility. But if there is a chance to reconcile, then this privilege will
- any confession made to or any advice apply.
- given by him in his professional character in the course of discipline 6. When waived
enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs;
Note: Any information received during the marriage is presumed to be
(e) A public officer cannot be examined: confidential
- during his term of office OR afterwards, Disqualification By Reason of Disqualification By Reason of
- as to communications made to him in official confidence, Marriage (Sec 22) Marital Privilege (Sec 24a)
- when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the Can be invoked ONLY if one of the Can be claimed w/n the other spouse
disclosure. (21a) spouses is a party to the action is a party to the action
Applies ONLY if the marriage is Can be claimed even after the
Notes: existing at the time the testimony is marriage is dissolved
offered
Basis of the Privilege: The confidential nature of the communication Constitutes a vital prohibition for or Applies ONLY to confidential
Who May Object Under the Disqualification Rules – ONLY by the against the spouse of the witness communication between spouses
persons protected thereunder (upon whom the testimony is directed). They Objection would be raised on the The objection of privilege is raised
may also waive the right to object. ground of marriage. Even if the when confidential marital
testimony is for or against the other communication is inquired into.
[MARITAL PRIVILEGE] spouse.
Requisites for the Disqualification By Reason of Marital Privilege to
Apply: Note: Waiving Sec 22 does not prevent the spouse from invoking sec 24 and
1. There is a valid marital relation; vice versa. So even if the information is not confidential, the spouse may still
2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential invoke sec 22 which is an absolute disqualification.
communication between the spouses during said marriage;
3. The spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not [ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE]
given his or her consent to such testimony.
Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Attorney-Client (A-C)
Instances When the Privilege Cannot Be Claimed: Privilege to Apply
1. With respect to communications made prior to the marriage of the 1. There is an attorney and client relation;
spouses 2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential
2. With respect to communication not intended to be kept in confidence communication between them in the course of professional
(ex. dying declaration of a husband to his wife as to who was his employment;
assailant since it is intended to be reported) 3. The client has not given his consent to the attorney’s testimony.
3. When the information is overheard by a third party whether he Note: IF the atty’s secretary or clerk is sought to be established – then
acquired the information legally or not. (A 3rd person is not covered BOTH the consent of the atty and the client is required.
by the prohibition)
Note: The client owns the privilege and therefore he alone can invoke it. Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Physician-Patient (P-P)
Prohibition is also applicable even to a counsel de oficio. Privilege to Apply
Basis: public policy 1. The physician is authorized to practice medicine, surgery, or
Confidential Communication: The attorney must have been consulted in obstetrics;
his professional capacity EVEN if no fee has been paid. 2. The information was acquired or the advice or treatment was given
- It includes preliminary communications made for the purpose of by him in his professional capacity for the purpose of treating and
creating the A-C relationship. (But if it is not for the purpose of curing the patient;
creating the A-C relationship – it will not be protected even if the 3. The information, advice or treatment, if revealed, would blacken the
client subsequently hires the same attorney) reputation of the patient;
- Includes verbal statements as well as documents or papers entrusted 4. The privilege is invoked in a civil case, whether patient is a party or
to the attorney not.
Instances when the A-C Privilege Does NOT Apply: Note: It is not necessary that the P-P relationship was created through the
1. Intended to be made public; voluntary act of the patient. Death of the patient does not extinguish the
2. Intended to be communicated to others; relation.
3. Intended for an unlawful purpose;
4. Received from third person not acting in behalf or as agent of the Note: The privilege extends to all forms of communications as well as to the
client; professional observations and examinations of the patient
5. Made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the
attorney-client relationship. The P-P Privilege Does NOT Attach:
The period to be considered is: 1. The communication was not given in confidence;
- the date when the privileged communication was made by the client 2. The communication is irrelevant to the professional employment;
to the attorney in relation to either a crime committed in the past or 3. The communication was made for an unlawful purpose, as when it is
with respect to a crime intended to be committed in the future intended for the commission or concealment of a crime;
BUT Communication Regarding: 4. The information was intended to be made public;
- A crime already committed - is privileged communication 5. There was a waiver of the privilege either by provisions of contract
- Contemplated criminal acts or in aid or furtherance thereof - is not or law.
covered. 6. Under Rule 28 of the Rules of Court,
o The results of the physical and mental examination of a
The A-C Privilege Does NOT Attach: person, when ordered by the court, are intended to be made
- When the attorney is a conspirator public, hence not privileged.
- When all the attorney has to do is to either affirm or deny the secret o Also, result of autopsies or post mortem examinations are
revealed by the client to the court generally intended to be divulged in court.
- When the information is voluntarily given after the attorney has
refused to accept employment. The Privilege May Also be Waived:
- Ex. Section 4 of said Rule 28: if the party examined obtains a
[PHYSICIAN-PATIENT PRIVILEGE] report on said examination or takes the deposition of the
examiner, he thereby waives any privilege regarding any other
Purpose: It is intended to facilitate confidential disclosure by a patient to a examination of said physical or mental condition conducted or to be
physician of all facts and symptoms w/o apprehension to the end that the conducted on him by any other physician.
physician may form a correct opinion and may safely treat his patient.
- Ex. Waiver of the privilege by contract may be found in stipulations  Trade Secrets will be covered by this privilege
in life insurance policies.
 Informer’s Privilege: Prosecutor is not to be compelled to dispose the
[MINISTER/PRIEST-PENITENT PRIVILEGE] identity of the informer unless the informer is already known to the
accused and when the identity of the informer is vital.
Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Minister/Priest-Penitent
Privilege to Apply  Those covered in the Secrecy of Bank Deposits Law
1. That the same were made pursuant to a religious duty enjoined in the
course of discipline of the sect or denomination to which they  EO 464: Executive Privilege
belong; and
2. They must be confidential and penitential in character.  Income Tax returns
- Ex: under seal of the confessional
Note: It is the person making the confession who can invoke the privilege.  Anti-Graft Cases
[PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION TO PUBLIC OFFICERS]
Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Privileged Communication 2. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE

to Public Officers to Apply
1. That it was made to the public officer in official confidence; Sec. 25. Parental and filial privilege.
2. That public interest would suffer by the disclosure of such
communication, as in the case of State secrets. No person may be compelled to testify against his:
Note: When no public interest will be prejudiced - this rule will NOT apply. - parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants.
(20a)
[OTHER INSTANCES OF PRIVILEGE]
Notes:
 RA 53 as amended by RA 1477, the publisher, editor or duly accredited
- It is not a rule of disqualification but was a privilege NOT to testify
reporter of any newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation
- hence it was referred to as “filial privilege
cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news report or
- However, under the Family Code, the descendant may be compelled
information appearing in said publication unless the court or a House or
to testify against his parents and grandparents, if such testimony is
committee of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by the
indispensable in prosecuting a crime against the descendant or by
Security of the State.
one parent against the other (Art. 215).
- Both parental and filial privileges are granted to any person
 Art. 233 of the Labor Code - All information and statements made at Reason for the Rule: The reason for the rule is to preserve “family
conciliation proceedings shall be treated as privileged communications cohesion”
and shall not be used as evidence in the NLRC, and conciliators and
Note: The privilege may now be invoked in both civil and criminal cases.
similar officials shall not testify in any court regarding any matter taken
up at the conciliation proceedings conducted by them.
3. ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
 Voters cannot be compelled to reveal their ballots Sec. 26. Admission of a party.
The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given Admission Declaration Against Interest
in evidence against him. (22) An admission need not be against The declaration against interest must
one’s proprietary or pecuniary have been made against the proprietary
Notes: interest, or pecuniary interest of the parties
Made by the party himself, and is a Must have been made by a person who
Admission, defined: Any statement of fact made by a party against his primary evidence and competent is either deceased or unable to testify
interest or unfavorable to the conclusion for which he contends or is though he be present in court and
inconsistent with the facts alleged by him. ready to testify
Admission can be made any time The declaration against interest must
Admission Confession have been made ante litem motam
An admission is a statement of fact It involves an acknowledgment of (prior to the controversy)
which does not involve an guilt or liability
acknowledgement of guilt or liability Self-Serving Testimony, defined: One which has been made extra-judicially
It may be express or tacit Must be express by the party to favor his interests. It is not admissible in evidence.
May be made by third persons Can be made only by the party - It does not include his testimony as a witness in court
himself and in some instances, is - No application to a judicial declaration
admissible against his co-accused - When the statement was not made in anticipation of a future
Express Admissions, defined: are those made in definite, certain and litigation – It cannot be considered self-serving
unequivocal language. Self serving declarations made by a party are admissible in his own
Implied Admissions, defined: are those which may be inferred from the behalf in the ff:
acts, declarations or omission of a party. Therefore, an admission may be 1. When they form part of res gestae, including spontaneous statements
implied from conduct, statement of silence of a party. and verbal acts;
2. When they are in the form of complaint and exclamations of pain
Requisites for Admissions to be Admissible and suffering;
1. They must involve matters of fact and not of law; 3. When they are part of a confession offered by the prosecution
2. They must be categorical and definite; 4. When the credibility of a party has been assailed on the ground that
3. They must be knowingly and voluntarily made; his testimony is a recent fabrication (Testimonial Rehabilitation)
4. They must be adverse to the admitter’s interests, otherwise it would 5. When they are offered by the opponent
be self-serving and inadmissible. 6. When they are offered without objection, the evidence cannot
Other Forms of Admissions: afterward be objected to as incompetent.
- Verbal or written, express or tacit, judicial or extrajudicial Admission by Conduct
- Judicial: One made in connection w/ a judicial proceedings - Flight from justice is an admission by conduct and circumstantial
(conclusive – does not require proof) evidence of consciousness of guilt
- Extrajudicial: Any other admissions (Sec 26 to 32) (Rebuttable – - Attempts to suppress evidence (ex. Destruction of evidence)
requires proof) - The act of repairing facilities after an injury has been sustained
Ex. Testimony of the accused in a parricide case to the effect that he was therein – is NOT an implied admission of negligence by conduct (It
married to the victim is an admission against his penal interest and will is merely a measure of extreme caution)
sustain his conviction even in the absence of independent evidence to prove
such marriage Sec. 27. Offer of compromise not admissible.
In civil cases, an offer of compromise: avoid criminal action.
- is not an admission of any liability, and
- is not admissible in evidence against the offeror. Instances when Offer of Compromise is Admissible
- In cases of violation of the internal revenue laws
In criminal cases: o Since the law provides that the payment of any IR tax may
EXCEPT: be compromised, and all criminal violations may likewise be
- those involving quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or compromised EXC those already filed and those involving
- those allowed by law to be compromised, fraud.
an offer of compromise by the accused: - In rape cases
- may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt. o GR: In effect it may be compromised by actual marriage
o EXC: An offer to compromise for monetary consideration is
A plea of guilty later withdrawn OR an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to an implied admission.
lesser offense: o People v. Valdez: An offer of marriage during the
- is not admissible in evidence AGAINST the accused who made the investigation is an admission of guilt
plea or offer.
Good Samaritan Rule: An offer to pay or the actual payment of the
An offer to pay OR the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses medical, hospital or other expenses by reason of the victim’s injuries is not
occasioned by an injury: admissible to prove civil or criminal liability.
- is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for
the injury. (24a)
Notes:
No Compromise is Valid Upon the Following Cases:
Compromise, defined: An agreement made between two or more parties as 1. Civil status of persons
a settlement of the matters in dispute. 2. Validity of marriage or legal separation
3. Any ground for legal separation
Civil Cases Criminal Cases 4. Future support
GR: An offer of compromise is not a GR: An offer of compromise by the 5. Jurisdiction of courts
tacit admission of liability and is not accused may be received in evidence 6. Future legitime
admissible in evidence against the as an implied admission of guilt. 7. Habeas Corpus and Election Cases.
offeror. It cannot be proved over the
objection of the offeror. Sec. 28. Admission by third party.
EXC: Unless the offer is not only to EXC: (1)Those involving quasi-
“buy peace” but amounts to an offenses (criminal negligence) or The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced:
admission of liability (compromise (2)those allowed by law to be - by an act, declaration, or omission of another,
directed only to the amount to be compromised - EXCEPT as hereinafter provided. (25a)
paid).
Ratio in Civil Cases: It is the policy In criminal cases however, the Notes:
of the law to favor the settlement of accused may be permitted to prove
disputes, to foster compromises and that such offer was not made under Principle of Res Inter Alios Acta Alteri Noceree Non Debet: Things done
to promote peace. consciousness of guilt but merely to between strangers ought not to injure those who are not parties to it.
- 1st Part: Sec 28, rule 130 o Partnership relation must be shown;
- 2nd Part: Sec 34, rule 130 2. The act or declaration is within the scope of the partnership, agency
- EXC: to the Rule: When the 3rd person is a or joint interest
o Sec 29: A partner, agent, joint owner, joint debtor, or has a o With regard to a non-partnership affair: The fact that each
joint interest with the party partner has individually made a substantially similar
o Sec 30: A co-conspirator admission does not render the aggregate admission
o Sec 31: A privy of the party competent against the firm.
3. Such act or declaration must have been made during the existence of
Basis of the GR: A party is not bound by any agreement to which he has no the partnership, agency or joint interest.
knowledge and to which he has not given his consent. His rights cannot be o Statements made after the partnership has been dissolved do
prejudiced by the declaration, act or omission of another EXC by virtue of a not fall within the exception
particular relation between them. o BUT if they are made in connection with the winding up of
the partnership – such admission is STILL admissible.
Basis of the EXC: A third party may be so united in interest with the party-
opponent that the other person’s admissions may be receivable against the Rule on Admission Made By Counsel
party himself. The term “privy” is the orthodox catchword for the relation. - GR: They are ADMISSIBLE against the client as the counsel acts
in representation and as an agent of the client
- EXC: It must not amount to a compromise or confession of
judgment (Because in compromise, the rule requires the consent of
the client)
Joint Debtor, defined: It does not refer to mere community of interest but
should be understood according to its meaning in solidum and not
Sec. 29. Admission by co-partner or agent. mancomunada.
Sec. 30. Admission by conspirator.
The act or declaration of a partner or agent of the party:
- within the scope of his authority and The act or declaration of a conspirator:
- during the existence of the partnership or agency, - relating to the conspiracy and
may be given in evidence against such party AFTER: - during its existence,
- the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act may be given in evidence:
or declaration. - against the co-conspirator
- AFTER the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of
The same rule applies: declaration. (27)
- to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other person
jointly interested with the party. (26a) Notes:
Notes: Application of the Requirement that the Conspiracy must Preliminarily

be Proved by Evidence other than the Conspirator’s Admission
Requisites for This Exception To Apply: - Applies ONLY to extrajudicial acts or statements
1. That the partnership, agency, or joint interest is established by
evidence other than the act or declaration
- NOT to judicial admission as to a testimony given on the witness In order that the EX-J statements of a co-accused may be taken into
stand at the trial where the party adversely effected has the consideration in judging the testimony of a witness it is necessary that:
opportunity to cross examine the declarant 1. The statements are made by several accused,
2. The same are in all material respects identical, and
An Admission by a Conspirator is Admissible Against his Co- 3. There could have been no collusion among said co-accused in
conspirator making such statements.
- Such conspiracy is shown by evidence aliunde
o Conspiracy must be established by prima facie proof in the Sec. 31. Admission by privies.
judgment of the court;
- The admission was made during the existence of the conspiracy Where one derives title to property from another:
o After the termination of a conspiracy, the statements of one - the act, declaration, or omission of the latter, while holding the title,
conspirator may not be accepted as evidence against any of - in relation to the property,
the other conspirators; is evidence against the former. (28)
- The admission related to the conspiracy itself
o Should relate to the common object. Notes:
Privity, defined: mutual succession of relationship to the same rights of
Existence of the Conspiracy May be Inferred: property.
- From the acts of the accused Privies, defined: those who have mutual or successive relationship to the
- From the confessions of the accused same right of property or subject matter
- Or by prima facie proof thereof
Note: If there is no independent evidence of the conspiracy – the To be Admissible, The Following Requisites Must Concur:
extrajudicial confession CANNOT be used against his co-accused (res inter 1. There must be a relation of privity between the party and the
alios rule applies to both EXJ and J admissions) declarant;
- Here, there is no need to produce direct evidence - independent 2. The admission was made by the declarant, as predecessor in interest,
circumstantial evidence will suffice. while holding the title to the property;
Quantum of Evidence to Prove Conspiracy: Clear and convincing 3. The admission is in relation to said property.
evidence
Rules on Extrajudicial Admissions Made by a Conspirator AFTER the The privity in estate may arise: by succession, by acts mortis causa or by
conspiracy had terminated and BEFORE the trial acts inter vivos.
- GR: NOT admissible Sec. 32. Admission by silence.
- EXC: Admissible against the co-conspirator IF:
1. Made in the presence of the co-conspirator who expressly or An act or declaration:
impliedly agreed therein – as there is tacit admission under Sec 32 - made in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a party
2. Where the facts stated in said admission are confirmed in the who does or says nothing
individual extrajudicial confessions made by the co-conspirators - when the act or declaration is such as naturally to call for action or
after their apprehension (interlocking confessions) comment if not true, and
3. As a circumstance to determine the credibility of a witness when proper and possible for him to do so,
4. As circumstantial evidence to show the probability of the co- may be given in evidence against him. (23a)
conspirator’s participation in the offense.
Notes:
To be Admissible the FF Requisites Must Concur: Doctrine of Adoptive Admission: A party’s reaction to a statement or action
1. He must have heard or observed the act or declaration of the other by another person when it is reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an
person; admission of something stated or implied by the other person.
2. He must have had the opportunity to deny it
3. He must have understood the statement; Instances Where There is NO Implied Admission
4. He must have an interest to object, such that he would naturally have 1. Allegations of unliquidated damages
done so, as if the statement was not true; 2. Allegations which are not material to the cause of action
5. The facts are within his knowledge; 3. Conclusions of fact/law
6. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence is 4. Allegations of usury other than in a complaint
material to the issue. 5. If defendant has not filed his answer and is declared in default.
The rule on admission by silence applies:

- Where a person was surprised in the act or Sec. 33. Confession.
- Even if he is already in the custody of the police.
- Applies to both civil and criminal cases The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt:
- of the offense charged, or
Rules on Voluntary Participation in a Reenactment of the Crime - of any offense necessarily included therein,
Conducted by the Police may be given in evidence against him. (29a)
- GR: It is considered a tacit admission of complicity.
- Note: To be given any evidentiary weight, the validity and efficacy Notes:
of the confession must first be shown.
Note: Implication of guilt is not derived from mere silence but from the Confession, Defined: A categorical acknowledgement of guilt made by an
acquiescence in participating in the reenactment accused in a criminal case, w/o any exculpatory statement or explanation.
- IF the accused admits the act BUT alleges a justification – it is
Application of The Rule: merely an admission
- DOES NOT Apply IF: the statements adverse to the party were - Confession of Judgment in Civil Cases = Admission of Liability
made in the course of an official investigation, as where:
o he was pointed out in a custodial investigation and was Forms of Confession:
neither asked to reply nor comment on such imputations or - Oral and under oath
o when the party had a justifiable reason to remain silent, as - In writing (need not be under oath)
when he was acting on advice of counsel
- It May Apply: To adverse statements in writing IF the party was Note: Sec 33 refers to EX-J Confessions
carrying on a mutual correspondence with the declarant. Types of Confessions
o However, if there was no mutual correspondence, the rule is 1. Judicial Confession: One made before a court in which the case is
relaxed since such prompt response can generally not be pending and in the course of legal proceedings therein
expected if the party still has to resort to a written reply. o By itself, can sustain conviction, even for a capital offense
Basis of Rule: It is basic instinct or a natural reaction to resist or deny a false o But for Capital Offenses: there must be evidence presented
statement other than the plea of guilty, also proof that such plea was
made voluntarily and w/ full comprehension
2. Extrajudicial (EX-J) Confession: One made in any other place or
occasion
o GR: Cannot sustain a conviction - After his confession, the accused was subjected to physical
o EXC: Unless corroborated by evidence of the corpus delicti examination and there were no signs of maltreatment or the accused
never complained, but not where he failed to complain to the judge
Requirements for the Admissibility of EX-J Confessions on a reasonable apprehension of further maltreatment as he was still
1. The confession must involve an express and categorical in the custody of his torturers
acknowledgment of guilt;
2. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal offense; Abandoned Ruling: Involuntary confessions are admissible if it contains the
3. The confession must have been given voluntarily; truth (Prior to Stonehil v. Diokno)
4. the confession must have been intelligently made, the accused Current Ruling: Involuntary Confessions are INADMISSIBLE, Ratio:
realizing the importance or legal significance of this act; 1. They are unreliable
5. There must have been no violation of Section 12, Art. III of the 1987 2. On grounds of humanitarian considerations, or
Constitution. (Rights in custodial investigation) 3. On legal considerations of their being violative of one’s
constitutional right against self incrimination
Rule on Presumption of Voluntariness: Confessions are presumed to be
voluntary and the onus is on the defense to prove that it was involuntary EX-J confession obtained prior to the 1973 Consti: It is admissible even if
(obtained by violence, intimidation, threat or promise of reward or leniency) the confessant was not informed of his right to silence and to counsel and
even if made while under arrest (ratio: consti mandate should be given a
Circumstances Held to be Indicia of Voluntariness of a Confession: prospective effect)
- The confession contains details which the police could not have
supplied or invented. Rules on EX-J Confession and the Constitution
- The confession contains details which could have been known only - Verbal EX-JC Made Without Counsel
to the accused o IF made spontaneously after the assault – admissible as
- The confession contains statements which are exculpatory in nature part of res gestae NOT under the confession rule
- The confession contains corrections made by the accused in his o Provided: It was not made under custodial investigation
handwriting or with his initials and which corrected facts are best - IF the accused was informed of his consti rights and was asked if
known to the accused. he understood it BUT was not asked if he wanted to exercise it
- The accused is sufficiently educated and aware of the consequences o INADMISSIBLE
of his act. - EX-JC under Custodial Investigation
- It was made in the presence of impartial witnesses with the accused o If made w/o counsel – Inadmissible
acting normally on that occasion o If prefaced by the investigator w/ a statement of his consti
- There is lack of motive on the part of the investigators to extract a rights to which he answered that he was going to tell the
confession, with improbabilities and inconsistencies in the attempt of truth – Not a waiver of his consti right to counsel
the accused to repudiate his confession. o IF accused is illiterate – investigation officer must make sure
- The accused questioned the voluntariness of the confession only for that his rights were fully explained to him
the first time at the trial of the case. (Estoppel)
- The contents of the confession were affirmed by the accused in his Custodial Investigation (CI), defined:
voluntary participation in the reenactment of the crime, as shown by - Questioning initiated by a law officer after a person has been taken
his silent acquiescence thereto. into custody or deprived of freedom
- The facts contained in the confession were confirmed by other - Present where the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry and
subsequent facts begins to focus on a particular suspect taken into custody and asked
questions that lead into eliciting incriminating statements
- Includes “invitations” to an investigation - Illegal confessions are inadmissible against the admitter but are
Note: There is NO presumption of regularity in CIs admissible against the person who obtained such confession
(violator of consti rights)
Rights of a Person under Investigation - EX-JC is Binding ONLY Upon HIMSELF and NOT Admissible
1. Right to be informed of ones right to remain silent, to have Against his Co-Accused, EXC:
competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice 1. If the latter impliedly acquiesced in or adopted said confession by
and the charges against him not questioning its truthfulness
2. Right to be provided with counsel if accused cannot afford one 2. If the accused persons voluntarily and independently executed
- Note: Waiver of 1 & 2 must be made: In writing AND in the identical confessions w/o collusion (interlocking confessions) which
presence of counsel confessions are corroborated by other evidence and w/o
3. Right not to be treated with torture, force, violence, threat, contradiction by the co-accused who was present;
intimidation or other means which vitiate free will 3. Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the confessant after
4. Right not to be placed under secret detention or under a solitary, being apprised of such confession;
incommunicado form of detention 4. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the crime which was
NOTE: Confession obtained in violation of these rights is INADMISSIBLE confessed by one of the accused and said confession is used only as a
(Art 3 Section 12, 1987 Constitution) corroborating evidence;
5. Where the confession is used as circumstantial evidence to show the
Instances of Vitiated Confession – Renders EX-JC INADMISSIBLE probability of participation by the co-conspirator;
- Any form of coercion, whether physical, emotional, or mental 6. Where the confessant testified for his co-defendant; or
- A promise of immunity or leniency IF given by the offended party 7. Where the co-conspirator’s extra judicial confession is corroborated
or by the fiscal (person in a position to give such) vitiates a by other evidence of record.
confession, BUT IF given by: Note: For Judicial Confessions: It is binding to BOTH the confessant and
o A person whom the accused could not have reasonably the other party
expected to be able to comply with such promise (not a
prosecuting officer) or could not bind the offended party - Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine:
IT is ADMISSBLE - Evidence obtained in violation of the right of a person against
unreasonable searches and seizures are inadmissible
Note: IF the accused voluntarily made a second confession after he had - It refers to an object NOT testimonial evidence
been maltreated - It does not refer to testimony or confessions obtained illegally.
- 2nd confession is ADMISSBLE – Provided it is proven that he was
already relieved by the fear caused by the previous maltreatment
Note: Judgment based solely on a vitiated confession is NULL and VOID

- Accused may be released on a writ of habeas corpus
Admissibility of EX-J Confessions

- Entire confession should be admitted in evidence – BUT the court 4. PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS EVIDENCE
may in appreciating the same reject portions which are incredible
- Confessions are admissible NOT ONLY to the offense charged Sec. 34. Similar acts as evidence.
BUT also to any offense necessarily included therein
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time An offer in writing:
- is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or - to pay a particular sum of money or
similar thing at another time; - to deliver a written instrument or specific personal property
BUT it may be received to prove: is, IF rejected without valid cause, equivalent to:
- a specific intent or knowledge; identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, - the actual production and tender of the money, instrument, or
custom or usage, and the like. (48a) property. (49a)
Notes: Notes:
- This section complements the rule on tender of payment (Art. 1256,
Principle of Res Inter Alios Acta: Things done between strangers ought not NCC) by providing that said offer of payment must be made in
to injure those who are not parties to it. writing.
- 1st Part: Sec 28, rule 130; 2nd Part: Sec 34, rule 130 - Such tender must, however, be followed by consignation of the
Note: Sec 34 applies to both civil and criminal cases and is strictly enforced amount in court in order to produce the effects of valid payment.
in all cases where it is applicable
5. TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE
GR: 1st Sentence of Codal
EXC: Where the evidence or similar acts may prove: Sec. 36. Testimony generally confined to personal knowledge; hearsay
1. A specific intent or knowledge; excluded.
2. Identity;
3. A plan, system or scheme; A witness can testify ONLY to those facts:
4. A specific habit; or - which he knows of his personal knowledge; that is,
5. Established customs, usages and the like - which are derived from his own perception,
EXCEPT as otherwise provided in these rules. (30a)
Basis: Evidence must be confined to the point in issue in the case on trial.
Evidence of collateral offenses must not be received as substantive evidence of Notes:
the offense on trial.
Purpose: To compel the defendant to meet charges of which the indictment Hearsay Rule (HR), defined: Any evidence, whether oral or documentary is
gives him no information, confuses him in his defense, raises a variety of issues, hearsay of its probative value is not based on the personal knowledge of the
and thus diverts the attention of the court from the charge immediately before it. witness but on the knowledge of some other person not on the witness stand.
(Including: all assertions not subjected to cross-examination)
Examples of the Exceptions: - GR: Hearsay evidence is excluded or INADMISSIBLE as evidence
- Evidence of another crime is admissible in a prosecution for robbery: - Ratio: It is excluded because the party against whom it is presented
o When it has the tendency to identify the accused or show his is deprived of his right to cross-examine the persons to whom the
presence at the scene of the crime statements or writings are attributed.
o NOT where the evidence is to prove a commission of - Note: If one has personal knowledge – it is not hearsay anymore
another crime wholly independent of that which is on trial.
- Previous acts of negligence, is admissible to show knowledge or Inadmissibility of hearsay evidence MAY be WAIVED: By not objecting
intent. to such evidence. (Ratio: since the right to cross-examine may also be
waived) Repeated failure to cross-examine is an IMPLIED waiver
Sec. 35. Unaccepted offer. Value of Hearsay Evidence
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the bo ok of regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 30 | P a t i ñ o , E r i c a
- Hearsay Evidence alone is insufficient to establish a fact 3. Statements or writings offered not to prove the truth of the facts
- IF not objected to – it may be considered and given the importance it stated but only to prove that those statements were actually made or
deserves like any other evidence (Manlilic v. Calaunan, 2007) those writings were executed (See doctrine of independently
HOWEVER, it has also been held that even if it may be admissible, whether relevant statements)
objected to or not, has NO probative value, and as opposed to direct primary
evidence, the latter always prevails. (People v. Willians, 2001) Doctrine of Independently Relevant Statements: Independent of whether
Ex. Newspaper Clippings are hearsay and have no evidentiary weight the facts stated are true or not, they are relevant since they are the facts in
UNLESS substantiated by person w/ personal knowledge of the facts issue or are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.
- The only question to be answered: W/N the statements were made
EXCEPTIONS to the HR: They are hearsay BUT are admissible - Hence, A witness may testify to the statements made by a person if
the fact that such statements were made would indicate the latter’s
Preliminary Notes on the Exceptions to the HR: 11 Exceptions to the HR mental state or physical condition
– Sections 37 to 47 (DDECCLARE FT)
1. Dying Declaration 2 Classes of Independently Relevant Statements:
2. Declaration Against Interest 1. Those statements which are the very fact in issue;
3. Entries In The Ordinary Course of Business 2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the fact in
4. Common Reputation issue. It includes the following:
5. Commercial Lists a. Statements of a person showing his state of mind that is, his
6. Learned Treatises mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will, and
7. Act Or Declaration Against Pedigree other emotions;
8. Res Gestae b. Statements of a person which shows his physical condition
9. Entries In Official Records as illness and the like;
10. Family Reputation Or Tradition Against Pedigree c. Statements of a person from which an inference may be
11. Testimony Or Deposition At A Former Proceeding (sec 47) made as to the state of mind of another, that is, knowledge,
Note: Sec 47 logically is not an exception. It merely requires for its belief, motive, good/bad faith of the latter;
admissibility that the party had cross-examined or had the opportunity to do d. Statements which may identify the date, place, person in
so. question;
e. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a witness.
Other Exceptions to the HR
1. Special Exception to the HR in child abuse cases: Hearsay testimony Ratio for the Exceptions to the HR:
of a child describing any act or attempted act of sexual abuse may be - Necessity for such evidence and
admitted in any criminal proceeding. (Sec 28 of the Rule on - On the assumption that in the ordinary course of events, they are
Examination of a Child Witness, A.M. No. 00-4-07-SC) trustworthy
o SUBJECT to certain prerequisites and the right to cross (Necessity AND Trustworthiness)
examine of the adverse party
o Admissibility shall be determined by the court in light of
specified subjective/objective considerations to determine
the reliability of the child
2. Rule 8 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence: Business records as an
exception to the HR
6. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE Considerations for the Determination of Whether Statements Were
Made in Consciousness of an Imminent or Impending Death:
EXCEPTION NO. 1: DYING DECLARATION 1. The words or statements of the declarant on the same occasion
2. His conduct at the time the declaration was made
Sec. 37. Dying declaration. 3. Serious nature of his wounds as would necessarily engender a belief
on his part that he would not survive.
The declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness of an
impending death: Intervening Time From the Declaration to the Actual Death: An
- may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of Immaterial Factor in Determining its Admissibility
inquiry, - Immaterial as long as the declaration was made under the
- as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such consciousness of impending death
death. (31a) - This is a question of fact for the courts to determine
- No retroaction must be made by the declarant
Notes: - If the gravity of the wounds did not diminish – DD is still admissible
even if the decedent died days after the declaration
Dying Declaration (DD), defined: Statements made by a person after the - Interval of Time is taken into account ONLY when the
mortal wound has been inflicted under the belief that the death is certain, declaration is ambiguous
stating the fact concerning the cause of and the circumstances surrounding -
the attack. Question: Do you think you will die?; IF the Answer is
- Also known as “Ante Mortem Statements” or “Statement in - “I will not die if treated” - admissible as part of res gestae or DD
Articulo Mortis” - “I cannot ascertain” – admissible as part of res gestae or DD
- “I don’t know” – NOT admissible
Requisites for DDs to be Admissible - “It all depends” + condition improved – DDs thereafter are NOT
1. That the death is imminent and the declarant is conscious of such admissible
fact; Note: DDs may be regarded as part of res gestae as they were made soon
2. That the declaration refers to the cause and the surrounding after a startling occurrence w/o any opportunity for fabrication or concoction
circumstances of such death - If the declarant doesn’t die – it is part of res gesta
3. That the declaration refers to the facts which the victim is competent
to testify to; DD once proved and admitted – its credibility and weight shall be
4. That the declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant’s determined like any other testimonial evidence
death is subject of the inquiry (the victim necessarily must have - Circumstances such as surprise, rapidity and confusion should be
died); taken into consideration in giving weigh to the testimony of the
5. That the statement must be complete in itself. declarant when identifying his assailants
- It may be impugned: in the same manner as the testimony of any
Reason for its admission other witness on the stand
1. Necessity – because the declarant’s death renders impossible his
taking the witness stand People v. Mallare: DD has to be admitted with utmost care and should be
2. Trustworthiness – at the point of death, every motive for falsehood is considered in light of all the facts because the source, accuracy and
silenced. The mind is induced by the most powerful consideration to completeness of the declarant’s knowledge as to the facts asserted could not
speak the truth. be tested by cross-examination
US v. Antipoli: DD is an exception to the Marital Privilege Rule since it is Notes:
NOT meant to be confidential communication between spouses.
DDs are Admissible: DDs NOT admissible: Declaration Against Interest - DAI
Only insofar as the DD refers to facts Statements referring to the DECLARATIONS Against Interest ADMISSIONS Against Interest
regarding the cause and surrounding antecedents of the fatal encounter Made by a person who is neither a Made by a party to a litigation or by
circumstances of the declarant’s party nor in privity with a party to the one in privity with or identified in
death (W/N they are in favor of or Opinions, impressions and suite. legal interest with such party
against the accused) conclusions of the declarant Secondary Evidence Primary Evidence
Note: DDs are admissible in ANY case for as along as the requisites are met. Exception to the Hearsay Rule Covered by the Hearsay Rule
Old rule that it only applies to certain criminal cases is now abandoned. Admissible ONLY when the Admissible w/n the declarant is
Note: DDs favorable to the accused are admissible declarant is UNavailable as a witness available as a witness
Must be made ante litem motam May be made at any time
Forms of DDs (before the controversy) before/during the trial
- May be oral or written or May be admitted against Used ONLY against the party
- Made by signs which could be interpreted and testified to by a himself/successor in interest and admitting.
witness against 3rd parties
Note:
- If Oral - It may be testified to w/o the need of repeating the exact Requisites in Order for a Statement to be Admissible as a DAI
words as long as he can give the substance thereof 1. That the declarant is dead and unable to testify;
- If unsigned written DD – It may used as a memorandum by the 2. That it relates to facts against the interest of the declarant;
witness who took it down 3. That at the time he made the said declaration the declarant was aware
that the same was contrary to his aforesaid interest; and
4. That the declarant had no motive to falsify and he believed such to
EXCEPTION NO. 2: DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST be true.
Reasons for such Admission

Sec. 38. Declaration against interest. 1. Necessity – such declarations are the only mode of proof available
2. Trustworthiness – persons do not make statements that are
The declaration made: disadvantageous to themselves without substantial reason to believe
- by a person deceased OR unable to testify, that the statements are true. Self-interest induces men to be cautious
- against the interest of the declarant, in saying anything against themselves.
IF the fact asserted in the declaration was at the time it was made:
- so far contrary to declarant's own interest, Interest covered:
- that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the 1. Proprietary interest
declaration UNLESS he believed it to be true, 2. Penal interest
may be received in evidence against: o A justifiable theory because one who is criminally liable is also
- himself or civilly liable.
- his successors in interest and o People v. Toledo and Holgado: A declaration admitting that he
- against third persons. (32a) was the one who killed the victim, made by a delcarant who died
shortly thereafter, is admissible where another person was 4. The act or declaration was made ante litem motam or prior to the
subsequently charged as the killer of the same victim controversy
3. Pecuniary interest Pedigree May be Established or Proved By:
Note: It is essential that at the time of the statement, the declarant’s interest 1. The act or declaration of a relative (sec 39)
affected is actual/real/apparent not merely contingent/future/conditional 2. The reputation or tradition existing in his family (sec 40)
Self Serving Declaration, defined: Statements favorable to or intended to 3. Entries in Family Bibles (sec 40)
advance the interests of the delcarant 4. With respect to marriage, by common reputation in the community
- It is inadmissible as being hearsay if the delcarant is unavailable as a (Sec 41)
witness Note: The relationship must preliminarily be proved by direct or
- Opposite of DAI circumstantial evidence.
- No specific degree of relationship is required
- BUT the weight to which such act or declaration is entitled may be
EXCEPTION NO. 3: ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE affected by the degree of relationship
Sec. 39. Act or declaration about pedigree. Note: Reputation between the declarant and the person subject of inquiry
must be legitimate unless the issue is the legitimacy itself.
The act or declaration:
- of a person deceased OR unable to testify,
- in respect to the pedigree of another person related to him by birth EXCEPTION NO. 4: FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION
or marriage, REGARDING PEDIGREE
may be received in evidence where:
- it occurred before the controversy, AND
- the relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other Sec. 40. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree.
than such act or declaration.
The reputation or tradition:
The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, - existing in a family previous to the controversy,
marriage, death, the dates when and the places where these fast occurred, and - in respect to the pedigree of any one of its members,
the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family history intimately may be received in evidence:
connected with pedigree. (33a) - IF the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the family,
either by consanguinity or affinity.
Notes:
Entries in family bibles or other family books or charts, engravings on rings,
Requisites in Order that Pedigree May be Proved by Acts or family portraits and the like:
Declarations of Relatives - may be received as evidence of pedigree. (34a)
1. The actor or declarant is dead or unable to testify
2. The act or declaration is made by a person related to the subject by Notes:
birth or marriage
3. The relationship between the declarant or the actor and the subject is Requisites W/ Respect to Reputation or Tradition Under Sec 40
shown by evidence other than such act or declaration 1. The witness testifying thereto must be a member, by consanguinity
or affinity, of the same family as the subject; and
2. Such reputation or tradition must have existed in that family ante Common Reputation, defined: The definite opinion of the community in
litem motam which the fact to be proved is known or exists. It means the general or
substantially undivided reputation, as distinguished from a partial or
Note: A statement as to one’s date of birth and age as learned from parents or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.
relatives is an ante litem motam declaration of family tradition
- Such statement prevails over a mere opinion of a trial judge Common Reputation May be Established:
- BUT cannot prevail over a secondary statement of the father 1. By testimonial evidence of competent witness
2. By monuments and inscriptions in public places
3. By documents containing statement of reputation
Section 39 Section 40
Act or declaration against pedigree Family reputation or tradition regarding Common Reputation or General Reputation is Admissible to Prove
pedigree 1. Facts of public interest more than 30 years old
Witness need not be a member of Witness is a member of the family 2. Facts of general interest more that 30 years old
the family 3. Marriage
Testimony is about what declarant, Testimony is about family reputation or 4. Moral Character
who is dead or unable to testify, tradition covering matters of pedigree. Note: Common reputation must have existed ante litem motam
said concerning the pedigree of the
declarant’s family Public Interest = Those of National Interest
Relation bet the declarant and the The witness himself is the one to whom General Interest = Those affecting inhabitants of a particular region or
person subject of inquiry must be the fact relates. No need to establish community
established by independent evidence relationship by independent evidence. Character = Inherent qualities of a person
Reputation = Opinion of him by others (Should be existing in his place of
residence, but may also exist in a place where he is known best)
EXCEPTION NO. 5: COMMON REPUTATION Note: Here, character is permitted to be established by his common
reputation
Sec. 41. Common reputation. Evidence of Negative Good Repute: Where the foundation proof shows that the
witness was in such position that he would have heard reports derogatory to one’s
character, the reputation testimony may be predicated on the absence of reports of
Common reputation: bad reputation or on the fact that the witness heard nothing against the person.
- existing previous to the controversy,
- respecting facts of public or general interest more than 30 years old, EXCEPTION NO. 6: RES GESTAE
or
- respecting marriage or moral character, Sec. 42. Part of res gestae.
may be given in evidence.
Statements made by a person:
Monuments and inscriptions in public places: - while a startling occurrence is taking place OR immediately prior
- may be received as evidence of common reputation. (35) OR subsequent thereto
- with respect to the circumstances thereof,
Notes: may be given in evidence as part of res gestae.
So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and 2. Trustworthiness – the statement is made indistinctively. The facts speaking
giving it a legal significance, thru the party and not the party speaking thru the facts.
- may be received as part of the res gestae. (36a)
Res Gestae in connection with a Dying Declarations
Notes: homicidal act
May be made by the killer himself Can be made only by the victim.
Res Gestae which means “things done”, TYPES: after or during the killing OR that of a
1. Spontaneous statements: Statements in connection with a startling 3rd person.
occurrence relating to that fact and in effect forming part thereof May precede or be made after the Made only after the homicidal
2. Verbal Acts: Statements accompanying an equivocal act, on the homicidal attack was committed. attack has been committed.
theory that they are the verbal parts of the act to be explained. Justification in the spontaneity of the Trustworthiness based upon in its
Requisites for Res Gestae No 1: Requisites for Res Gestae No 2: statement. being given in awareness of
Spontaneous Statements Verbal Acts impending death.
1. The principal act, the res gestae, be 1. The res gestae or principal act or to Note: If both elements for res gestae and dying declarations are present –
a startling occurrence; be characterized must be equivocal; they may be admitted as both.
2. The statements were made before 2. Such act must be material to the issue
the delcarant had the opportunity to 3. The statements must accompany the When Must the Statement or Act be Made:
contrive equivocal act. GR: While the declarant was under the immediate influence of the startling
3. The statements must refer to the 4. The statements give a legal occurrence. Hence, done immediately prior, during or subsequent to the
occurrence in question and its significance to the equivocal act
events.
attending circumstances
EXC:
4. The statement must be
- If the declarant was unconscious – statements regarding the event will
spontaneous.
still be admissible
The res gestae is the startling The res gestae is the equivocal act.
- If the declarant did not have the opportunity to concoct or contrive a
occurrence
story – it is still admissible even if statement was made after hours
Statements may be made prior, Verbal act must be contemporaneous
during or immediately after the with or accompany the equivocal act.
Statements or Outcries as Part of Res Gestae are Admissible:
startling occurrence.
- To establish the identity of the assailant
- To prove the complicity of another person in the crime
Requisites for Admissibility of Res Gestae, The statement must:
- To establish an admission of liability on the part of the accused
1. Be Spontaneous
2. Made while a startling occurrence is taking place or immediately
prior or subsequent
EXCEPTION NO. 7: ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS
3. Relates to the circumstances of the startling occurrence.
4. Must be involuntary and simultaneously wrung from the witness by
Sec. 43. Entries in the course of business.
the impact of the occurrence
Entries made:
Reasons for Admission: - at, or near the time of transactions to which they refer,
1. Necessity – natural and spontaneous utterances are more convincing than
- by a person deceased, OR unable to testify, who was in a position to
the testimony of a person on the stand.
know the facts therein stated,
may be received as prima facie evidence, IF such person made the entries: Notes:
- in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty AND
- in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty. (37a) Requisites for Admissibility of Official Records
1. The entries was made by a public officer in the performance of his
Notes: duty or by a person specially enjoined by the law to do so;
Shop Book Rule Requisites 2. The entrant had personal knowledge of the facts stated by him or
1. The person who made the entry must be dead or unable to testify. such facts were acquired by him from reports made by persons under
2. The entries were made at or near the time of the transaction to which a legal duty to submit the same
they refer; 3. Such entries were duly entered in a regular manner in the official
3. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated in the entries; records
4. The entries were made in his professional capacity or in the Reasons for Admission
performance of a duty whether legal, contractual, moral or religious; 1. Necessity – practical impossibility of requiring the official’s
and attendance as a witness to testify to the innumerable transactions
5. The entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business occurring in the course of his duty.
or duty; 2. Trustworthiness – there is a presumption of regularity in the
Rules for Admissibility of Business Entries performance of official duty.
- If the Entrant is Available as a Witness – the entries will be Examples of Official Records:
INADMISSIBLE as an exception to the hearsay rule. - A register, a cash book, or an official return or certificate,
o They may be used as a memo to refresh his memory while - motor vehicle accident report (if made in the performance of the
testifying in the transaction officer’s duties, at about the time of the accident, based on
- There is no necessity to bring into court all the clerks or employees information given as personal knowledge)
who individually made the entries - Sheriff’s return (statement in the performance of a duty especially
- It is sufficient that the person who supervises the work of the enjoined by law) – no need for the sheriff to testify
employees testify:
o That the account was prepared under his supervision Entries in the Course of Business Entries in Official Records
o That the entries were entered in the ordinary course of (sec 43) (Sec 44)
business Entries are made by a person who is No such requirement
- There is no precise moment required when the entries should be dead or unable to testify
made – it is sufficient if it is made w/in a reasonable time while the Needs authentication No need
memory of the facts is unimpaired Best evidence rule applies Exception to the best evidence rule
- Probative Value: Prima Facie of the facts stated therein Entries are made pursuant to a duty, The entrant is a public officer, or if a
either legal, contractual, moral or private individual, must have acted
EXCEPTION NO. 8: ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS religious pursuant to a legal duty
Sec. 44. Entries in official records. Note: The entrant must have been competent with respect to the facts stated
in his entries.
Entries in official records made in the performance of his duty: - Entries made by a priest in the register of the facts of baptism are
- by a public officer of the RP or NOT admissible to prove the date of birth or its relation to persons
- by a person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law, o A priest is not competent to testify to the truth of these facts.
are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. (38)
- BUT church registries are ADMISSIBLE as evidence of the facts
with respect to marriage solemnized by the priest (BUT needs to be Reasons for Admission:
authenticated) 1. Necessity – because of the unusual accessibility of the persons
- If the certificate is transmitted to a public officer – it is admissible responsible for the compilation of matters contained in a list,
w/o a need for prior authentication. register, periodical or other published compilation and tremendous
inconvenience it would cause to the court if it would issue summons
Entries in Official Records May be Proved: See Sec 24 and 25 Rule 132 to these numerous individuals.
2. Trustworthiness – they have no motive to deceive and they further
Probative Value: Also prima facie of the facts stated therein realize that unless the list, register, periodical or other published
compilation are prepared with care and accuracy, their work will
have no commercial and probative value.
Ex. Mortality tables, annuity tables
EXCEPTION NO. 9: COMMERCIAL LISTS

EXCEPTION NO. 10: LEARNED TREATISES
Sec. 45.Commercial lists and the like.
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. (39)
4. Is generally relied upon by them.
Notes:
Requisites for Admissibility

1. Statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an
occupation;
2. The statements must be contained in a list, register, periodical or
other published compilation;
3. The compilation was published for use by persons engaged in that
occupation; and
- 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. (40a)
Notes:

1. That the court takes judicial notice thereof; or
2. The same are testified by a witness expert on the subject
Reasons for admission

1. Necessity – even if such person is legally procurable, the
expense is frequently disproportionate.
2. Trustworthiness – learned writers have no motive to misrepresent. 3. The former case involved the same subject as that in the present case
He is aware that his work will be carefully scrutinized by the learned although on different causes of action
members of his profession and that he may be subject to criticisms 4. The issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same
and ultimately rejected as an authority of the subject matter if his issue involved in the present case
conclusions are found to be invalid. 5. The adverse party had an opportunity to cross examine the witness in
the former case.
Inability to Testify: Inability proceeding from a grave cause, almost

amounting to death (ex. Losing one’s power of speech)
- Subsequent failure or refusal to appear at the second trial, or hostility
since testifying at the first trial does NOT amount to such inability
Actions may be Essentially Different: Testimony given in a civil case is

admissible in a subsequent criminal case PROVIDED the above requisites
are met.
Rule on Admissibility of Prior Judgment (Not testimony)

- A judgment in a criminal proceeding cannot be read in evidence in a
civil action against a person not a party thereto to establish any fact
therein
- The mater is res inter alios and cannot invoked as res judicata
EXCEPTION NO. 11: TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER - It may only be admitted in a civil case by way of inducement or to
PROCEEDING show a collateral fact relevant to the issue in the civil action
- It may not be admitted to prove the plaintiff’s action or the
Sec. 47. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding. defendant’s defense – it is not binding upon the parties in the civil
action
The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or unable to testify: - Ratio: Parties are not the same and different rules of evidence are
- given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, applicable to each
- involving the same parties and subject matter,
may be given in evidence AGAINST: HOWEVER, in Miranda v. Malate: Judgment of conviction in the absence
- the adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine him. of collusion between the accused and the offended party is binding and
(41a) conclusive to a person subsidiarily liable w/ regard to his liability and to the
amount thereof.
Notes:

1. The witness is dead or unable to testify
2. His testimony or deposition was given in a former case or
proceedings, judicial or administrative between the same parties or
those representing the same interests
3. On the mental sanity of a person, if the witness is sufficiently
acquainted with the former or if the latter is an expert witness (Sec
50c)
4. On the emotion, behavior, condition, or appearance of a person
which he has observed; and (Sec 50d)
5. On ordinary matters known to all men of common perception, such
as the value of ordinary household articles (Galian v. State
Assurance Co., Ltd.)
Reason for the Rule: It is for the court to form an opinion concerning the
facts in proof of which evidence is offered. Witnesses must testify to facts
w/in their knowledge and not their opinions.
7. OPINION RULE
Sec. 49. Opinion of expert witness.
Sec. 48.General rule.
The opinion of a witness:
The opinion of witness is not admissible EXCEPT as indicated in the - on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or training
following sections. (42) which he shown to posses,
may be received in evidence. (43a)
Notes:
Notes:
Opinion, defined: An inference or conclusion drawn from facts observed.
- GR: Sec 48: Witnesses must give the facts and not their inference, Expert Witness, defined: One who belongs to the profession or calling to
conclusions, or opinions. Opinions are INADMISSIBLE which the subject matter of the inquiry relates to and who possesses special
- EXCEPTIONS: Opinion of the Witness is Admissible (Sec 49 &50) knowledge on questions on which he proposes to express an opinion.
1. On a matter requiring SPECIAL knowledge, skill, experience or Test: Whether the opinion called for will aid the fact finder in resolving an
training which he is shown to possess, that is when he is an expert issue
(Sec 49);
2. Regarding the identity or the handwriting of a person, when he has Degree of Skill or Knowledge Required of an Expert Witness
knowledge of the person or handwriting, whether he is an ordinary or
expert witness (Sec 50 a & b)
- There is no definite standard of determining the degree of skill or dissimilarities as regards spontaneity, rhythm, pressure of a pen, loops,
knowledge that a witness must possess in order to testify as an strokes, and discrepancies between genuine and false specimens
expert. - Expert evidence on handwriting is at best weak and unsatisfactory. It
- It is sufficient that the following factors are present: is very unreliable. It is not conclusive. It has less weight than direct and
1. Training and education credible testimonies of witnesses as to matters w/in their personal
2. Particular, first hand familiarity with the facts of the case observation.
3. Presentation of authorities or standards upon which his opinion is based. - It is not necessarily binding especially when the expert was not presented
as a witness to give the adverse party an opportunity to cross-examine.
Requisites for Admissibility of Expert Evidence - only if: - When the inquiry merely involves a comparison of existing signatures,
1. The matter to be testified to is one that requires expertise, and an opinion of an expert is not necessary.
2. The witness had been qualified as an expert - Other factors that should be considered: The position of the writer, the
condition of the surface in which the paper is placed, his state of mind,
Value of an Expert Witness: It is NOT conclusive BUT purely advisory. feelings and nerves, kind of pen and paper.
The courts are not bound by the expert’s findings. - It is common knowledge that the writing of a person changes as time
elapses. It changes as one advances in age.
Rules on Expert Testimony - From the ink alone, it is impossible to determine the ink writing’s age.
- Courts must consider all the circumstances of the case (expert’s
qualifications, experience and degree of learning, the basic and logic On Paraffin Tests for Firearm Use
of his conclusions and other evidence on record) - Paraffin Tests are NOT conclusive as to the presence of gunpowder
- The value of expert testimony depends largely on the extent of the since other compounds with nitrates can give the same reaction. It is
experience or studies of such expert. unreliable since the only thing it can definitely establish is the presence
or absence of nitrates BUT not if its source is a firearm
Note: An expert witness may base his opinion either on the first-hand - Tobacco, cosmetics, fertilizers, fireworks can give a positive result as
knowledge of the facts or on the basis of hypothetical questions where the well.
facts are presented to him and on the assumption that they are true, - It also doesn’t definitely establish the distance where the gun was
formulates his opinion on the hypothesis. fired. Blackening and burning around the wound better establishes the
Probative Value of Expert Evidence short distance of the gunshot.
- W/N the courts are bound by the testimony of an expert: DEPENDS on Rules on Paternity Testing
the nature of the inquiry. - Blood tests on filiation of a child, competently conducted by
o ONLY when the subject of inquiry is of such a technical nature qualified persons are admissible on the non-paternity of a person
that a layman can possibly have no knowledge thereof that courts - It is however, inconclusive to affirm paternity but can only show a
must depend and rely upon experts. possibility of such fact absent any other evidence.
- Conflicting expert evidence have neutralizing effect on contradictory
conclusions. They generate doubt. On DNA Testing
- A non-expert private individual, may examine certain contested - DNA evidence based on genetic code is admissible to prove
documents, it is not necessarily null and void if there are facts w/in his paternity since except for identical twins, each person’s DNA is
knowledge which may help the court in the determination of the issue. distinct and unique
- In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, it is necessary to
Rules on Handwriting Expert Evidence consider how the samples were collected, handled, the possibility of
- Value of such expert evidence depends upon the assistance that he contamination and w/n the standards of procedure were followed
affords in pointing out distinguishing marks, characteristics,
- Obtaining DNA does not violate the right against self-
incrimination.
- The probative value or weight of DNA analysis is subject to the Notes:
requisites of evaluation
o Less than 99.9%: Corroborative Evidence Ordinary Opinion Evidence, defined: That which is given by a witness
o 99.9% or higher: Rebuttable Presumption who is of ordinary capacity and who has by opportunity acquired a particular
knowledge which is outside the limits of common observation and which
On Evidence Obtained By Sound Recording may be of value in elucidating a matter under consideration.
- Tape Recording is admissible provided the ff requisites are first
established: Shorthand Rendering of Facts: Instantaneous conclusions of the mind. The
1. Recording device was capable of taking testimony witness may testify as to the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a
2. The operator of the device was competent person
3. No changes, additions or deletions have been made
4. The testimony was elicited and voluntarily made w/o any kind of
inducement 8. CHARACTER EVIDENCE
5. The establishment of the authenticity and correctness of the
recoding Sec. 51. Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions:
6. The identity of the speakers
7. The manner of the preservation of the recording (a) In Criminal Cases:
- A witnesses’ declaration that the sound recording represents a true
portrayal of the voices satisfies the requirements of authentication. (1)The accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the
moral trait involved in the offense charged.
(2)UNLESS in rebuttal, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral
character which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense
charged.
(3)The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved IF it
tends to establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of
the offense charged.
Sec. 50. Opinion of ordinary witnesses.

(b) In Civil Cases:
Opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in
evidence regarding: Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil case is admissible ONLY
when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
(a) The identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge;
(b) A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity; and (c) In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14, (46a, 47a)
(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted.
Notes:
The witness may also testify:
- on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance Character, defined: The aggregate of the moral qualities which belong to
of a person. (44a) and distinguish an individual person.
Rules on the Admissibility of Character Evidence: Rules with Respect to the Nature or Substance of the Character
- GR: Character evidence is NOT admissible in evidence Evidence (CE)
Ratio: The evidence of a person’s character does not prove that such person Person Referred To Nature or Substance of the CE
acted in conformity with such character or trait in a particular occasion.
W/ Respect to the Accused: CE “must be pertinent to the moral trait
In Criminal Cases involved in the offense charged”
- GR: The prosecution may not prove the BAD Moral Character (MC) of Ex. In a prosecution for estafa, perjury or false testimony where in the
the accused which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense person’s moral trait is involved
charged.
- EXCEPTION: It is sufficient that CE “may establish in any
o The prosecution may prove BAD MC at the rebuttal stage - IF W/ Respect to the Offended reasonable degree the probability of the
the accused, in his defense attempts to prove his GOOD MC. Person offense charged”
o GOOD or BAD MC of the offended party may always be proved Ex. In a case of rape, the victim’s chastity may be questioned.
if such evidence tends to establish the probability or CE must “refer to his general reputation for
improbability of the offense charged. W/ Respect to Witnesses truth, honesty or integrity” affecting his
- EXC to the EXC: credibility
o Proof of the bad character of the victim is not admissible:
 In a murder case: If the crime was committed through
treachery and evident premeditation
 In a rape case: If through violence and intimidation
o In prosecution for rape, evidence of complainant’s past sexual
conduct, opinion thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be
admitted unless, and only to the extent that the court finds that
such evidence is material and relevant to the case. (RA 8505)
Note: In criminal cases
- GR: The prosecution cannot initially attack the character of the accused
- EXC: ONLY if the accused opens that issue by introducing evidence of
his good MC when he makes his defense.
Ratio: To avoid unfair prejudice to the accused who may be convicted
because of such character
In Civil Cases
- GR: MC of either party can NOT be proved
- EXC: Unless it is pertinent to the issue of character involved in the
case
Note: Here, the issue involved must be character. (Ex. Civil actions for
damages arising from the offenses of libel slander or seduction)
In BOTH Criminal and Civil Cases

- BAD MC of a witness may always be proved by either party but
NOT evidence of his character, UNLESS it has been impeached.
BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS
Sec 1. Burden of proof.
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in

issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence
required by law. (1a, 2a)
BURDEN OF PROOF
Burden of Proof or “onus probandi”, defined: Obligation imposed upon a

party who alleges the existence of facts necessary for the prosecution of his
action or defense to establish the same by the requisite quantum of evidence.
Proof, defined: The establishment of a requisite degree of belief in the mind
of the trier of fact as to the fact in issue.
To Sustain Preliminary Investigation Issuance of Warrant Quantum of Evidence Required:

Criminal Conviction of Arrest Civil Cases Preponderance of Evidence
Cases Proof Evidence as to “engender a Probable Cause: Charges of Misconduct Clear and Convincing Evidence
beyond well-founded belief” as to Reasonable ground to Against Judges *For Removal: Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
reasonable the fact of the commission believe that the Administrative, Quasi- Substantial Evidence: Such relevant evidence as a
doubt of the crime and the accused has committed Judicial and Agrarian reasonable mind might accept as sufficient to
respondent’s probable guilt the offense . Cases support a conclusion
Hierarchy of Evidence
1. Proof beyond reasonable doubt
2. Clear and convincing evidence
3. Preponderance of evidence
4. Substantial evidence
2 Separate Burdens in Burden of Proof

1. Burden of Going Forward: Burden of Producing evidence
2. Burden of Persuasion: The burden of persuading the trier of fact that
the burdened party is entitled to prevail.
Upon Whom BURDEN OF PROOF Rests:
Civil Cases Criminal Cases
On the party who would be defeated if no The burden of proof is
evidence were given on either side. always with the prosecution.
Plaintiff Has the burden of proof to show Note: It is required that

[RULE 131] the truth of his allegations if the courts determine first if the
defendant raises a negative defense. evidence of the prosecution o The essential ingredients of the offense of the defense (criminal
(w/ respect to his complaint) has at least shown a prima case). Only needs to establish a prima facie case from the best
Defendant Has the burden of proof if he raises facie case before considering evidence obtainable
an affirmative defense on the the evidence of the defense. Example: In breach of contract, non-performance must be proven. In illegal
complaint of the plaintiff. *If established – then the possession of firearms, the lack of license must be proved.
(w/ respect to his counterclaim) burden is shifted upon the - EXC to the EXC: In civil cases, even if the NA is an essential part
Cross accused to prove otherwise of the cause of action or defense, it does not need to be proved:
Claimant w/ respect to his cross claim o IF it is only for the purpose of denying the existence of a
document which should properly be in the custody of the adverse
Burden of Evidence, defined: The logical necessity on a party during a party.
particular time of the trial to create a prima facie case in its favor or to
destroy that created against him by presenting evidence. Note: It is not incumbent upon the prosecution to adduce positive evidence to
support a NA the truth of which is indicated by established circumstances and
In BOTH civil and criminal cases: The BURDEN OF EVIDENCE lies w/ the which if untrue could readily be disproved by documents or other evidence w/in
party who asserts an affirmative allegation. the knowledge or control of the accused. When the negative of an issue does not
Civil Cases Criminal Cases permit of direct proof or when the facts are more immediately w/in the
Plaintiff Must prove the Prosecution Must prove the its knowledge of the accused – the onus rests on the accused.
affirmative affirmative allegations in
allegations in his the indictments (elements of
complaint the crime and the attending WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
circumstances)
Defendant In his counterclaim Defense As to the justifying, The Following Facts Need Not be Proved:
and in his exempting, mitigating, and 1. Facts which are presumed (Rule 131)
affirmative defenses absolutory circumstances 2. Facts which are of judicial notice (Rule 129)
3. Facts which are judicially admitted (Rule 129)
Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence
Does not shift and remains Shifts from party to party depending upon the
throughout the entire case exigencies of the case in the course of the trial PRESUMPTIONS
exactly where the original
pleadings placed it. Presumption, defined: An inference as to the existence or non-existence of
Generally determined by the developments of a fact which courts are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts.
Generally determined by the the trial, or by the provisions of substantive law
pleadings filed by the party. or procedural rules which may relieve the party Note: A presumption shifts the burden of going forward with the evidence.
from presenting evidence on the facts alleged. It imposes on the party against whom it is directed the burden of going
(ex. Presumptions, judicial notice) forward with evidence to meet or rebut the presumption.
Principle of Negative Averments (NA)

- GR: NAs need not be proved (whether in civil or criminal action) Presumptions Judicial Admission and Judicia l
- EXC: It has to be proved when such negative allegations are: Notice
o The essential parts of the cause of action (civil case) or The proponent still has to introduce The proponent does not have to
evidence of the basis of the presumption introduce any evidence
(evidence of the existence and non- 1. ESTOPPEL IN PAIS (Rule 131, Sec. 2(a)) – The fact which the party in
existence of the facts from which the court estoppel has represented to be true is conclusively presumed as against
can draw the inference of the fact in issue him to be true
Requisites as to the Party Estopped Requisites as to the Party Claiming
Classifications of Presumptions Estoppel
Presumptions of Law Presumptions of Fact a. Conduct amounting to false a. Lack of knowledge of truth as to the
(praesumptiones juris) (praesumptiones hominis) representation or concealment facts in question
Definition: A deduction which the Definition: A deduction which reason draws b. Intent or at least expectation that the b. Reliance in good faith upon the
law expressly directs to be made from facts proved without an express direction conduct shall be acted upon conduct or statements of the party to
from particular facts. from the law to that effect c. Knowledge, actual or constructive of be stopped
A certain inference must be made Discretion is vested in the tribunal as to the real facts c. Action or inaction based thereon to
whenever the facts appear which drawing the inference. his detriment or prejudice.
furnish the basis of the inference Note: Estoppel is effective only as between the parties thereto or their
Reduced to fixed rules and form Derived wholly and directly from the successors in interest
part of the system of jurisprudence circumstances of the particular case by means
of the common experience of mankind 2. ESTOPPEL BY DEED (Rule 131, Sec. 2 (b)) – The ownership of the
Presumptions of Law Can Be: landlord at the start of the tenancy relation is conclusively presumed as
a. Conclusive or Absolute (juris et de jure) - A presumption of law that is against the tenant.
not permitted to be overcome by any proof to the contrary Note: If the title asserted is one that is alleged to have been acquired
b. Disputable, Rebuttable or Prima Facie (juris tantum) - is that which the subsequent to the commencement of that relation, the presumption will not
law permits to be overcome or contradicted by proofs to the contrary; apply
otherwise the same remains satisfactory.
Sec. 2. Conclusive presumptions. Sec. 3. Disputable presumptions.
The ff are instances of conclusive presumptions: The ff presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be
contradicted and overcome by other evidence:
(a))Whenever a party has by his own declaration, act, or omission:
- intentionally and deliberately led another: (a) That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
o to believe a particular thing true, and
o to act upon such belief,
he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, Presumption of Innocence (A)
be permitted to falsify it.
 Applies to both civil and criminal cases
(b)The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord:  The legislature may provide for prima facie evidence of guilt:
- at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and - Provided: There be a rational connection between the facts proved
tenant between them. (3a) and the ultimate fact presumed.
 This presumption accompanies the accused throughout the trial down to
Notes: the moment of conviction. This presumption disappears after conviction
and the appellate court then will presume the accused guilty.
Classes of Conclusive Presumptions
 An accused is not called upon to offer evidence on his behalf for his 2. When the evidence is merely corroborative or merely cumulative, or
freedom is forfeited only if the requisite quantum of proof necessary for is unnecessary
conviction be in existence. 3. When the suppression of evidence is not willful
Basis: founded on the principles of justice and is intended not to protect the 4. When the suppression is an exercise of privilege
guilty but to prevent the conviction of an innocent person.
(f) That money paid by one to another was due to the latter;
(b) That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
(g) That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter;
(c) That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
(h) That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid;
(d) That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
(i) That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later
one is produced;
Presumption That a Person Takes Ordinary Care of his Concerns (D)
(j) That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent
All men are presumed to be sane and normal and subject to be moved by wrongful act is the taker and the doer of the whole act:
substantially the same motives. - otherwise, that things which a person possess, or exercises acts of
ownership over, are owned by him;
When of age and sane, they must take care of themselves. Courts operate not
because one person has been defeated or overcome by another but because he Presumption from Possession of Stolen Goods (J)
has been defeated or overcome illegally. There must be a violation of law,
the commission of what the law known as an actionable wrong before the This is not in conflict with the presumption of innocence. At the start of the
courts is authorized to lay hold of the situation and remedy it. criminal case, the court will apply the presumption of innocence. But once the
prosecution is able to prove that a certain object has been unlawfully taken, that
(e) That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced; there is a crime of theft committed and that the prosecution has also proven that
the accused is in possession of this object unlawfully taken, then the presumption
of innocence disappears. The new presumption of guilt takes place.
Presumption of Suppression of Evidence (E)
Facts to Be Proved By the Prosecution for Presumption (J) to Apply:
1. The crime was actually committed
Ratio: The natural conclusion is that the proof if produced, instead of
2. The crime was committed recently
rebutting would support the inference against him and the court is justified in
3. The stolen property was found in possession of the accused and
acting upon that conclusion
4. The accused is unable to satisfactorily explain his possession there
Requisites for Presumption (e) to Apply:
To Conclusively Prove Possession, It is Necessary That:
1. That the evidence is material
1. The possession must be unexplained by any innocent origin
2. That the party had the opportunity to produce the same
2. The possession must be fairly recent and
3. That the said evidence is available only to said party
3. The possession must be exclusive
When Presumption (e) Will Not Apply:
Note: Convictions in these cases are not sustained upon a presumption of law
1. When the evidence in question is equally available to both parties
but rest wholly upon an inference of fact as to the guilt of the accused.
Omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta donec probetur in
contrarium – all things are presumed to have been done regularly and with
(k) That a person in possession of an order on himself for: due formality until the contrary is proved.
- the payment of the money, or
- the delivery of anything, While ordinarily, irregularity will not be presumed, an adverse assumption
has paid the money or delivered the thing accordingly; may arise when the official act in question appears to be irregular upon its
face.
(l) That a person acting in a public office was regularly appointed or elected
to it; (n) That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or
elsewhere, was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
Presumption that a Person in a Public office was Regularly Appointed or
Elected to it: (L) Presumption of Regularity of Judicial Proceedings (N)
Ratio: It would cause great inconvenience if in the first instance strict proof The court rendering the judgment is presumed to have jurisdiction over the
were required of appointment or election to office in all cases where it might subject matter and the parties and to have rendered a judgment valid in every
be collaterally in issue. respect.
- Jurisdiction is presumed in all cases, be it superior or inferior court.
Burden of Proof: Is on the adverse party to show that he was not appointed - However, jurisdiction may not be presumed when the record itself
or designated. shows that jurisdiction has not been acquired or there was something
on the record showing the absence of jurisdiction.
(m) That official duty has been regularly performed; (o)That all the matters within an issue raised in a case:
- were laid before the court and passed upon by it; and
Presumption that an Official Duty has been Regularly Performed (M) in like manner that all matters within an issue raised in a dispute submitted
for arbitration:
Ratio: - were laid before the arbitrators and passed upon by them;
1. Innocence and not the wrongdoing is to be presumed
2. An official oath will not be violated (p)That private transactions have been fair and regular;
3. A republican form of government cannot survive unless a limit is
placed upon controversies and certain trust and confidence reposed Presumption that Private Transactions have Been done Fairly and
in each government, department, or agent at least to the extent of Regular (P)
such presumption.
Note: This presumption applies to both civil and criminal cases An individual intends to do right rather than wrong and intends to do only
what he has the right to do.
This presumption of authority is not confined to official appointees. It has
been extended to persons who have been appointed pursuant to a local or In the absence of proof to the contrary, there is a presumption that all men act
special statute to act in quasi-public or quasi-official capacities and to fairly honestly, and in good faith.
professional men like surgeons and lawyers.
(q)That the ordinary course of business has been followed;
Those who were engaged in a given trade or business are presumed to be
acquainted with the general customs and usages of the occupation and with
such other facts as are necessarily incident to the proper conduct of the
business.
(r)That there was a sufficient consideration for a contract;

(w))That after an absence of 7 years, it being unknown whether or not the
(s))That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient absentee still lives:
consideration; - he is considered dead for all purposes,
- EXCEPT for those of succession.
(t)That an endorsement of a negotiable instrument was made:
- before the instrument was overdue and The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his
- at the place where the instrument is dated; succession:
- till after an absence of 10 years.
(u)That a writing is truly dated; IF he disappeared after the age of 75 years:
- an absence of 5 years shall be sufficient in order that his succession
(v)That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course may be opened.
of the mail;
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the
Presumption in Paragraph (V) division of the estate among the heirs:
(1) A person on board
For the Presumption in Par (V) to Arise, It Must Be Proved: - a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or
- That the letter was properly addressed with postage pre-paid and that - an aircraft which is missing,
it was actually mailed who has not been heard of for 4 years since the loss of the vessel or
- IF the said letter was not returned to the sender: It is presumed that it aircraft;
was received by the addressee
(2) A member of the armed forces who:
Service of Pleadings By Mail (Sec 10, Rule 13) - has taken part in armed hostilities, and
- Service is complete upon the expiration of 10 days after mailing - has been missing for 4 years;
UNLESS the court otherwise provides
- If by registered mail: The service is complete upon actual receipt by (3) A person who:
the addressee (If he fails to claim his mail from the post w/in 5 days - has been in danger of death under other circumstances and
from date of 1st notice – service is complete from the expiration of - whose existence has not been known for 4 years;
such time)
(4) If a married person has been absent for 4 consecutive years, the
spouse present may:
- contract a subsequent marriage IF he or she has well-founded belief
that the absent spouse is already death.
In case of disappearance, where there is a danger of death under the
circumstances hereinabove provided:
- an absence of only 2 years shall be sufficient for the purpose of
contracting a subsequent marriage.
However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present must:
- institute a summary proceedings as provided in the Family Code and
in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the absentee,
- without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse.
Ordinary But Continued Absence: (First 2 subpars) The absentee is (dd) That IF the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another
presumed to have died at the end of the said period marriage:
- within 300 days after such termination of the former marriage,
Qualified Absence: (In danger of death under the 3 instances contemplated) these rules shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary:
The absentee is presumed to have died at the time he was exposed to such
danger or peril, at the start of the period. (1) A child born BEFORE 180 days after the solemnization of the
subsequent marriage:
Note: Distinction is important for successional rights - is considered to have been conceived during the former marriage,
- PROVIDED it be born within the 300 days after the termination of
the former marriage.
(x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was
conformable to the law or fact; (2) A child born AFTER 180 days following the celebration of the
subsequent marriage:
(y) That things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and - is considered to have been conceived during such marriage,
ordinary nature habits of life; - even though it be born within the 300 days after the termination of
the former marriage.
(z))That persons acting as copartners have entered into a contract of co-
partneship; (ee) That a thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with
things of the nature;
(aa) That a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have
entered into a lawful contract of marriage; (ff) That the law has been obeyed;
(bb) That property acquired by a man and a woman: (gg) That a printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published
- who are capacitated to marry each other and by public authority, was so printed or published;
- who live exclusively with each other as husband and wife
w/out the benefit of marriage OR under void marriage, (hh) That a printed or published book, purporting to contain reports of cases
has been obtained by their joint efforts, work or industry. adjudged in tribunals of the country where the book is published, contains
correct reports of such cases;
(cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman:
- who are not capacitated to marry each other and (ii) That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property
- who have acquire properly through their actual joint contribution of to a particular person has actually conveyed it to him
money, property or industry, - when such presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such
such contributions and their corresponding shares including joint deposits of person or his successor in interest;
money and evidences of credit are equal.
Par (KK) Par (JJ)
The parties are NOT required to perish in It is Required that the deaths
a calamity occurred during a calamity
It only applies to questions of It applies to cases not involving
successional rights successional rights
Provides a presumption of simultaneity in Provides for presumptions of
the deaths of the persons called to succeed survivorship
(jj) That EXCEPT for purposes of succession, when: each other
- two persons perish in the same calamity, such as wreck, battle, or Sec. 4. No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy.
conflagration, and
- it is not shown who died first, and There is NO presumption of legitimacy of a child:
- there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, - born after 300 days following the dissolution of the marriage or the
the survivorship is determined from the probabilities resulting from the separation of the spouses.
strength and the age of the sexes, Whoever alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove his
According to the following rules: allegation. (6)
1. If both were under the age of 15 years:
o the older is deemed to have survived; Notes:
2. If both were above the age of 60: - An exact copy of Art 261 of the CC
o the younger is deemed to have survived; - Applies when the dissolution of the marriage is by reason of causes other
3. If one is under 15 and the other above 60: than the death of the husband.
o the former is deemed to have survived; - Separation may be: legal separation or a separation de facto
4. If both be over 15 and under 60, and the sex be different:
o the male is deemed to have survived,
o if the sex be the same, the older;
5. If one be under 15 or over 60, and the other between those ages:
o the latter is deemed to have survived.
In Order for Presumption (JJ) to Apply, It is Necessary That:

1. The deaths occurred in a calamity and
2. There are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred
that one died ahead of the other
(kk) That IF there is a doubt, as between two 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, they shall be considered to have died at the
same time. (5a)
Presumption is the same as the rule in Art 43 of the CC

[RULE 132]
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Sec 1. Examination to be done in open court.
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing:

- shall be done in open court, and
- under oath or affirmation.
UNLESS:
- the witness is incapacitated to speak, or
- the questions calls for a different mode of answer,
the answers of the witness shall be given orally. (1a)
Sec.2. Proceedings to be recorded.
The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, INC:

- the questions propounded to a witness and his answers thereto,
- the statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or
witnesses with reference to the case,
shall be recorded:
- by means of shorthand or stenotype or
- by other means of recording found suitable by the court.
A transcript of the record of the proceedings:

- made by the official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and
- certified as correct by him
shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings. (2a)
Notes: 2. Be relevant;
3. Not be argumentative;
Rules For Admissibility 4. Not for conclusion of law;
- GR: The testimony of the witness must be given in open 5. Not call for opinion or hearsay evidence;
- EXC: Such requirement may be supplanted 6. Not call for illegal answer;
o In civil cases, by depositions pursuant to and under the 7. Not call for self-incriminating testimony;
limitations of Rules 23 and 24 8. Not be leading;
o In criminal cases, by depositions or conditional 9. Not be misleading;
examinations, pursuant to Sec 12 to 15 Rule 119 and Rule 10. Not to tend reputation of witness;
123, or by the records of the preliminary investigation 11. Not to be repetitions;
12. Not call for a narration.
How Oral Evidence is Given

- GR: It is usually given orally in open court. Therefore, generally, Sec. 3. Rights and obligations of a witness.
the testimonies of witnesses cannot be presented in affidavits.
- EXC: Testimonies of witnesses may be given in affidavits is under A witness MUST answer questions:
the Rules of Summary Procedure (BP 129) - although his answer may tend to establish a claim against him.
Purpose: to enable the court to judge the credibility of the witness by the However, it is the right of a witness:
witness’ manner of testifying, their intelligence, and appearance.
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and
GR: Testimony of witnesses shall be given under oath or affirmation. from harsh or insulting demeanor;
- Two fold object in requiring a witness to be sworn: (2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;
1. By affecting the conscience of the witness to compel him to (3) Not to be examined EXCEPT ONLY as to matters pertinent to the issue;
speak the truth; (4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an
2. If he willfully falsifies that truth, that he may be punished by offense UNLESS otherwise provided by law; or
perjury. (5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation
- The right to have the witness sworn may be waived - UNLESS it to be the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the
o If a party fails to object to the taking of the testimony of a fact in issue would be presumed.
witness without the administration of an oath, he will be deemed But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an
to have waived his objection. offense. (3a, 19a)
How Testimony of the Witness Should be Elicited Notes:

- By question of counsel
- The court may also propound questions either on the direct or cross- GR: A witness cannot refuse to answer questions material to the inquiry
examination of the witness or suggest questions to counsel. even if it may tend to establish a claim against him
Note: The testimony of a witness cannot be considered self-serving if he is EXC: He may validly refuse to answer:
subjected to cross-examination. 1. Under the right against self-incrimination (If it will subject him to
punishment for an offense)
Questions propounded to a witness must: - Available in civil, criminal and administrative cases
1. Not be indefinite or uncertain;
- May be with reference to the offense involved in the same case
where he is charged or in another case Right of Self-Incrimination Distinguished
- It may be waived however in immunity statutes wherein the witness
is granted immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted Accused Ordinary Witness
in his testimony Cannot be compelled to testify or produce May be compelled to testify by
2. Under the right against self-degradation (If it will have a direct evidence even by subpoena or other subpoena having only the right to
tendency to degrade his character) UNLESS: process or order of the court. He cannot refuse to answer a particular
- Such question is directed to the very fact at issue or to a fact from be required either for the prosecution, for incriminating question at the time it
which the fact at issue would be presumed or co-accused or even for himself. is put to him.
- It refers to his previous final conviction for an offense
Note: Right should be seasonable invoked and may be waived.
Classification of Immunity Statutes

1. Use Immunity – Only prohibits the use of witness’ compelled
testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the Sec. 4. Order in the examination of an individual witness.
criminal prosecution of the witness. It does not render a witness
immune from prosecution. The order in which the individual witness may be examined is as follows;
2. Transactional Immunity – grants immunity to the witness from (a) Direct examination by the proponent;
prosecution for an offense to which his compelled testimony relates. (b) Cross-examination by the opponent;
(c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
Scope of the right against self-incrimination (d) Re-cross-examination by the opponent. (4)
1. No person should be compelled to be a witness against himself;
2. The rule may be invoked in any court or proceedings; Sec. 5. Direct examination.
3. The rule covers only testimonial compulsion and production by him
of incriminating documents and articles. (Forced Reenactment Direct examination is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party
comes within the ban since prohibition against testimonial presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue. (5a)
compulsion extends to those communicative in nature)
Note: Right against self-incrimination is granted only in favor of individuals.
Sec. 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and extent.
When is an act testimonial: If it explicitly or implicitly relate a factual
assertion or discloses information. UPON the termination of the direct examination the witness may be cross-
examined BY the adverse party
Rationale against testimonial compulsion: The court may not extract from - as to many matters stated in the direct examination, or connected
the defendant’s own lips and against his will an admission of his guilt. therewith,
- with sufficient fullness and freedom
Limitation if a witness is a party in a civil action: Before the plaintiff can o to test his accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from
compel the defendant to be a witness, the plaintiff must first prove that he has interest or bias, or the reverse, and
submitted written interrogatories of the defendant. o to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. (8a)
elements of the crime) and thereafter failed to appear and cannot be
Notes: produced despite a warrant for his arrest – striking out is not
warranted (Pp v. Gorospe, 1984)
Purposes of Cross Examination
1. To discredit the witness When direct-examination may be stricken out for lack of cross-
2. To discredit the testimony of the witness examination: Depends on who is at fault:
3. To clarify certain matters - IF it is on the party presenting the witness – it may be expunged
4. To elicit admissions from witnesses - IF it is on the adverse party: There can be no forfeiture of direct
testimony.
Scope and Limits of Cross Examination
- American Rule: Restricts cross-examination to facts which are
connected with the matters that have been stated in the direct
examination of the witness
- English Rule: A witness may be cross-examined, not only upon
matters testified to by him on his direct examination, BUT ALSO on
all matters relevant to the issue
What Rule Do we Follow? - BOTH

- GR: We follow the English Rule – However, it does not mean that Sec. 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent.
the party is making the witness his own, as stated in Sec 5
- EXC: We follow the American Rule (may only be cross-examined AFTER the cross-examination of the witness has been concluded, he may be
on matters covered by direct examination )when: re-examined BY the party calling him:
o The witness is an unwilling or hostile witness as so declared - to explain or supplement his answers given during the cross-
by the court OR is an adverse party examination.
o The witness is an accused who testifies as a witness in his On re-direct-examination:
own behalf - questions on matters NOT dealt with during the cross-examination,
- may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (12)
Hostile Witness, defined: One declared so by the court upon adequate
showing of his – adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify or his Principal Object: To prevent injustice to the witness and the party who has
having misled the party into calling to the stand. called him by affording an opportunity to the witness:
- To explain/amplify/reaffirm the testimony which he has given on
Misleading Facts (Questions which assumes facts not on record), IF asked: Cross-E
- On cross-examination: Objectionable for being misleading - To explain any apparent contradiction or inconsistency in his
- On direct-examination: Objectionable for lack of basis statements
Doctrine of Incomplete Testimony: When cross-examination cannot be

done or completed due to causes attributable to the party who offered the Sec. 8. Re-cross-examination.
witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered incompetent
- GR: Such testimony should be stricken from the record. UPON the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party may:
- EXC: However, in criminal cases when the prosecution witness was - re-cross-examine the witness
extensively cross-examined on the material points (essential o on matters stated in his re-direct examination, and also
o on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its - not yet testified to by the witness, or
discretion. (13) - contrary to that which he has previously stated.
It is not allowed. (5a, 6a, and 8a)
Purpose: To overcome the other party’s attempt to rehabilitate a witness or
to rebut damaging evidence brought out on Cross-E Leading Question, defined: One which suggests to the witness the answer
desired.
It is NOT a Matter of Right on Re-Cross-E for Counsel to Touch on
Matters NOT Brought on Re-Direct-E GR: It is not allowed
- Re-Cross-E is limited to new matters brought out on the Re-Direct-E - Ratio: It causes the witness to testify in accordance with the
and such matters as may be allowed by the court suggestion rather than a genuine recollection of events
EXC: Leading Questions are Allowed:
Sec. 9. Recalling witness. 1. On cross-examination
2. On preliminary matters
AFTER the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded: 3. Difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers
- the witness cannot be recalled w/out leave of the court. 4. Unwilling or hostile witness
The court will grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests of 5. Adverse party or an officer, director or a corporation or partnership
justice may require. (14) which is an adverse party
Note: For Nos. 3 and 4: There is no need of a preliminary showing of
- GR: After the examination of a witness by both sides has been hostility before leading questions can be asked
concluded, the witness, CANNOT be recalled W/O leave of court Leading questions have been allowed by the SC when the witness is:
- EXC: When a recall of the witness has been expressly reserved – immature, aged and infirm, in bad physical condition, uneducated, ignorant
recall is a matter of right unaccustomed to court proceedings, feeble-minded, confused, has slow
comprehension, deaf and dumb, unable to speak or understand English.
Sec. 10. Leading and misleading questions. (People v. Dela Cruz, 2002)
A question: Note: A question that merely suggests a subject w/o suggesting an answer or
- which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining a specific thing is NOT a leading question
party desires is a leading question.
It is not allowed, EXCEPT: Misleading Question, defined: One which assumes facts not in evidence or
w/o sufficient basis or which assumes testimony or proof which has not been
(a) On cross examination; given. – It has little probative value
(b) On preliminary matters; - GR: It is NOT allowed as well
(c) When there is a difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a - EXCEPTIONS:
witness who is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a 1. When waived;
deaf-mute; 2. When asking questions to an expert witness
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing Sec. 11. Impeachment of adverse party's witness.
agent of a public or private corporation or of a partnership or association
which is an adverse party. A witness may be impeached:
- by the party against whom he was called,
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact: - by contradictory evidence,
- by evidence that his general reputation for truth, honestly, or
integrity is bad, or Sec. 12. Party may not impeach his own witness.
- by evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent
with his present, testimony, EXCEPT with respect to witnesses referred to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of
BUT NOT: Section 10:
- by evidence of particular wrongful acts, - the party producing a witness is NOT allowed to impeach his
EXCEPT that it may be shown: credibility.
- by the examination of the witness, or the record of the judgment, A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by
- that he has been convicted of an offense. (15) the court UPON adequate showing of:
- his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or
Notes: - his having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand.
GR: One who voluntarily offers a witness’ testimony is bound by such (i.e. The unwilling or hostile witness so declared OR the witness who is an
cannot impeach or contradict), adverse party, may be impeached:
EXCEPTIONS: - BY the party presenting him in all respects as if he had been called
1. In case of a hostile witness or an unwilling witness by the adverse party,
2. Where the witness is an adverse party or the representative of a - EXCEPT by evidence of his bad character.
juridical person which is the adverse party or He may ALSO be impeached and cross-examined:
3. When the witness required is NOT voluntarily offered but is required - BY the adverse party,
by law to be presented (ex. Subscribing witness to the will) - but such cross-examination must ONLY be on the subject matter
A Party Can Impeach a Witness of the Adverse Party BY: of his examination-in-chief. (6a, 7a)
1. Contradictory evidence from testimony in same case Notes:
2. Evidence of prior inconsistent statement
3. Evidence of bad character and A Party Can Impeach His Own Witness ONLY By:
4. Evidence of bias, interest, prejudice or incompetence 1. Evidence contradictory to his testimony or
5. Evidence of mental, sensory derangement or defect 2. Evidence of prior inconsistent statements
6. Evidence of conviction of an offense which affects credibility of Note: In Case of Hostile Witnesses, Adverse Witnesses or Involuntary
witness. (People v. Givera 349 SCRA 573 (2001) witnesses – They may be impeached other than by #1 & #2
Other Modes of Impeaching Aside From Sec 11
1. By involving him during Cross-E in contradiction Sec. 13. How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements.
2. By showing the impossibility or improbability of his testimony
3. By proving action or conduct of the witness inconsistent with his BEFORE a witness can be impeached by evidence that he has made at other
testimony times statements inconsistent with his present testimony:
4. By showing bias, interest or hostile feeling against the adverse party - the statements must be related to him, with the circumstances of the
Note: Impeachment is LIMITED to bad reputation for lack of veracity and times and places and the persons present, and
NOT for lack of morals - he must be asked whether he made such statements, and IF so,
allowed to explain them.
Rehabilitation of Witnesses: An impeached witness may be allowed on If the statements be in writing :
redirect to attempt to rehabilitate (to restore the witness’ credibility) by the - they must be shown to the witness BEFORE any question is put to
party who called the witness to the stand him concerning them. (16)
Note: An impeached witness does not stricken his testimony
Notes:
Contradictory Evidence: Refers to other testimony of the same witness, or Sec. 14. Evidence of good character of witness.
other evidence presented by him in the same case
Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible UNTIL such
Prior Inconsistent Statement: Refers to statements oral or documentary, character has been impeached. (17)
made by the witness sought to be impeached on occasions other than trial in
which he is testifying. Impeaching under is done by “laying the Sec. 15. Exclusion and separation of witnesses.
predicate”:
1. By confronting him with such statements, with the circumstances On any trial or hearing, the judge may:
under which they were made - exclude from the court any witness not at the time under
2. By asking him whether he made such statements and examination, so that he may not hear the testimony of other
3. By giving him as chance to explain the inconsistency witnesses.
The judge may also:
Note: Unless the witness is given the opportunity to explain the - cause witnesses to be kept separate and to be prevented from
discrepancies, the impeachment is incomplete conversing with one another
- HOWEVER, such defect is deemed WAIVED if no objection on that - until all shall have been examined. (18)
ground is raised when the document involved is offered for
admission Notes:
Application of the Power of Exclusion: Applies only to the witnesses and

not to the parties to a civil action.
Laying the Predicate Laying the Foundation or Bases
Refers only to impeachment of a Refers to a situation where evidence which Power Does NOT Apply:
witness through PIS is incompetent will be introduced in - To Parties: They have a right to be present at the trial either by
evidence because it fails under the themselves or their attorneys, as well as reasonable notice of the time
exceptions to the rule on exclusion fixed thereof. Parties CANNOT be divested by an exclusion order.
- To an Accused in a Criminal Case: He has the right to be present
Impeaching “by laying the predicate” May be Dispensed With In case of and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the
Prior Inconsistent Statements (PIS) proceedings.
- As to the testimony of the Adverse Party: If the PIS appears in a
disposition of the adverse party and not a mere witness (the If the Witness Violates the Order of Exclusion: Court may:
deposition may be used by any party for any purpose) - Bar him from testifying
- When the previous statements of a witness are offered as evidence of - Give little weight to his testimony aside from his liability for
an admission, and not merely to impeach him contempt
- When such PIS is admissible as independent evidence (Beda, p308)
Note: It is within the power of the judge to refuse to order the exclusion of
Ratio for Laying the Predicate the principal witness during the hearing of a criminal case
1. To avoid unfair surprise to the adversary
2. To save time (an admission will make extrinsic proof unnecessary) Sec. 16. When witness may refer to memorandum.
3. To give the witness a chance to explain
A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact: Evidence is the testimony Evidence is the writing or record
- by anything written or recorded by himself or under his direction (the memorandum)
at the time: Rule of evidence affected is Rule of evidence affected is the best
- when the fact occurred, or competency of witness, examination evidence rule
- immediately thereafter, or of witness (laying the predicate)
- at any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory and knew The witness simply testifies that he Witness must swear that the writing
that the same was correctly written or recorded; knows that the memorandum is correctly states the transaction
but in such case: correctly written by him or under his
- the writing or record must be produced and may be inspected BY the direction: No need to swear
adverse party, who may, IF he chooses:
o cross examine the witness upon it, and may read it in Value of the Memorandum: It is STILL testimonial in character
evidence. - The memorandum used to refresh the memory of the witness does
not constitute evidence, and may not be admitted as such
So, also, a witness may testify from such writing or record, though he - The memorandum is NOT admissible as corroborative evidence
retain no recollection of the particular facts: since a witness cannot be corroborated by any written statement
- IF he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the prepared wholly by him
transaction when made;
- but such evidence must be received with caution. (10a) Note: The memorandum NEED NOT be the original writing. A copy will
suffice.
Notes:
Application of the Article – ONLY when it is shown beforehand that there

is a need to refresh the memory of the witness.
Revival of Present Memory Revival of Past Recollection Sec. 17. When part of transaction, writing or record given in evidence, the
Present Recollection Revived Past Recollection Recorded remainder, the remainder admissible.
(1st Sentence) (2nd Sentence)
Applies if the witness remembers the Applies where the witness does not When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is:
facts regarding his entries recall the facts involved - given in evidence by one party,
Requisites: Requisites: - the whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the other, and
1. Memorandum has been written by 1. Witness retains no recollection when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in
him or under his direction; and of the particular facts evidence:
2. Written by him: 2. But he his able to swear that - any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary
o When the fact occurred or the record or writing correctly to its understanding
immediately thereafter; or stated the transaction when - may also be given in evidence. (11a)
o At any other time when the made
fact was fresh in his memory
and he knew that the same Sec. 18. Right to respect writing shown to witness.
was correctly recorded
Entitled to greater weight Entitled to lesser weight
Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be inspected by the adverse However, private documents required by law to be entered in public
party. (9a) records may be considered “public documents”
- Note: If a private writing itself is inserted officially into a public
record, its record, its recordation or its incorporation into the public
B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS record becomes a public document BUT that does NOT make the
private writing itself a public document so as to make it admissible
Sec. 19. Classes of Documents. w/o authentication.
For the purpose of their presentation evidence, documents are either public or For the purpose of their presentation in evidence:
private. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
As to GR: Admissible in evidence NOT Self Authenticating. It
Public documents are: Authenticity w/o further proof of its must be proved relative to
genuineness and due its due execution and
(a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign execution genuineness, before it may
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the EXC: Where a special rule be received in evidence
RP, or of a foreign country; of law requires proof thereof
(b) Documents acknowledge before a notary public: despite its being a document
- EXCEPT last wills and testaments; and acknowledged (ex. Probate
(c) Public records, kept in the RP, of private documents required by law to be of notarial wills)
entered therein. As to Evidence even against 3rd Binds only the parties who
Persons persons, of the fact which executed it or their privies,
All other writings are private. (20a) Bound gave rise to its due execution insofar as due execution
and to the date of the latter and date of the document
Notes: concerned
Note: Certain transactions must be in a public document; otherwise they will
Authentication, defined: The process of proving the due execution and not be given any validity.
genuineness of the document
Requisites for the Admissibility of a Copy of a Foreign Official
Document, defined: A deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by Document:
which something is proved, evidenced or set forth. 1. It must be attested by the officer having legal custody of the records
or by his deputy and
Classes of Documents 2. It must be accompanied by a certificate of the Philippine diplomatic
- Public Documents: A document acknowledged before persons and consular representative to the foreign country certifying that
authorized to administer oaths. “Official Documents” such attesting officer has the custody of the document,
o A document to be public must be an official written act of a Ratio of #2: Not a mere technicality but is intended to justify the giving of
public officer full faith and credit to the genuineness of a document in a foreign country.
o A foreign decision purporting to be the written record of an
act of an official body or tribunal of a foreign country is a Sec. 20. Proof of private document.
public writing.
- Private Documents: Includes commercial documents
BEFORE any private document offered as authentic is received in evidence, Doctrine of Authentication of the Adverse Party: Where the reply of the
its due execution and authenticity must be proved either: adverse party refers to and affirms the transmittal to him and his receipt of
the letter in question, a copy of which the proponent is offering in evidence.
(a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or
(b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the Authentication of a Document is NOT Required When:
maker. 1. The writing is an Ancient Document (Sec 21)
2. When the writing is a public document on record (Sec 19)
Any other private document: 3. When it is a notarial document, acknowledged, proved and certified
- need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be. (21a) in accordance with Sec 30
4. When the authenticity and due execution of the document has been
Sec. 21. When evidence of authenticity of private document not necessary. expressly and impliedly admitted by failure to deny the same under
oath (ex. Actionable documents)
Where a private document: Additional Ground in Beda Reviewer:
1. is more than 30 years old, 5. When such genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the
2. is produced from the custody in which it would naturally be found if issue
genuine, and
Sec. 22. is
3. Howunblemished
genuinenessby any alterations orproved.
of handwriting circumstances of suspicion, Authenticity and Proved by: Evidence of the genuineness of the
no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. (22a) Due Execution of a handwriting of the maker
The handwriting of a person may be proved: Private Document
- by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person Proved by:
because: 1. Testimony of the purported writer
o he has seen the person write, OR 2. A witness who actually saw the person writing the
o has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has Handwriting instrument (Sec 20a)
acted or been charged, AND 3. A witness familiar with such handwriting (Sec 22)
o has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person. and who can give his opinion thereon, such opinion
being an exception to the opinion rule
4. A comparison by the court of the questioned
handwriting and admitted genuine specimens thereof
(Sec 22)
5. Expert Evidence (Sec 49)
Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by a comparison, Note: Sec 22 merely enumerated the methods of proving handwriting but it
made: does not give preference or priority to a particular method
- by the witness or the court, Handwriting Experts – NOT Mandatory; Weight of Expert Testimony:
- with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against It depends upon the assistance he may afford in pointing out distinguishing
whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the marks, characteristics, discrepancies in and between genuine and false
satisfaction of the judge. (23a) specimen of writings which would ordinarily escape notice or detection by an
untrained observer
Sec 20, 21, 22: Rules on Authentication of Private Documents
Doctrine of Self Authentication: Where the facts in the writing could only Ancient Documents
have been known to the writer - 3 Requirements (See codal Sec 21)
- An ancient document is said to be in the proper custody if it is in the
place in which and under the care of the person with whom it would IF the office in which the record is kept is in foreign country:
naturally be. - the certificate may be made BY a secretary of the embassy or
- Ratio: The fact of its coming from the natural and proper place tends to legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by
remove presumptions of fraud and strengthen the belief of its any officer in the foreign service of the RP stationed in the foreign
genuineness country in which the record is kept, and
- By merely producing the document: it establishes prima facie its own - authenticated by the seal of his office. (25a)
authenticity. The burden then shifts to the adverse party to prove
otherwise. Whether the Record if Domestic or Foreign – It may be Evidenced By:
1. An official publication
Sec. 23. Public documents as evidence. 2. A copy thereof duly attested by the proper officers
Note: Absent the attestation of the proper officer, a mere copy of the foreign
Documents consisting of entries in public records made in the performance document is not admissible as evidence to prove the foreign law.
of a duty by a public officer:
- are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. Sec. 25. What attestation of copy must state.
All other public documents are evidence:
- even against a third person, Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the purpose of
- of the fact which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the evidence, the attestation must state, in substance:
latter. (24a) - that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part
thereof, as the case may be.
Notes: The attestation:
- must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, IF there be
Public documents are admissible w/o further proof of their due execution and any, or
genuineness - IF he be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such
court. (26a)
Ratio:
- Necessity: practical impossibility of requiring the official’s attendance as Sec. 26. Irremovability of public record.
a witness to testify to the innumerable transactions occurring in the
course of his duty Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible in evidence:
- Trustworthiness: There is a presumption of regularity, legality and - must not be removed from the office in which it is kept,
accuracy - EXCEPT upon order of a court where the inspection of the record is
essential to the just determination of a pending case. (27a)
Sec. 24. Proof of official record.
Irremovability of Public Record
The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, - GR: A public record cannot be removed from the office which it is kept
when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced: - EXC: It may be removed by order of the court BUT ONLY when
- by an official publication thereof or essential to the just determination of a pending case (ex. subpoena duces
- by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the tecum)
record, or by his deputy, and Note: The rule however, refers only to a public record, an official copy of
accompanied, IF the record is not kept in the RP, with: which could be made available to the interested party and is admissible in
- a certificate that such officer has the custody. evidence.
Ratio: Sec. 30. Proof of notarial documents.
1. To enable others to use the record;
2. To prevent the serious risk of loss; Every instrument:
3. To prevent its exposure to wear and tear - duly acknowledged or proved and
- certified as provided by law,
Sec. 27. Public record of a private document. may be presented in evidence:
- without further proof,
An authorized public record of a private document may be proved: - the certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the
- by the original record, or execution of the instrument or document involved. (31a)
- by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, with
an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody. (28a) Notes:
Note: If a private writing itself is inserted officially into a public record, its Notarial Document, defined: One which is duly acknowledged before a
record, its recordation or its incorporation into the public record becomes a notary public. (It is a public document)
public document BUT that does NOT make the private writing itself a public - The notary must be duly authorized and must have notarized said
document so as to make it admissible w/o authentication. document in accordance with the Notarial Law.
Sec. 28. Proof of lack of record. Probative Value of a Notarial Document: It is evidence of the facts
expressed therein
A written statement:
- signed by an officer having the custody of an official record or by his When a Certified True Copy is Presented It Should Comply With the FF
deputy to be Admissible:
- that after diligent search, no record or entry of a specified tenor is 1. The provisions that should appear in the certification or attestation of
found to exist in the records of his office, the said copy (Sec 24 & 25)
- accompanied by a certificate as above provided, 2. It must have the documentary stamp affixed unless specifically
is admissible as evidence that the records of his office contain no such record exempted as in the case of baptismal or birth certificate.
or entry. (29) Note: It is presumed that the requisite stamps have been affixed to the
original copy of a document where only the carbon copies thereof are
available
Note: When a special power of attorney is executed and acknowledged

before a notary public or other competent officer in a foreign country, it
cannot be admitted in evidence in RP courts unless it is certified as such in
Sec. 29. How judicial record impeached. accordance with Sec 24.
Public Instruments do NOT Have Uniform Probative Value
Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of: - The law does not specifically provide that the contents of public
instruments w/o distinction are equally evidence against 3rd parties
(a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer, - The probative value of public instruments depends on the kind of
(b) collusion between the parties, or document that is presented in evidence.
(c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings. (30a)
Rules on Baptismal Certificates (BC) - that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the
- Issued by priests during the Spanish regime: Considered public instrument.
documents If he fails to do that:
- Issued after the Spanish regime: Considered private documents and - the document shall NOT be admissible in evidence. (32a)
cannot even be considered as prima facie evidence of the fact that gave
rise to its execution (it is considered hearsay unless the priest who Sec. 32. Seal.
performed the baptismal rites are produced)
There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents:
Note: - insofar as their admissibility as evidence is concerned. (33a)
- BCs are not sufficient proof of paternity or recognition of a child. It
is only proof of the baptism administered but not the veracity of the Sec. 33. Documentary evidence in an unofficial language.
statements in the certificate concerning the relationship of the person
baptized. (OLD RULE) Documents written in an unofficial language:
- NOW, Art 172 of the Family Code provides: “Filiation of legitimate - shall not be admitted as evidence,
children is established by the record of birth in the civil registry” - UNLESS accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino.
To avoid interruption of proceedings:
Note: BCs may be used to determine the minority of the victim in statutory - parties or their attorneys are directed to have such translation
rape prepared before trial. (34a)
Note: Death Certificates is not proof of the cause of death – its probative Note: Under the 1987 Constitution: “The official languages are Filipino and,
value being confined only to the fact of death until otherwise provided by law, English, with the regional languages as
- Statements therein regarding the duration of illness and the cause of auxiliary official languages in the region”
death are mere hearsay.
- However, it is admissible to prove residence of decedent at the time
of death.
Sec. 31. Alteration in document, how to explain.
The party producing a 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 C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
- was otherwise properly or innocently made, or
Sec. 34. Offer of evidence.
Evidence | Judge Bonifacio | 3B 2009-2010 [This reviewer is lifted from the b ook o f regalado and Beda– not plagiarized you fuckers!] 64 | P a t i ñ o , E r i c a
Testimonial/Oral Evidence Documentary and Object Evidence
The court shall consider NO evidence which has not been formally offered. At the time the witness is called to After the party has presented his
The purpose for which the evidence is offered: testify testimonial evidence, before he rests
- must be specified. (35) Oral Evidence is Always Offered 2x: Offered only once
1. Before the witness testified
Notes: 2. Every time a question is asked of
him (implied offer)
GR: The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally
offered. The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified. Procedure Before Documentary and Object Evidence Can be
EXC: If there was repeated reference thereto in the course of the trial by Considered by the Court
adverse party’s counsel and of the court, indicating that the documents were 1. Marking: To facilitate their identification. May be made during pre-
part of the prosecution’s evidence. trial or trial.
- Two requisites must concur: (Pp v. Napta) 2. Identification: Proof that the document being presented is the same
1. The document must have been duly identified by testimony duly one referred to by the witness in his testimony
recorded. 3. Authentication: Proof of a document’s due execution and
2. The document must have been incorporated to the records of the case. genuineness.
Ex. Presented and marked in the pre-trial and testified as to the details 4. Formal Offer: After the termination of the testimonial evidence, the
and contents and was cross examined. proponent will then make a formal offer and state the purpose for
which the document is presented.
Purpose Why Offer Must be Specified: To determine whether that piece of 5. If the evidence is excluded, an offer of proof
evidence should be admitted or not because such evidence may be admissible 6. Objections: It is only when the proponent rests his case and
for several purposes under the doctrine of multiple admissibility. formally offers the evidence that an objection may be made.
Objection prior thereto is premature
You Follow What is Stated in the Offer: It must be rejected if it is
inadmissible for the purpose stated even if it is admissible for another Identification and Authentication is Not needed in private documents: If
purpose. there is a stipulation on its due execution and genuineness.
Authentication is Not needed in public documents
Sec. 35. When to make offer.
Marking and identifying of evidence as an exhibit does NOT mean that
As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer must be made: it has been offered as part of evidence.
- at the time the witness is called to testify. - Evidence identified and marked as exhibits may be withdrawn before
the formal offer thereof or may not at all be offered as evidence.
Documentary and object evidence shall be offered: - If they are not formally offered in evidence – such cannot be
- AFTER the presentation of a party's testimonial evidence. considered as evidence nor can they be given any evidentiary value.
- Such offer shall be done orally UNLESS allowed by the court to be Note: The SC has admitted evidence to prove mitigating circumstance even
done in writing. (n) if they are not presented or offered in evidence considering the gravity of the
offense and the interest of justice.
When to Make an Offer: Depends on its form:
Sec. 36. Objection. court.
Note: the formal offer of evidence at the time the witness is called to testify
Objection to evidence offered orally must be made: is necessary to enable the court to intelligently rule on any objection.
- immediately after the offer is made. - Proponent must: Show its evidence, materiality and competence
- Adverse party must: Promptly raise any objection thereto
Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a Note: A document admitted not as an independent evidence but merely as
witness shall be made: part of the testimony of a witness does NOT constitute proof of the facts
- as soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably apparent. related therein.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to: Sec. 37.When repetition of objection unnecessary.
- within 3 days AFTER notice of the
- UNLESS a different period is allowed by the court. When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the examination of a
witness:
In any case, the grounds for the objections must be specified. (36a) - that the question being propounded are of the same class as those to
which objection has been made,
Notes: - whether such objection was sustained or overruled,
it shall NOT be necessary to repeat the objection:
Classifications of Objections: - it being sufficient for the adverse party to record his continuing
1. General Objection – It does not go beyond declaring the evidence as objection to such class of questions. (37a)
immaterial, incompetent, irrelevant or inadmissible. It does not specify
the grounds for objection. “Broadside Objection” Note: Here, the party may just enter a general and continuing objection to the
2. Specific Objection – It states why or how the evidence is irrelevant or same class of evidence and the ruling of the court shall be applicable to all
incompetent. such evidence of the same class.
- The court may also motu proprio treat the objection as a continuing one,
Requirements to Exclude Inadmissible Evidence:
1. One has to object to the evidence Sec. 38.Ruling.
2. The objection must be timely made and
3. The grounds for the objection must be specified (specific objections) The ruling of the court must be given:
- immediately AFTER the objection is made,
Effect of General Objection: - UNLESS the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself
- Failure to specify the grounds is a waiver of objection on the question presented;
- BUT when evidence is excluded upon a mere general objection, the but the ruling shall ALWAYS be made:
ruling will be upheld IF any ground in fact existed for the exclusion. - during the trial and
- at such time as will give the party against whom it is made an
When to make Objection: (If not made w/in such time = waived) opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling.
Offer Time to Object
Offered orally Made immediately after the offer is made The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated.
Question propounded in the course Made as soon as the grounds thereof shall - However, IF the objection is based on two or more grounds:
of the oral examination of a witness become reasonably apparent o a ruling sustaining the objection on one or some of them
Offer of evidence in writing W/in 3 days after notice of the offer must specify the ground or grounds relied upon. (38a)
unless a different period is allowed by the
d. Uncompleted testimonies where there was no opportunity for the
Note: The court should only consider evidence for the purpose for which it party to cross-examine
was offered. e. Conditionally admitted evidence not later substantiated.
When Should the Ruling Be Made?
GR: Parties who object is entitled to a ruling at the time the objection is
made Sec. 40.Tender of excluded evidence.
- If no ruling is made, it would prejudice the rights of the client since there
would be no way of knowing if one would be compelled to meet any IF documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court:
evidence. - the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the
- The attorney must inform the court of the lack of ruling – IF NOT: record.
o gr: The case cannot be reopened on such ground. The right to IF the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record:
object is deemed waived and cannot be raised on appeal o the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and
o exc: When there is a serious prejudice on substantial rights – the o the substance of the proposed testimony. (n)
appellate court may consider it a reversible error.
EXC: Unless the parties present a question to which the court desired to Rationale of the Requirement of Attaching Evidence: So that in case of
inform itself before making its ruling. appeal, the appellate court may be able to examine the same and determined
- Here, it is proper for the court to take reasonable time to study the the propriety of their rejection - Since Documents forming no part of proofs
questions before the appellate court cannot be considered in disposing of the case,
otherwise that would infringe upon the constitutional right of the adverse
Sec. 39.Striking out answer. party to due process.
Should a witness answer the question: Erroneous Admission or Rejection of Evidence

- BEFORE the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its - GR: New Trial is warranted
objection to the same, and - EXC: Not a ground for new trial or reversal:
- such objection is found to be meritorious, o IF there are other independent evidence to sustain the decision or
the court shall: o IF in correcting it, would not have changed the decision
- sustain the objection and Note: IF the court discovered such error BEFORE judgment had become
- order the answer given to be stricken off the record. final or BEFORE an appeal had been perfected – it may reopen the case
On proper motion, the court may also: Policy of “Por lo Que Puedo Valer” - The practice of excluding evidence
- order the striking out of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant, on doubtful objections should be avoided.
or otherwise improper. (n) - It is impossible for the judge of first instance to known with certainty
whether testimony is relevant or not and when there is no indication of
Mode of Excluding Inadmissible Evidence bad faith on the attorney offering such evidence – the court as a rule may
1. Objection when the evidence is offered safely accept the testimony upon the statement that the proof offered will
2. Motion to strike out or Expunge – proper in the following cases: be connected later.
a. When the witness answers prematurely before there is reasonable - Greater reason to adhere to such policy in criminal cases when it can lead
opportunity for the party to object (Sec 39) to the erroneous acquittal of the accused which the People can no longer
b. Unresponsive answers appeal.
c. Answers that are incompetent, irrelevant, or improper (Sec 39)
Note: There must be an objection before motion to strike.
The ruling of the court on procedural questions and on admissibility of
evidence during the course of the trial is interlocutory. Requirements for Evidence to Be Worthy of Credit
- They may not be the subject of a separate appeal - Must not only proceed from a credible source but must, in addition,
- They are to be assigned as errors and reviewed in the appeal taken be credible in itself – It must be natural, reasonable and probable as
from the trial court on the merits of the case. to make it easy to believe.
- It should be in accord with the common knowledge and experience
[RULE 133] of mankind
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE GR: Findings of the judge who tried the case and heard the witnesses are not
to be disturbed on appeal
Sec 1.Preponderance of evidence, how determined. EXC: It may be disturbed for good cause: if there are substantial facts and
circumstances which have been overlooked and which, if properly
In civil cases, the party having burden of proof: considered, might effect the result of the case
- must establish his case by a preponderance of evidence.
In determining where the preponderance or superior weight of evidence on ISSUE: Credibility of the Witness
the issues involved lies, the court may consider: - Defined: The witnesses’ is meant his integrity, disposition and
- all the facts and circumstances of the case, intention to tell the truth in the testimony he has given
- the witnesses' manner of testifying, GR: The findings of the TC will not be disturbed on appeal since it is in a
- their intelligence, better position to decide the question, having heard and observed the
- their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which there are demeanor of each witness
testifying, - For the same reason, the matter of assigning values to declarations at
- the nature of the facts to which they testify, the witness stand is best and competently performed by the TC
- the probability or improbability of their testimony, EXCEPTIONS:
- their interest or want of interest, and also 1. It may be disturbed if the TC has plainly overlooked certain facts of
- their personal credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear substance and value which, if properly considered, might effect the
upon the trial. result of the case
The court may also consider: 2. Also, when the identification of the accused or credibility of witness
- the number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily and one judge heard the testimony of the prosecution witness BUT
with the greater number. (1a) different judge penned the decision – GR rule does not apply
Sec. 2.Proof beyond reasonable doubt. Competency of a witness does not mean that the witness is credible or
will be believed by the court.
In a criminal case, the accused: - Facial expressions are not necessarily indicative of one’s feelings.
- is entitled to an acquittal, The TC should not however discredit a witness by the supposed
- UNLESS his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt. expression of lack of sincerity in his face, the judge should put that
Proof beyond reasonable doubt: fact on the record and allow the witness to explain
- does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of - Demeanor, emphasis gestures, inflection of the voice aids the proper
error, produces absolute certainly. evaluation of credibility
Moral certainly ONLY is required, OR that degree of proof which produces - The fact that a person has reached the “twilight of his life” (advance
conviction in an unprejudiced mind. (2a) age) is not always a guaranty that he would tell the truth
Notes:
- The facts adduced in a record of a preliminary investigation are o It appears to be trustworthy and reliable, clear and
evidence ONLY for the purpose of testing the credibility of the convincing
witness o NOT if there is unexplained contradictions on an important
detail
ISSUE: Number of Witness - Testimony of the offended party is not essential to convict an
- GR: The number of witness should not in and by itself determine he accused if there are already other evidence to prove such guilt
weight of evidence - The fact that the prosecution w/o explanation failed to call several
- EXC: In case of conflicting testimonies of witness – such factor may witnesses mentioned in the information – gives rise to the
be given certain weight presumption that their testimonies would not be favorable to the
prosecution’s cause.
Note: The failure of a party to present merely corroborative or cumulative - Delays of a witness in revealing what he knows about a crime does
evidence does not give rise to any adverse or unfavorable presumption not render his testimony false since there is always the inherent fear
or reprisal in criminal cases. Such delay if satisfactorily explained
2 Conflicting Testimonies of 1 Witness 2 Witnesses w/ Conflicting does not undermine her credibility
Testimonies - The refusal of a person to submit to investigation to explain the
The court can accept either statement as proof The court shall adopt the innocent role he professes is inconsistent with the normal reaction of
Note: If the witness gives a false testimony - testimony which he believes an innocent man.
he impeaches his own testimony and the court to be true - GR: The mere relationship of the witness to the victim does not
should exclude it from all consideration impair his positive and clear testimony nor render the same less
Note: The most subtle and prolific of all fallacies of testimony arises out of worthy of credit; EXC: When there is a showing of improper motive
“unconscious partisanship” (ex. Passengers and driver in an accident) - Using as witnesses persons who were accomplices w/o including
them in the information – does not render the testimony inadmissible
- The identity of the offender like the crime must be proved beyond
Bias, defined: That which motivates the disposition to see and report matters reasonable doubt
as they are wished for rather than as they are Rules on Conspiracy
- It is present when a witnesses’ relation to the cause or to the parties - Conspiracy need not be established by direct evidence
is such that he has an incentive to exaggerate or give false color to - It may be proved by: A number of indicative acts, conditions and
his statements or to suppress or pervert the truth, or to state what is circumstances
false. - It may be proved by circumstantial evidence but it must be proved
- Bias is NOT a factor: When the witnesses on both sides are equally with as much certainty as the crime itself.
interested or biased, especially if there is no numerical - It may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense
preponderance on either side. was committed
- The testimony of an interested witness is not necessarily biased, Rule on Qualifying or Aggravating Evidence:
incredible or self-serving - It must be proved in an evident and incontestable manner.
- It must be proved as conclusively as the acts constituting the offense.
Testimonies in Criminal Cases Rule on Proving Self-defense
- Testimony of a co-conspirator or an accomplice is admissible – since - The one claiming self-defense must rely on the strength of his own
it comes from a polluted source, it must be scrutinized with caution defense and not on the weakness of the prosecution
- The testimony of a SINGLE witness may be sufficient to produce - Self-defense must be proved by “clear and convincing” evidence
conviction IF: Rule on Alibi
- Alibi is one of the weakest defense since it is easily susceptible of - Corroboration is NOT required in the crime of rape (EXC. when the
concoction – hence must be viewed w/ suspicion point at issue is whether the act was committed w/ or w/o the use of
- It may be considered ONLY: by “positive, clear and satisfactory force or threat – such testimony should be scrutinized with the
evidence” greatest caution)
- The accused must not only prove his alibi but also that it was
physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime Note: The testimony of persons accidentally present at the time of the
- Such defense becomes weaker when not corroborated execution of the will is not weighty as that of the subscribing witness
- Still, the prosecution still has the onus probandi in establishing the
guilt of the accused and the weakness of the defense does not relieve Affirmative Testimony v. Negative Testimony
it from such responsibility - Affirmative testimony has greater weight than negative testimony
- Defense of alibi must be predicated on substantial and reliable - Negative testimony cannot prevail over positive statements
evidence sufficient and reliable to engender reasonable doubt - In weighing contradictory declarations – greater weight is given to
Note: When the accused withdraws his appeal after realizing the futility of positive testimony
his defense and the other escapes from confinement – said acts are Note: Witnesses admittedly present while a fact is taking place may not
unmistakable signs of guilt. coincide in describing all the details of the occurrence. It doesn’t necessarily
- Flight of the accused is evidence of guilt; however, non-flight is not imply falsehood.
indicative of innocence.
Effect of Falsehood
Rules on Inconsistent or Contradictory testimony - When a party resorts to falsehood to advance his suit – it is presumed
- If they refer to mere insignificant details – they do not materially that he knows perfectly well that his cause is groundless
impair the credibility of witness - Falsehood, fraud, fabrication or suppression of evidence are receivable as
o It does not affect the material points. indications of his consciousness that his cause is weak or unfounded
o They indicate veracity rather than prevarication and only
tend to bolster the probative value of such testimony Rules on Affidavits
- They are subordinated in importance to open court declarations
“Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus”: When testimony is believed in part (Since they are oftentimes executed when the affiant is at a high pitch of
and disbelieved in part depending upon the corroborative evidence and the excitement and when his mental state is not as to afford him a fair
probabilities of the case opportunity of narrating in full the incident when it transpired)
- Deals only with the weight of evidence and is not a positive rule of - They are not complete reproductions of what the declarant has in
law. It is not an absolute one nor mandatory and binding upon the mind (since the are generally prepared by the administering officer)
court which may accept or reject the witnesses’ testimony - Ex parte affidavits are generally incomplete, hence discrepancies
- Does NOT Apply: between the statements of the affiant and that made on the witness stand
o When the challenged testimony is sufficiently corroborated do not necessarily discredit him
on many grounds - It is an affidavit is only prima facie evidence of weak probative force
o When such mistakes do not arise from an apparent desire to - When the affidavit is inconsistent with the testimony – the latter is
pervert the truth but from innocent lapses and the desire of invariably believed.
the witness to exculpate himself although not completely - Omissions and misunderstandings by the writer are not infrequent.
Note: These rules do not apply when the omission in the affidavit refers to a
Rules on Corroborative Testimonies very important detail
- Non-production of a corroborative witness w/o any explanation –
weakens the testimony of the witness to be corroborated
Non-Payment of Taxes: Indicative of the fact that the claimant does not 6. The suggestiveness of the identification procedure
believe himself to be the owner of the property.
Continuous Payment: Great weight in favor of ownership 12 Danger Signals That the Identification May be Erroneous
1. The witness originally stated that he could not identify anyone
Tax declarations: NOT conclusive evidence of ownership BUT if 2. The witness knew the accused before the crime but made no
accompanied by open, adverse and continued possession in the concept of an accusation against him when questioned by the police
owner – they constitute evidence of great weight 3. A serious discrepancy exists between the witness’ original
description and his actual description of the accused
On the Motive of the Accused in a Criminal Case 4. Before identifying the accused at the trial, the witness erroneously
GR: Motive is immaterial and since it is not an element of a crime – it need identified some other person
not be proved 5. Other witnesses of the crime fail to identify the accused
- Mere proof of motive, no matter how string, cannot sustain a 6. Before trial, the witness sees the accused but fails to identity him
conviction if there is no other evidence establishing the guilt of the 7. Before the commission of the crime, the witness had limited
accused opportunity to see the accused
8. The witness and the person identified are of different racial groups
EXC: Evidence of motive is relevant or essential in the ff instances: 9. During his original observation of the offender, the witness was
1. When the identity of the assailant is in question unaware that a crime was involved
2. To determine the voluntariness of the criminal act or the sanity of the 10. A considerable time elapsed between the witness’ view and his
accused identification of the accused
3. To determine from which side the unlawful aggression commenced, as 11. Several persons committed the crime
where the accused invoked self-defense wherein unlawful aggression on 12. The witness failed to make a positive trial identification
the part of his opponent is an essential element
4. To determine the specific nature of the crime committed (ex. When Res Ipsa Loquitor (“the thing speaks for itself”)
murder is during a rebellion) - Rule that the fact of the occurrence of an injury taken with the
5. To determine whether a shooting was intentional or accidental surrounding circumstances, may permit an inference or raise a
6. When the accused contends that he acted in defense of a stranger since presumption of negligence, or make out a plaintiff’s prima facie case
he must not have been motivated by revenge - The rule is however, considered as merely evidentiary or in the
7. When the evidence is circumstantial or inconclusive and there is a doubt nature of a procedural rule – the application does NOT dispense with
whether a crime has been committed or whether the accused has the requisite of proof of negligence.
committed it.
8. When it is an element of the offense (ex. To show malice in libel) Sec. 3.Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground for conviction.
Rule on Identification of Suspects: The “Totality of Circumstances” Test An extrajudicial confession made by an accused:
- Such test utilizes the following factors - shall not be sufficient ground for conviction,
1. The witness’ opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the - UNLESS corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (3)
crime
2. The witness’ degree of attention at that time
3. The accuracy of any prior description given by the witness Corpus Delicti, defined: Actual commission of someone of the particular
4. The level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the crime charged.
identification - Literally means “The body or the substance of the crime”
5. The length of time between the crime and the identification and
- It is the actual commission by someone of the particular crimes (a))There is more than one circumstance;
charged. (b) The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
Elements: (c)The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a
1. The existence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the conviction beyond reasonable doubt. (5)
criminal charge and
2. The existence of a criminal agency as the cause of the act or result Notes:
(someone criminally responsible)
Note: The identity of the accuse is NOT a necessary element In Order to Convict on the Strength of Circumstantial Evidence (CE)
How Proved?: When the evidence on record shows that the crime prosecute Alone:
had been committed - It is incumbent on the prosecution to present such CE which will and
must necessarily lead to the conclusion that the accused is guilty of
Corpus Delicti in THEFT the crime charged beyond reasonable doubt.
1. That the property was lost by the owner and
2. That it was lost by a felonious taking GR: CE is sufficient even for a capital offense
Note: The fact of the crime of theft may be established even w/o recovery of EXC: When the law specified the species and quantum of evidence (ex.
the thing stolen Treason)
Corpus Delicti in ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM

1. The existence of the firearm When CE does NOT suffice to sustain conviction:
2. That it has been actually held with animus possidendi by the accused - Falsification
w/o the corresponding license. - Bigamy, adultery, parricide (evidence of 1st marriage is necessary),
- libel through written publications
Corpus Delicti in MURDER
- The fact of death Note: Not only prior and coetaneous actuations of the accused in relation to
- Note: If there is doubt as to the identity of the cadaver – there is no the crime but also his acts or conduct after thereto can be considered as CE of
corpus delicti Guilt
Requirement of Independent Evidence of the Corpus Delicti Note: Motive becomes important when the evidence of the crime is purely
- Mere EX-J confession uncorroborated by independent proof of circumstantial
corpus delicti is NOT sufficient to sustain a judgment of conviction
- The evidence may be circumstantial, but just the same, there must be Sec. 5.Substantial evidence.
some evidence substantiating the confession
- Corpus Delicti is NOT synonymous with the whole charge so as to In cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be
require that all the elements of the crime be established (Hence for a deemed established IF:
complex crime of robbery with murder – corpus delicti of only - it is supported by substantial evidence, or
murder will still be admissible although there is no independent - that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might
evidence of robbery) accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. (n)
Sec. 4.Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. Note: Substantial Evidence does not necessarily mean preponderant proof as
required in ordinary civil cases, but:
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
1. That amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion or
2. Evidence commonly accepted by reasonably prudent man in the
conduct of their affiants
In Civil Cases: The proponent must establish the case by preponderance of

evidence
- If there is an equiponderance of evidence (same weight) – the court
will find for the defendant – same rule will apply in criminal cases –
if there is an equiponderance , the prosecution will lose
Sec. 6.Power of the court to stop further evidence.
The court may stop the introduction of further testimony upon any particular
point when:
- the evidence upon it is already so full that more witnesses to the
same point cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive.
- But this power should be exercised with caution. (6)
Note: The court has the power to stop the introduction of testimony which
will merely be cumulative
Sec. 7.Evidence on motion.
When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record:

- the court may hear the matter on affidavits or depositions presented
by the respective parties,
- BUT the court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly
on oral testimony or depositions. (7)
Note: If the affidavits contradict each other on matters of fact – the court can
have no basis to make its findings of fact and the prudent course is to subject
the affiants to cross-examination

Evidence (Reviewer)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evidence (Reviewer)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RULES OF EVIDENCE

Based on the Book of Regalado

Rules on Extrajudicial Admissions:

Rules on Contradicting Judicial Admissions

Requirement of “Notice” Demanding the Original Document:

When Can Parol Evidence of a Collateral Agreement (CA) Between the

Note: False description shall not vitiate a document IF the subject is

Sec. 10. Interpretation of a writing according to its legal meaning.

Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Privileged Communication 2. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE

Notes: Application of the Requirement that the Conspiracy must Preliminarily

The rule on admission by silence applies:

Note: Judgment based solely on a vitiated confession is NULL and VOID

Admissibility of EX-J Confessions

Reasons for such Admission

Ex. Mortality tables, annuity tables

EXCEPTION NO. 9: COMMERCIAL LISTS

Sec. 45.Commercial lists and the like.

Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons:

Requisites for Admissibility

Requisites for Admissibility

Reasons for admission

Inability to Testify: Inability proceeding from a grave cause, almost

Actions may be Essentially Different: Testimony given in a civil case is

Rule on Admissibility of Prior Judgment (Not testimony)

Requisites for Admissibility

Sec. 50. Opinion of ordinary witnesses.

In BOTH Criminal and Civil Cases

Sec 1. Burden of proof.

Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in

Burden of Proof or “onus probandi”, defined: Obligation imposed upon a

To Sustain Preliminary Investigation Issuance of Warrant Quantum of Evidence Required:

2 Separate Burdens in Burden of Proof

Plaintiff Has the burden of proof to show Note: It is required that

Principle of Negative Averments (NA)

Sec. 2. Conclusive presumptions. Sec. 3. Disputable presumptions.

(r)That there was a sufficient consideration for a contract;

In Order for Presumption (JJ) to Apply, It is Necessary That:

Presumption is the same as the rule in Art 43 of the CC

Sec 1. Examination to be done in open court.

The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing:

Sec.2. Proceedings to be recorded.

The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, INC:

A transcript of the record of the proceedings:

How Oral Evidence is Given

How Testimony of the Witness Should be Elicited Notes:

Classification of Immunity Statutes

What Rule Do we Follow? - BOTH

Doctrine of Incomplete Testimony: When cross-examination cannot be

Application of the Power of Exclusion: Applies only to the witnesses and

Application of the Article – ONLY when it is shown beforehand that there

Note: When a special power of attorney is executed and acknowledged

Sec. 31. Alteration in document, how to explain.

The party producing a document as genuine:

He may show that the alteration:

When to Make an Offer: Depends on its form:

Should a witness answer the question: Erroneous Admission or Rejection of Evidence

Corpus Delicti in ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM

In Civil Cases: The proponent must establish the case by preponderance of

Sec. 6.Power of the court to stop further evidence.

Sec. 7.Evidence on motion.

When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record:

You might also like