LAW ON EVIDENCE

ATTY. RONEY JONE P. GANDEZA

PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS
Baguio City 2600
INTRODUCTION TO EVIDENCE
 CONCEPT OF EVIDENCE

• Evidence is the means sanctioned by the Rules

of Court of ascertaining in a judicial
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of
fact. (Sec. 1, Rule 128)
• To be considered evidence, a particular
circumstance must be sanctioned or allowed
by the Rules of Court.
• EXAMPLE: A coerced extrajudicial confession
does not fall within the definition of evidence
because it is not sanctioned by the Rules.
QUESTION:
Why is evidence required?

ANSWER:
• Evidence is required because of the
presumption that the court is not aware of
the facts involved in a case.
• It is therefore incumbent upon the parties to
prove a fact in issue thru the presentation of
admissible evidence.
 SCOPE OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all
courts and in all trials and hearings, except as
otherwise provided by law or by the Rules of
Court. (Sec. 2, Rule 128)
The rules of evidence do not apply to:
• Cadastral Cases
• Land Registration Cases
• Insolvency and
• Naturalization Proceedings
• Election Cases
except by analogy or in suppletory character. (Sec. 4,
Rule 1, Rules of Court)
QUESTION:
In point of time, what law determines the
admissibility of evidence?
ANSWER:
• The admissibility or inadmissibility of evidence is
determined in accordance with the law in force
at the time the evidence is offered.
• There is no vested right of evidence.
• Evidence otherwise inadmissible under the law
at the time the action accrued may be received
in evidence, provided that it is admissible under
the law in force during the trial.
 EVIDENCE IN CIVIL AND
CRIMINAL CASES
QUANTUM OF PROOF:
• In civil cases, the party having the burden
of proof must prove his claim by
preponderance of evidence.
• In criminal cases, the guilt of the accused
must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
OFFER OF COMPROMISE:
• In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an
admission of any liability, and is not admissible
in evidence against the offeror.
• In criminal cases, an offer of compromise by the
accused may be received in evidence as an
implied admission of guilt.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE:
• In civil cases, the concept of presumption of
innocence does not apply.
• In criminal cases, the accused enjoys the
constitutional presumption of innocence.
 FACTUM PROBANDUM
FACTUM PROBANS
FACTUM PROBANDUM:
The ultimate fact or the proposition which is
sought to be established by a party. This is
hypothetical in character.
FACTUM PROBANS:
The intermediate facts or the materials which
establish the proposition. This exists as a fact.
NOTE: Every evidentiary question involves the
relationship between the factum probandum and
the factum probans.
QUESTION:
How are the rules of evidence construed?
ANSWER:
• The rules of evidence must be liberally
construed (Section 6, Rule 1).
• Rules of Procedure are mere tools intended to
facilitate rather than to frustrate the
attainment of justice.
• A strict and rigid application of the rules must
always be eschewed if it would subvert their
primary objective of enhancing substantial
justice.
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE
DIRECT EVIDENCE:
This is evidence which goes to prove the fact in
dispute directly without the aid of any
inference or presumption.
It includes testimony of what is heard as well as
what is seen, or whatever is perceived by the
five senses.
EXAMPLE: Witness testifies that he saw the
accused hack the victim with a bolo.
REAL EVIDENCE:
This is evidence furnished by things or physical
objects on view or inspection, as distinguished
from description thereof by witnesses. (e.g.
scars, marks, photos).
Sometimes called “Autoptic Proference.”
EXAMPLE: Rape victim identifies the
undergarment she was wearing at the time of
the rape.
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE:
• Also known as indirect evidence.
• It arises from direct evidence, or a
combination of direct and real evidence.
• It consists of inferences logically drawn from
known facts.
• The main fact is arrived at through a process
of simple deduction based on the common
experience of mankind.
EXAMPLE:
• Witness testifies that he saw the accused
running away from the place where the
victim was found with stab wounds.
• Another witness testifies that the clothing of
the accused was stained with blood when the
accused arrived home.
• Another witness testifies that the accused
had a bolo stained with blood.
QUESTION:
When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to
convict the accused?
ANSWER:
It is sufficient for conviction if:
1. There is more than one circumstance.
2. The facts from which the inferences are derived
are proven. and
3. The combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt. (Sec. 4, Rule 133; People vs Sevilleno, G.R.
No. 152954, March 11, 2004)
CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE:
This is evidence which is of a different kind
as that already given and which tends to
prove the same proposition or point.
EXAMPLE: A prosecution witness testifies
that her husband died because of stab
wounds inflicted by armed men who
entered their residence on the night of
December 25.
The death certificate of the deceased is only
corroborative of the testimony of the
witness.
CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE:
This is evidence which is of the same kind and
character as that already given and which
tends to prove the same proposition or point.
EXAMPLE: Issue is literacy of the plaintiff.
Evidence of plaintiff’s school teachers and
classmates as to plaintiff’s literacy is
cumulative to that upon the same question.
POSITIVE EVIDENCE:
Evidence is positive if witness states affirmatively
that a certain event did or did not occur.
NEGATIVE EVIDENCE:
Evidence is negative if witness states he did not
see or did not know of the occurrence of a fact and
there is total disclaimer of personal knowledge.
NOTE: testimony in negative form may amount to
positive testimony, depending upon whether the
witness was in a favorable position to hear or
observe, and whether he was paying attention.
 ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES

POSITIVE: witness did not see or hear something

he would have seen or heard.
EXAMPLE: W testifies that he saw A set fire the
house of B on a specific date and time.
NEGATIVE: witness did not see or hear because he
was not paying any attention.
EXAMPLE: W testifies that he was on that occasion
at the place where the house of B was burned and
that he was busy with his cellular phone so he did
not see A set fire on the house of B.
CASE DOCTRINE:
• Mere denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and
convincing evidence, has no weight in law
and cannot be given greater evidentiary value
than the positive testimony of the
complaining witness.
• Denial is intrinsically weak, being a negative
and self-serving assertion. (People v. Rodas, G.R. No.
175881, Aug. 28, 2007)
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE: that which suffices for
the proof of a particular fact, until contradicted
and overcome by other evidence.
EXAMPLE: Entries made by security guard in a
logbook.
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE: that which is
incontrovertible.
EXAMPLE: Letter written by the accused to the
victim threatening to kill the latter.
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
 ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
AND WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE

• The admissibility of a particular item of evidence

has to do with whether a circumstance meets the
various tests by which its reliability is to be
determined, so as to be considered with other
evidence admitted in the case, in arriving at a
decision as to the truth.
• The weight has something to do with the effect
of evidence admitted, its tendency is to convince
and persuade.
EXAMPLE:
A is accused of murder. He attempts to establish
alibi as defense:
1. A’s mother testifies that he was at home in bed
at the time the murder was committed.
2. A distinguished physician testifies that he was
attending to the accused in his home at the
time the murder was committed.
Both (1) and (2) are equally admissible. But it is
likely that the court would give greater weight to
the testimony of the disinterested physician than
of a mother, who might be expected to commit
perjury in an effort to save her son.
 DIFFERENT KINDS OF
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY:
If a fact is offered for one purpose and is
admissible insofar as it satisfies all rules
applicable to it when offered for that purpose, its
failure to satisfy some other rule which would be
applicable to it if offered for another purpose
does not exclude it.
EXAMPLE: The declaration of a DYING PERSON
person regarding the circumstances of his death
may be inadmissible as a dying declaration but
may received as part of the res gestae.
 CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY:
• When two or more evidentiary facts are so
connected under the issues that the relevancy of
one depends upon another not yet evidenced,
and the party is unable to introduce them both at
the same moment, the offering party may be
required by the court, as a condition precedent,
to state the supposed connecting facts and to
produce them later.
• If the promise is not fulfilled, such fact already
received will be stricken off the record at the
initiative of the other party.
EXAMPLE:
P v. D for recovery of land.
At the trial, P offers a series of deeds of sale
from L to M, from M to N, and from N to O. On
objection to the relevancy of the deeds, P
states that his title from O depends on an
heirship between O and P, and that he will later
produce evidence of this heirship. The deeds
are admissible, conditionally, on later
production of evidence of heirship.
CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY:
An eye for an eye rule on evidence.
Where an inadmissible fact has been offered by
one party and received without objection, and
the opponent afterwards, for the purpose of
counteracting it, offers a fact similarly
inadmissible, such fact is admissible if it serves
to remove an unfair effect upon the court
which might otherwise ensue from the original
fact.
EXAMPLE:
P vs. D for a breach of contract action.
In the course of P’s evidence, a letter of P is
introduced in which he charged D with having
swindled him in an earlier contract of the same
nature. This is irrelevant and should not have
been admitted.
However, if D offers evidence to explain that
the former transaction was perfectly honest on
his part, the evidence is admissible.
 REQUISITES FOR
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
RELEVANCY:
Evidence is relevant if it has such a relation to the
fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or
non-existence.
COMPETENCY:
Evidence is competent if it is not excluded by law
or by the rules.
QUESTION:
When is evidence relevant?
ANSWER:
• Evidence is relevant when it has such
a relation to the fact in issue as to
induce a belief as to its existence or
non-existence or its probability or
improbability.
• The tendency of relevant evidence is
its essential quality of persuasiveness.
EXAMPLE:
Plaintiff versus Defendant for
damages. Plaintiff claims that he was
bitten by Defendant’s dog which
Defendant knew to be ferocious.
The fact that the dog had previously
bitten X, Y, and Z and that they made
complaints to Defendant are relevant
to the damage suit filed by Plaintiff
against Defendant.
IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE:
Evidence is irrelevant if it has no bearing on the
fact in issue.
EXAMPLE:
D is indebted to a bank. When the obligation falls
due, he fails to pay and the bank sues for
collection.
As part of the evidence of the bank, the bank
accountant is placed on the stand and in the
course of his examination he is asked if he, in
turn, is also indebted to the bank.
If D’s counsel objects on the ground that the
question is irrelevant, the objection should be
sustained because the issue is D’s indebtedness
and not the indebtedness of the accountant.
QUESTION:
When is evidence competent?

ANSWER:
Evidence is competent when it is not
excluded by law in particular case.

EXAMPLE: Statute of Frauds.

 COLLATERAL MATTER

• A COLLATERAL MATTER is a matter

outside the controversy or is not
directly connected with the principal
matter or issue in dispute.
• A collateral matter is a term which
connotes an absence of a direct
connection between the evidence
and the matter in dispute.
RULE ON COLLATERAL MATTERS:
Collateral matters are not allowed
because they draw away the mind of the
court from the point at issue, and excite
prejudice and mislead. (Sec. 4, Rule 128)
EXAMPLE:
The motive of a person may be considered
collateral to the issue in a homicide case
because a very strong motive does not ipso
facto make it relevant to the issue of guilt
or innocence because a person with
absolutely no motive to kill could be the
culprit.
 ADMISSIBLE
COLLATERAL MATTER

A collateral matter may be admitted

in evidence if it tends in any
reasonable degree to establish the
probability or improbability of the
fact in issue. (Sec. 4, Rule 128)
EXAMPLE:
When it is disputed whether a person did or
did not do an act, the fact that he had a
motive or reason for doing it emphasizes
the likelihood that he did do it.
Also, evidence that the accused owns a
handgun with which the slaying was
accomplished would be persuasive that he
was the killer.
JUDICIAL NOTICE
QUESTION:
What are the facts that need not be proved?
ANSWER:

• Those which the courts may take judicial

notice. (Rule 129)
• Those that are judicially admitted. (Rule 129)
• Those that are conclusively presumed. (Rule 131)
and
• Those that are disputably presumed but
uncontradicted. (Rule 131)
 CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

• When a case comes to trial, there is a

presumption that the court is uninformed
concerning the facts involved; it is incumbent
upon the parties to the case to bring in
evidence to prove their respective claims.
• However, there are many facts which need not
be proved, such as matters of common
knowledge known to all intelligent persons, as
well as facts readily ascertainable without proof,
proof of which would be idle and unnecessary.
These are matters of judicial notice.
• Judicial notice takes the place of proof and is of
equal force. It replaces evidence and stands for
the same thing. What is known need not be
proved.
• The principle of judicial notice may be described
as a judicial shortcut, based upon convenience
and expediency to save time, trouble and
expense otherwise lost in establishing facts
already known and which do not admit of
contradiction.
EXAMPLE: Complainant testifies that he was
assaulted in Quezon City. It would be ridiculous to
require the prosecution to prove that a place
called Quezon City exists.
 REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

• The matter must be one of common and

general knowledge.
• It must be well and authoritatively settled
and not doubtful or uncertain.
• It must be one which is not subject to a
reasonable dispute. (Expertravel & Tours, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
152392, May 26, 2005).
QUESTION:
When is a matter considered of “common
knowledge”?
ANSWER:
They are those matters coming to the
knowledge of men generally in the course of
ordinary experiences of life, or they may be
matters which are generally accepted by
mankind as true and are capable of ready and
unquestioned demonstration.
 MANDATORY AND
DISCRETIONARY JUDICIAL NOTICE
MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE:
No motion or hearing is necessary for the court
to take judicial notice of a fact. This is a matter
which a court must take judicial notice of.
DISCRETIONARY JUDICIAL NOTICE:
A hearing may be necessary before judicial
notice is taken of a certain matter. This is a
matter which the court may or may not take
judicial notice of.
DISCRETIONARY JUDICIAL NOTICE

QUESTION:
What is discretionary notice?
ANSWER:
A court may take judicial notice of matters
which are:
• of public knowledge;
• capable of unquestionable demonstration;
• ought to be known to judges because of their
judicial functions.
 REQUIREMENTS OF
DISCRETIONARY JUDICIAL NOTICE

• The matter must be one of common knowledge.

(Facebook is a popular social networking site)
• The matter must be beyond reasonable doubt.
(The Philippines is predominantly a Christian
country)
• The knowledge must exist within the jurisdiction
of the court. (Ilocano is widely spoken in Baguio
City)
QUESTION:
In discretionary judicial notice, when is hearing
necessary?
ANSWER:
DURING TRIAL: The court on its own initiative, or
on request of a party, may announce its intention
to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the
parties to be heard thereon.
AFTER TRIAL BUT BEFORE JUDGMENT OR ON
APPEAL: The proper court, on its own initiative or
on request of a party, may take judicial notice of
any matter and allow the parties to be heard
thereon if such matter is decisive of a material
issue in the case.
 MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE
• The existence and territorial extent of states.
(North and South Korea are divided along the 48th
parallel; US has 50 states)
• Political history, forms of government and symbols
of nationality of states. (China adopts a socialist
economy)
• The law of nations. (Treaty establishing the
European Union)
• The admiralty and maritime courts of the world
and their seals.
• The political constitution and history of the
Philippines. (1987 Constitution)
• The official acts of the legislative, executive
and judicial departments of the Philippines.
(laws are passed after three readings)
• The laws of nature. (survival of the fittest)
• The measure of time. (24 hours in a day)
• The geographical divisions. (location of
political subdivisions)
QUESTION:
May the RTC motu proprio take judicial notice that
the street name or popular name of
metamphetamine hydrochloride is shabu?
ANSWER:
Yes, because the chemical composition of shabu is
the same as metamphetamine hydrochloride, a
fact which is of unquestionable demonstration.
 JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
FOREIGN LAWS
GENERAL RULE:
A foreign law is not within the scope of judicial notice. It
has to be alleged and proved as a fact in accordance with
the rules of evidence.
EXCEPTION:
When foreign laws are within the actual
knowledge of the court and such laws are:
• generally known;
• actually ruled upon in other cases before it;
• None of the parties claim otherwise.
 PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION

• if the proper foreign law is not established as a

fact, the presumption arises that the foreign law is
identical with the local law.
• EFFECT: The court is legally mandated to apply the
local law.
• The doctrine of processual presumption is also
known as the presumed identical approach
doctrine.
 JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
LOCAL ORDINANCES

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS are required to take

judicial notice of the ordinances of the
municipality or city wherein they sit.
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS must take judicial notice
of local ordinances only:
• When expressly authorized to do so by statute;
or
• In case on appeal before them and wherein the
inferior court took judicial notice of an ordinance
involved in the same case.
APPELLATE COURTS may also take judicial
notice of ordinances not only because the
lower courts took judicial notice thereof but
because these are facts capable of
unquestionable demonstration. (Riano, Evidence: A
Restatement for the Bar, pp. 90-91, 2009 ed.)
 JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
RECORDS OF OTHER CASES

GENERAL RULE:
Courts are not authorized to take judicial notice
of the contents of the records of other cases,
even when such cases have been tried or are
pending in the same court, and
notwithstanding the fact that both cases may
have been heard or are actually pending before
the same judge. (Calamba Steel Center, Inc. v. CIR, G.R. No.
151857, Apr. 28, 2005)
EXCEPTIONS:
• When in the absence of any objection, with the
knowledge of the opposing party, the contents
of said other cases are clearly referred to by title
and number in a pending action and adopted or
read into the record of the latter.

• When the original record of the other case or

any part of it is actually withdrawn from the
archives at the court’s discretion upon the
request, or with the consent of the parties, and
admitted as part of the record of the pending
case. (Jumamil v. Cafe, G.R. No. 144570, Sept. 21, 2005)
• When the action is closely interrelated to
another case pending between the same
parties;
• Where the interest of the public in ascertaining
the truth are of paramount importance;
• In cases seeking to determine what is
reasonable exercise of discretion or whether or
not the previous ruling is applicable in a case
under consideration;
• Where there is finality of a judgment in another
case that was previously pending determination
and therefore, res judicata. (Herrera, Vol. V, pp. 89-90,
1999 ed.)
PROBLEM:
A and B are accused of killing C. Only A is arrested
because B goes into hiding. After trial, A is
acquitted of the crime charged in a decision
rendered by Judge X.
Shortly thereafter, B is arrested and brought to
trial. After trial, B is found guilty of homicide in a
decision rendered by Judge Y, the judge who
replaced Judge X after the latter retired.
On appeal, B contends that Judge Y should have
taken judicial notice of the acquittal of A in the
decision rendered by Judge X.
Is B correct?
ANSWER:
No. The appreciation of one judge of the
testimony of a certain witness is not binding on
another judge who heard the testimony of the
same witness on the same matter. Each magistrate
who hears the testimony of a witness is called
upon to make his own appreciation of the
evidence.
It is, therefore, illogical to argue that because one
judge made a conclusion in a certain way with
respect to one or more of the accused, it
necessarily dictates that the succeeding judge who
heard the same case against the other accused
should automatically make the same conclusion.
(People v. Langit, G.R. Nos. 134757-58, Aug. 4, 2000)
 JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

All courts must take judicial notice of the

decisions of the Supreme Court, and this is so
because they are duty bound to know the
rulings of the highest tribunal and to apply
them in the adjudication of cases,
jurisprudence being a part of our judicial
system
 JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
A JUDICIAL ADMISSION is an admission, verbal or
written, made by a party in the course of the
proceedings in the same case, which does not
require proof.
•ELEMENTS:
• It must be made by a party to the case or his
counsel.
• It must be made in the course of the proceedings
in the same case. and
• It can be verbal or written admission. There is no
particular form required.
 JUDICIAL AND
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Those made in the course
of the proceeding in the same case.
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Those made out of
court or in a judicial proceeding other than the
one under consideration.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: They do not require proof
and may be contradicted only by showing that it
was made through palpable mistake or that no
such admission was made.
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: They are regarded
as evidence and must be offered as such,
otherwise the court will not consider it in deciding
the case.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: need not be offered in evidence
because it is not evidence. It is superior to evidence and
shall be considered by the court as established.
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Require formal offer for it
to be considered.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Conclusive upon the admitter.
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Rebuttable.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Admissible even if self-serving.
EXTRA JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Not admissible if self-
serving.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Subject to cross-examination.
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS: Not subject to cross-
examination.
QUESTION:
When are judicial admissions made?
ANSWER:
Judicial admissions may be made by the party
himself or by his counsel:
• in the pleadings filed by the parties.
• during the trial, either by verbal or written
manifestations or stipulations, including
depositions, written interrogatories and requests
for admissions.
• in other stages of the judicial proceedings, as in
preliminary conference or pre-trial.
QUESTION:
What remedy is available to a party who gives a
judicial admission?
ANSWER:
IF THE ADMISSION IS IN WRITING:
File a motion to withdraw such pleading, or any
other written instrument containing such
admission.
IF THE ADMISSION IS ORAL:
The counsel of the party may move for the
exclusion of such admission.
QUESTION:
What are the rules on admissions made in
pleadings?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE: The facts alleged in a party’s
pleading are deemed admissions and are
binding upon that party.
EXCEPTION: Hypothetical admissions made by
a party litigant, as when a defendant moves to
dismiss a case on lack of jurisdiction or sets up
an affirmative defense.
QUESTION:
Suppose an admission is made in a pleading which
has been withdrawn or amended by a party, is the
admission still binding on the party who made
such admission?
ANSWER:
Admissions in a pleading which had been
withdrawn or superseded by an amended
pleading, although filed in the same case, are
considered as extrajudicial admissions. The
original must be proved by the party who relies
thereon by formally offering it in evidence. (Torres v.
CA, G.R. Nos. L-37420-21, July 31, 1984)
QUESTION:
Are judicial admissions made by the accused
during his arraignment binding upon him?
ANSWER:
No. A plea of guilt entered by the accused may
be later withdrawn by him at any time before
the judgment of conviction becomes final. Such
plea is not admissible in evidence against the
accused and is not even considered as an
extrajudicial admission.
QUESTION:
What are the legal consequences of judicial
admissions?
ANSWER:
• A party who judicially admits a fact cannot later
challenge that fact because judicial admissions
constitute waiver of proof; production of
evidence is dispensed with;
• No evidence is needed to prove a judicial
admission and it cannot be contradicted unless
it is shown to have been made through palpable
mistake or that no such admission was made.
OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
QUESTION:
What is object evidence?
ANSWER:
Object evidence, also known as real evidence,
demonstrative evidence, autoptic proference
and physical evidence, is that evidence which is
addressed to the senses of the court. (Sec. 1, Rule
130)

It is not limited to the view of an object; it

extends to the visual, auditory, tactile,
gustatory, and olfactory. It is considered as
evidence of the highest order.
QUESTION:
What are the requisites for admissibility of
object evidence?

ANSWER:
• relevant to the fact in issue.
• authenticated.
• not hearsay.
• not privileged.
• meet any additional requirement set by law.
QUESTION:

What are the purposes of authentication of

object evidence?
ANSWER:

• prevent the introduction of an object

different from the one testified about.
• ensure that there has been no significant
changes in the object’s condition.
QUESTION:
What does object evidence include?
ANSWER:
• any article or object which may be known or
perceived by the use of the senses.
• examination of the anatomy of a person or of
any substance taken therefrom.
• conduct of tests, demonstrations or
experiments.
• examination of representative portrayals of
the object in question. (e.g. maps, diagrams)
NOTE: Courts may refuse the introduction
of object evidence and rely on testimonial
evidence alone if:
• its exhibition is contrary to public
morals or decency.
• to require its being viewed in court or in
ocular inspection would result in delay,
inconvenience, or unnecessary expenses
which are out of proportion to the
evidentiary value of such object.
• the 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.
• evidence already presented clearly portrays
the object in question as to render a view
thereof unnecessary. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 716, 2008
ed.)
QUESTION:
Is exhibition of an object which is repulsive or
indecent absolutely prohibited?

ANSWER:

No. If a view of the object is necessary in the

interest of justice, such object may still be
exhibited, but the court may exclude the public
from such view. Such view may not be refused
if the indecent or immoral objects constitute
the very basis of the criminal or civil action
(e.g. obscene pictures or exhibits).
PROBLEM:
In a trial for murder, the prosecution offers as
evidence photographs showing the accused
mauling the victim when the latter was with his
friends.
Although the person who took the photograph
was not presented as a witness, the prosecution
presented the companions of the victim who
identified themselves in the photographs. The
defense objects to the admissibility of the
photographs because the person who took the
photographs was not presented as witness.
Is the contention of the defense tenable?
ANSWER:
No. When presented in evidence, photographs
must be identified by the photographer as to
its production and testify as to the
circumstances under which the photos were
produced.
The value of this kind of evidence lies in its
being a correct representation or reproduction
of the original, and its admissibility is
determined by its accuracy in portraying the
scene at the time of the crime.
The photographer, however, is not the only
witness who can identify the pictures he has
taken. The correctness of the photograph as a
faithful representation of the object portrayed can
be proved prima facie, either by the testimony of
the person who made it or by other competent
witnesses who can testify to its exactness and
accuracy, after which the court can admit it subject
to impeachment as to its accuracy.

Here, the photographs are admissible as evidence

inasmuch as the correctness thereof is testified to
by the companions of the victim. (Sison v. People, G.R. Nos.
108280-83, Nov. 16, 1995)
PROBLEM:
Abe is charged with murder for the shooting of
Rey.
Abe is found guilty as charged.

On appeal, Abe argues that the trial court

should have acquitted him on the argument
that the paraffin test conducted on him two
days after he was arrested yielded a negative
result; hence, he could not have shot Rey.
Is Abe correct?
ANSWER:
No. While the paraffin test yielded a negative
result, such fact alone does not ipso facto prove
that Abe is innocent.
A negative paraffin result is not conclusive proof
that a person has not fired a gun. It is possible to
fire a gun and yet be negative for nitrates, as when
the culprit is wearing gloves or he washes his
hands afterwards.
Here, since Abe submitted himself for paraffin
testing only two days after the shooting, it is likely
that he had already washed his hands thoroughly,
thus removing all traces of nitrates therefrom.
(People v. Brecinio, G.R. No. 138534, Mar. 17, 2004).
 CATEGORIES OF
OBJECT EVIDENCE

FOR PURPOSES OF AUTHENTICATION:

UNIQUE OBJECTS: those that have readily
identifiable marks. (e.g. a calibre 40 gun with
serial number XXX888)
OBJECTS MADE UNIQUE: those that are readily
identifiable (e.g. a bolo knife used to hack a victim
which could be identified by a witness in court)
NON-UNIQUE OBJECTS: those which have no
identifying marks and cannot be marked (e.g.
footprints left at a crime scene)
 VIEW OF AN OBJECT
OR OCULAR INSPECTION

An ocular inspection conducted by the judge

without the presence of the parties or without
due notice is not valid because an ocular
inspection is part of the trial.

NOTE: It is a discretionary act of the trial court

to go to the place where the object is located,
as when the object evidence cannot be brought
in court.
 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE

QUESTION:
What is chain of custody rule in relation to Section
21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002?
ANSWER:
It is a method of authenticating evidence.
It requires that the admission of an exhibit be
preceded by evidence sufficient to support a
finding that the matter in question is what the
proponent claims it to be.
It would include testimony about every link in the
chain, from the moment the item was picked up to
the time it is offered into evidence, in such a way
that every person who touched the exhibit would
describe how and from whom it was received,
where it was and what happened to it while in the
witness’ possession, the condition in which it was
received and the condition in which it was
delivered to the next link in the chain.
These witnesses would then describe the
precautions taken to ensure that there had been
no change in the condition of the item and no
opportunity for someone not in the chain to have
possession of the same. (Lopez v. People, G.R. No. 172953,
Apr. 30, 2008)
QUESTION:
When is there a need to establish a chain of
custody?
ANSWER:
It is necessary when the object evidence is non-
unique as it is not readily identifiable, was not
made identifiable or cannot be made
identifiable (e.g. drops of blood or oil, drugs in
powder form, fiber, grains of sand and similar
objects)
 DNA EVIDENCE RULE
(A.M. NO. 06-11-5-SC)

QUESTION:

In what cases do the rules on DNA Evidence apply?

ANSWER:
The DNA Evidence Rule applies whenever DNA
evidence is offered, used, or proposed to be
offered or used as evidence in all criminal and civil
actions as well as special proceedings. (Sec. 1)
 MEANING OF
DNA / DNA EVIDENCE
• Deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA is the chain of
molecules found in every nucleated cell of the
body. (Sec. 3, Rule on DNA Evidence).
• It is the fundamental building block of a person’s
entire genetic make-up, which is found in all
human cells and is the same in every cell of the
same person. (People v. Umanito, G.R. No. 172607, Oct. 26, 2007)
• DNA evidence constitutes the totality of the DNA
profile, results and other genetic information
directly generated from DNA testing of biological
samples. (Sec. 3)
 DNA TESTING
DNA Testing refers to the verified and credible
scientific methods which include the extraction of
DNA from biological samples, the generation of
DNA profiles and the comparison of the
information obtained from the DNA testing of
biological samples for the purpose of determining,
with reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA
obtained from two or more distinct biological
samples originates from the same person (direct
identification) or if the biological samples originate
from related persons (kinship analysis). (Sec. 3)
 SCIENTIFIC BASIS OF DNA TESTING

•The scientific basis of a DNA test comes from

the fact that our differences as individuals are
due to the differences in the composition of
our genes.

•These genes comprise a chemical substance,

the deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA. [Te Court Systems
Journal (1999)]
QUESTION:
May DNA test be conducted absent a prior
court order?

ANSWER:

Yes. The Rules on DNA Evidence do not

preclude a DNA testing, without need of a prior
court order, at the behest of any party,
including law enforcement agencies, before a
suit or proceeding is commenced. (Sec. 4)
 ISSUANCE OF A
DNA TESTING ORDER
In PENDING ACTIONS, the appropriate court
may, at any time, issue a DNA testing order,
either motu proprio or upon application of any
person who has a legal interest in the matter in
litigation, after due hearing and notice to the
parties, and upon showing of the following:
• A biological sample which is relevant to the
case exists.
• the biological sample was not previously
subjected to a similar DNA testing.
• although the biological sample was
previously subjected to a similar DNA testing,
the results may require confirmation for good
reasons.
• the DNA testing uses a scientifically valid
technique.
• the DNA testing has the scientific potential to
produce new information which is relevant to
the proper resolution of the case.
• the existence of other factors, if any, which
the court may consider as potentially
affecting the accuracy or integrity of the DNA
testing. (Sec. 4)
QUESTION:
Is the order granting the DNA testing
appealable?
ANSWER:
No. An order granting the DNA testing shall be
immediately executory is not appealable.
Any petition for certiorari initiated therefrom
shall not, in any way, stay the implementation
thereof, unless a higher court issues an
injunctive order. (Sec. 5)
PROBLEM:
During A’s trial for rape with murder, the
prosecution seeks to introduce DNA evidence
against him, based on forensic laboratory
matching of the materials found at the crime scene
and A’s hair and blood samples.
A’s counsel objects on the allegation that the DNA
evidence is inadmissible because the materials
taken from A are in violation of his constitutional
right against self-incrimination as well as his right
of privacy and personal integrity.
Should the DNA evidence be admitted?
ANSWER:
The DNA evidence should be admitted because it
is not in violation of A’s constitutional right
against self-incrimination or his right of privacy
and personal integrity.
The right against self-incrimination is applicable
only to testimonial evidence. Extracting a blood
sample and cutting a strand from the hair of the
accused are purely mechanical acts that do not
involve his discretion nor require his intelligence.
(2004 Bar Question)
QUESTION:
Is the result of a DNA test automatically
admissible as evidence in the case in which it
was sought for?
ANSWER:
No. The grant of a DNA testing application is
not to be construed as an automatic admission
into evidence of any component of the DNA
evidence that may be obtained as a result
thereof. (Sec. 5)
 POSSIBLE RESULTS
OF A DNA TEST

RULE OF INCLUSION: The samples are similar, and could have

originated from the same source. The analyst then proceeds
to determine the statistical significance of the similarity.
RULE OF EXCLUSION: The samples are different; hence, it
must have originated from different sources. This conclusion
is absolute and requires no further analysis.
TEST IS INCONCLUSIVE: This occurs due to degradation,
contamination, failure of some aspect of protocol, or some
other reasons. Analysis might be repeated to obtain a more
conclusive result. (People v. Vallejo, G.R. No. 144656, May 9, 2002).
 POST-CONVICTION
DNA TEST: REMEDY
QUESTION:
Who may avail of a post-conviction DNA
testing?
ANSWER:
Post-conviction DNA testing may be availed of,
without need of prior court order, by the
prosecution or any person convicted by final
judgment of any crime.
QUESTION:

What are the requisites for the applicability of

a post-conviction DNA testing?

ANSWER:

• existence of biological sample.

• sample is relevant to the case.

• the testing would probably result in the

reversal or modification of the judgment of
conviction. (Sec. 6)
QUESTION:
What is the remedy of the convicted person if the
result of the post-conviction DNA testing is
favorable to him?
ANSWER:
The convict or the prosecution may file a petition
for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin.
In case the court, after due hearing, finds the
petition to be meritorious, it shall reverse or
modify the judgment of conviction and order the
release of the convict, unless continued detention
is justified for a lawful cause. (Sec. 10)
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
CAVEAT:
A lawsuit is won or lost not solely through the
testimony of witnesses,. Other means of
presenting facts are the introduction of
documentary evidence, such as letters
memoranda, books of account and written
records.
RULES ON DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE:
• Rule on Authentication of Evidence
• Best Evidence Rule
• Secondary Evidence Rule
• Parol Evidence Rule
 MEANING OF
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Documents as evidence consist of writings or

any material containing letters, words,
numbers, figures, symbols, or other modes of
written expressions, offered as proof of their
contents. (Sec. 2, Rule 130)
QUESTION:
May a private document be offered and admitted
in evidence both as documentary evidence and as
object evidence?
ANSWER:
Yes. A private document is considered as object
evidence when it is addressed to the senses of the
court or when it is presented in order to establish
certain physical evidence or characteristics that
are visible on the paper and the writings that
comprise the document.
It is considered as documentary evidence when it
is offered as proof of its contents. (2005 Bar Question)
 REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

• The document must be relevant.

• The evidence must be authenticated by a
competent witness. and
• The document must be formally offered in
evidence.
 BEST EVIDENCE RULE

STATEMENT OF THE RULE:

When the subject of the inquiry is the contents of
a document, no evidence shall be admissible other
than the original document itself. (Sec. 3, Rule 130)

APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE:

The rule will come into play only “when the
subject of inquiry is the contents of a document.”
QUESTION:
What are the exceptions to the best evidence
rule?
• When the original has been lost or destroyed,
or cannot be produced in court, without bad
faith on the part of the offeror.
• When the original is in the custody or under
the control of the party against whom the
evidence is offered, and the latter fails to
produce it after reasonable notice.
• When the original consists of numerous accounts or
other documents which cannot be examined in court
without great loss of time and the fact sought to be
established from them is only the general result of
the whole.
NOTE: The voluminous records must be made accessible to
the adverse party so that the correctness of the portion
produced or summary of the document may be tested on
cross-examination.
• When the original is a public record in the custody of
a public officer or is recorded in a public office.
NOTE: Where the issue is only as to whether such a
document was actually executed, or exists, or on the
circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the
best evidence rule does not apply and testimonial evidence
is admissible.
QUESTION:
Why is the best evidence rule often described
as a misnomer?
ANSWER:
Because it merely requires the best evidence
available and, in the absence thereof, allows
the introduction of secondary evidence.
It is a misnomer because it is applicable only to
documentary evidence and not to testimonial
and object evidence. (1994 Bar Question)
PROBLEM:
At the trial of Abe for violation of the Dangerous
Drugs Act, the prosecution offers in evidence a
photocopy of the marked P1,000 bill used in the
“buy-bust” operation.
Abe objects to the introduction of the photocopy
on the ground that the best evidence rule
prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence
in lieu of the original.
Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or
documentary evidence? Is such photocopy
admissible in evidence?
ANSWER:
The photocopy is real (object) evidence,
because the marked bills are real evidence.
It is admissible in evidence because the best
evidence rule does not apply to object or real
evidence.
The best evidence rule is inapplicable since
such secondary evidence is only intended to
establish the existence of a transaction and not
the contents of the document. (1994 Bar Question)
QUESTION:
What is the best evidence of telegrams and
cables?
ANSWER:
It depends on the issue to be proved.
• Contents of the telegram received by the
addressee: the original dispatch received.
• The telegram sent by the sender: the message
delivered for transmission.
• Inaccuracy of transmission of the telegram: both
telegrams as sent and received. (Regalado, Vol. II, pp.
722-723, 2008 ed.)
PROBLEM:
In a collection case, Defendant sought to escape
liability from a promissory note by showing that
the same is a forgery.
Defendant called an expert witness to prove that
her signature in the promissory note is forged.
Plaintiff objected to the presentation of the
expert witness on the allegation that the finding of
the witness is based on a mere photocopy of the
promissory note.
Is the objection tenable?
ANSWER:

Yes. The best evidence of a forged signature in an

instrument is the instrument itself reflecting the alleged
forged signature.
The fact of forgery can only be established by a
comparison between the alleged forged signature and
the authentic and genuine signature of the person
whose signature is theorized upon to have been forged.
Without the original document containing the alleged
forged signature, one cannot make a definitive
comparison which would establish forgery.
A comparison based on a mere photocopy or
reproduction of the document under controversy cannot
produce reliable results. (Heirs of Gregorio v. CA, G.R. No. 117609,
Dec. 29, 1998)
PROBLEM:
C loaned B a sum of money. To evidence the loan, C typed
a single copy of a promissory note which he and D both
signed. C then made two photocopies of the promissory
note, giving one copy to D and retaining the other copy. C
entrusted the typewritten copy to his counsel for
safekeeping. The copy with C's counsel was destroyed
when the latter’s law office was burned.
In an action to collect on the promissory note, which is
deemed to be the "original" copy for the purpose of the
best evidence rule?
ANSWER:
The copy that was signed and lost is the only "original"
copy for purposes of the best evidence rule. (Sec. 4 [b], Rule
130).
QUESTION:
Are the photocopies in the hands of the parties
considered as "duplicate original copies?”
ANSWER:
No, because they are merely photocopies which were
not signed. (Mahilum v. CA, G.R. No. L-17970, July 10, 1966) They
constitute secondary evidence. (Sec. 5, Rule 130)
QUESTION:
How will C prove D’s loan?
ANSWER:
The loan may be proved by secondary evidence through
the photocopies of the promissory note. (Sec. 5,Rule 130)
(1997 Bar Question)
 CONCEPT OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENT

THREE CONCEPTS OF “ORIGINAL” DOCUMENT:

FIRST: The original of a document is one the contents of
which are the subject of inquiry.
SECOND: When a document is in two or more copies
executed at or about the same time, with identical
contents, including signed carbon copies, all such copies
are equally regarded as originals.
THIRD: When an entry is repeated in the regular course
of business, one being copied from another at or near
the time of the transaction, including entries in journals
and ledgers, all the entries are likewise equally regarded
as originals. (Sec. 4, Rule 130)
 SECONDARY EVIDENCE
Secondary evidence is that which shows that better or
primary evidence exists as to the proof of the fact in
question.
It is the class of evidence that is relevant to the fact in
issue, it being first shown that the primary evidence of the
fact is not obtainable. It performs the same functions as
that of primary evidence. (Francisco, p. 68, 1992 ed.)
NOTE: All originals must be accounted for before one can
resort to secondary evidence. It must appear that all of
them have been lost or destroyed or cannot be produced
in court.
The non-production of the original document, unless it
falls under any of the exceptions in Sec. 3, Rule 130, gives
rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence.
QUESTION:
When may secondary evidence be admitted?
ANSWER:
It may be admitted only by laying the basis for its
production and compliance with the following:
• The offeror must prove the due execution and
existence of the original document;
• The offeror must show the cause of its
unavailability. and
• The offeror must show that the unavailability
was not due to his bad faith.
Consequently, the correct order of proof is as
follows:
• Existence
• Due execution
• Loss
• Contents
This order may be changed if necessary at the
sound discretion of the court. (Citibank N.A. Mastercard v.
Teodoro, G.R. No. 150905, Sept. 23, 2003)

NOTE: Intentional destruction of the originals by a

party who acted in good faith does not preclude
the introduction of secondary evidence of the
contents thereof.
QUESTION:
What is the order of presentation of secondary
evidence?
ANSWER:

• copy of the original.

• a recital of the contents of the document in

some authentic document.

• by the testimony of witnesses. (Sec. 5, Rule 130)

QUESTION:
How may the due execution of a document be
proved?
ANSWER:
The due execution of a document may be proved
through the testimony of:
• the person who executed it.
• the person before whom its execution was
acknowledged.
• any person who was present and saw it
executed and delivered.
• any person who thereafter saw and
recognized the signature.
• one to whom the parties thereto had
previously confessed the execution thereof.
• by evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting of the maker. (Sec. 20,
Rule 132)
QUESTION:
How may the loss or destruction of a document be
proved?
ANSWER:
The loss or destruction of a document may be proved
by:
• any person who knew of such fact.
• anyone who, in the judgment of the court, had made
sufficient examination in the places where the
document or papers of similar character are usually
kept by the person in whose custody the document
was and has been unable to find it.
• any person who has made any other investigation
which is sufficient to satisfy the court that the
document is indeed lost.
QUESTION:
How may the contents of a document be proved?
ANSWER:
They may be proved by the testimony of:
• any person who signed the document.
• any person who read it.
• any person who heard when the document was
being read.
• any person who was present when the contents
of the document were talked over by the parties
to such an extent as to give him reasonably full
information of the contents.
• any person to whom the parties have stated or
confessed the contents thereof.
QUESTION:
May the presentation of the original be waived?
ANSWER:
Yes. If the party against whom the secondary
evidence is offered does not object thereto when
the same is offered in evidence, the secondary
evidence becomes primary evidence.
But even if admitted as primary evidence, the
probative value of the secondary evidence must
still meet the various tests by which its reliability is
to be determined. Its admissibility should not be
confused with its probative value. (Heirs of Teodoro De
la Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 117384, Oct. 21, 1998)
QUESTION:
What facts must be shown by the party offering
secondary evidence if the original is in the custody of
the adverse party?
ANSWER:
• original is in the possession or under the control of
the opponent.
• demand or notice is made to him by the proponent
signifying that the document is needed.
• failure or refusal of opponent to produce document in
court; and
• satisfactory proof of existence of document (Sec. 6, Rule
130)
QUESTION:
What is the effect if the refusal or failure of the
adverse party to produce the original is
justified?
ANSWER:
It does not give rise to the presumption of
suppression of evidence, or create an
unfavorable inference against him. It only
authorizes the presentation of secondary
evidence. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 727, 2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
How may the contents of a document be
proved when the original is in the custody of a
public officer?
ANSWER:
The contents may be proved by:
• a certified copy issued by the public officer in
custody thereof (Sec. 7, Rule 130))
• official publication. (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 203, 1999)
QUESTION:
What is the effect of not offering a document in
evidence after calling for its production and
inspection?

ANSWER:
If the party who calls for the production of a
document does not offer the same in evidence, no
unfavorable inference may be drawn from such
failure.
REASON: This is because a party who calls for the
production of a document is not required to offer
it. (Sec. 8, Rule 130)
 PAROL EVIDENCE

QUESTION:
What is parol evidence?
ANSWER:
Parol evidence is any evidence aliunde (extrinsic
evidence) which is intended or tends to vary or
contradict a complete and enforceable agreement
embodied in a document. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 730, 2008 ed.)
It may refer to testimonial, real, or documentary
evidence.
 RATIONALE FOR
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

• To give stability to written statements.

• To remove the temptation and possibility of

perjury.

• To prevent possible fraud.

 “FALSO DEMONSTRATIO NON
NICE CUM DE CORPORE CONSTAT”
•Literally means “an erroneous description does
not spoil the act.”
•It states that false description does not injure or
vitiate a document if the subject is sufficiently
identified.
•The incorrect description shall be rejected as
surplusage while the correct and complete
description, standing alone, shall sustain the
validity of the writing. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 735, 2008 ed.)
•Parol evidence is admissible to prove mistake in
the execution of a written instrument.
QUESTION:
May a condition precedent and a condition
subsequent be proved by parol evidence?
ANSWER:
Conditions precedent may be established by parol
evidence because there is no varying of the terms
of the written contract by extrinsic agreement for
the reason that there is no contract in existence.
There is nothing in which to apply the excluding
rule.
Conditions subsequent may not be established by
parol evidence because a written contract already
exists.
 REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION
OF THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

• There must be a valid contract.

• The terms of the agreement must be reduced
to writing.
• The dispute is between the parties or their
successors-in-interest. and
• There is dispute as to the terms of the
agreement.
 EXCEPTIONS TO THE
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
A party may present evidence to modify, explain
or add to the terms of the written agreement If he
puts in issue in his pleadings the following:
• an intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in
the written agreement.
• failure of the written agreement to express the
true intent of the parties thereto.
• validity of the written agreement.
• existence of other terms agreed to by the parties
or their successors in interest after the execution
of the written agreement.
 PAROL EVIDENCE VS.
BEST EVIDENCE
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE: Presupposes that the
original document is available in court.
BEST EVIDENCE RULE: Presupposes that the original
document is not available or there is a dispute as to
whether said writing is original.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE: Prohibits the varying of the
terms of a written agreement.
BEST EVIDENCE RULE: Prohibits the introduction of
secondary evidence in lieu of the original
document regardless of whether or not it varies the
contents of the original.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE: Applies only to documents
which are contractual in nature, except wills.
BEST EVIDENCE RULE: Applies to all kinds of
writings.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE: Can be invoked only when
the controversy is between the parties to the
written agreement, their privies, or any party
affected thereby like a cestui que trust.
BEST EVIDENCE RULE: Can be invoked by any party
to an action whether he has participated or not in
the writing involved.
 AUTHENTICATION AND
PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
AUTHENTICATION NOT REQUIRED:
• The writing is an ancient document.
•

• The writing is a public document or record.

• The writing is a notarial document acknowledged,
proved or certified.
• The authenticity and due execution of the document has
been admitted or impliedly admitted by failure to deny
the same under oath.
• When genuineness and due execution are immaterial to
the issue.
QUESTION::
What is authentication?
ANSWER:
Authentication is proving the due execution and
genuineness of a document.
QUESTION:
What is a document?
ANSWER:
It is a deed, instrument or other duly authorized
paper by which something is proved, evidenced or
set forth. (Bermejo v. Barrios, G.R. No. L-23614, Feb. 27, 1970)
 PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS:
• The written official acts, or records of the official
acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies
and tribunals, and public officers, whether of
the Philippines, or of a foreign country.
• Documents acknowledged before a notary
public, except last wills and testaments.
• Public records kept in the Philippines of private
documents required by law to be entered
therein.
ALL OTHER WRITINGS ARE PRIVATE.
 DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS: Admissible even without need of
further proof of its genuineness and due execution.
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS: Admissible only if their due
execution and authenticity are proved either:
• By anyone who saw the document executed or written.
• By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
handwriting of the maker.
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS: Evidence even against third persons
of the fact which gave rise to their due execution.
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS: Binding only on the parties who
executed them or their privies, insofar as due execution
and date of the document are concerned.
 ANCIENT DOCUMENT RULE

ANCIENT DOCUMENTS are exempt from proof of

due execution and authenticity provided:
• The private document be more than 30 years
old.
• That it be produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine.
• That it is unblemished by any alteration or
circumstances of suspicion.
NOTE: The ancient document rule applies only if
there are no other witnesses to determine
authenticity.
 PROOF OF GENUINENESS
OF A HANDWRITING
GENUINENESS OF A PERSON’S HANDWRITING MAY
BE PROVED BY:
• any witness who actually saw the person writing
the instrument.
• any person who is familiar or has acquired
knowledge of the handwriting of such person, his
opinion as to the handwriting being an exception
to the opinion rule under Sections 48 and 50 of
Rule 130.
• a comparison of the questioned handwriting from
the admitted genuine specimens thereof.
• an expert witness. (Secs. 20/22, Rule 132; Sec. 49, Rule
130)
QUESTION:
Is the testimony of a handwriting expert
indispensable to the examination or the
comparison of handwritings in cases of
forgery?
ANSWER:
No. Handwriting experts are usually helpful in
the examination of forged documents because
of the technical procedure involved in analyzing
them, but resort to these experts is not
mandatory or indispensable.
A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on
the testimonies of handwriting experts, because
the judge must conduct an examination of the
questioned signature in order to arrive at a
reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity.
The opinions of handwriting experts are not
binding upon the courts, especially when the
question involved is mere handwriting similarity
or dissimilarity, which can be determined by a
visual comparison of specimens of the questioned
signatures with those of the currently existing
ones. (Pontaoe v. Pontaoe, G.R. No. 15958, April. 22, 2008)
 PROOF OF OFFICIAL RECORD

QUESTION:
How are public records proved?
ANSWER:
Written official acts, or records of the official
acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies
and tribunals, and public officers (e.g. a written
foreign law) may be evidenced by:
IF IT IS WITHIN THE PHILIPPINES:
• an official publication thereof.
• a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody
of the record, or by his deputy.
IF IT IS KEPT IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY:
• an official publication thereof; or
• by a copy attested by the officer having the legal
custody of the record, or by his deputy and
accompanied with a certificate that such officer has
the custody.
NOTE: The certificate may be made by a secretary of
the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-
consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the
foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the
foreign country in which the record is kept, and
authenticated by the seal of his office. (Sec. 24, Rule 132)
QUESTION:
What is the probative value of documents
consisting of entries in public records?
ANSWER:
They are prima facie evidence of the facts
stated therein if entered by a public officer in
the performance of a duty. All other public
documents are evidence, even against a third
person, of the fact which gave rise to their
execution and of the date of the latter. (Sec. 23, Rule
132)
QUESTION:
Abe is charged with illegal possession of
firearm. During trial, the prosecution presents
in evidence a certification issued by the PNP
Firearms and Explosives Office attesting that
Abe has no license to carry any firearm.
However, the certifying officer is not presented
as a witness.
Is the certification of the PNP Firearms and
Explosives Office without the certifying officer
testifying thereon admissible in evidence
against Abe?
ANSWER:
Yes. Section 28, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court
provides that “a written statement signed by an
officer having the custody of an official record or by
his deputy that after diligent search, no record or
entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the
records of his office, accompanied by a certificate as
above provided, is admissible as evidence that the
records of his office contain no such record or entry.”
The records of the PNP Firearm and Explosives Office
are a public record. Hence, notwithstanding that the
certifying officer is not presented as a witness for
the prosecution, the certification he made is
admissible in evidence against Abe. (2003 Bar Question)
 NOTARIAL DOCUMENTS

QUESTION:
What is the evidentiary weight given to a notarial
document?
ANSWER:
Notarial documents celebrated with all the legal
requisites under a notarial certificate is evidence
of a high character, and to overcome its recitals, it
is incumbent upon the party challenging it to
prove his claim with clear, convincing and more
than mere preponderant evidence. (Pan Pacific
Industrial Sales Co. v. CA, G.R. No.125283, Aug. 9, 2005)
QUESTION:
How are notarial documents proved?
ANSWER:
The document may be presented in evidence
without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of
the execution of the instrument or document
involved.
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
 COMPETENCY OF WITNESS

WITNESS:
As used in the law of evidence, the term
witness refers to a person who testifies in a
cause or gives evidence before a judicial
tribunal.
COMPETENCY OF WITNESS:
The legal fitness or ability of a witness to be
heard on the trial of a cause.
QUESTION:
What is the rule on the competency of a witness?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE: A person who takes the witness
stand is presumed to possess the qualifications of
a witness. (Presumption of competency)
EXCEPTIONS: There is prima facie evidence of
incompetency in the following cases:
• The fact that a person has been recently found of
unsound mind by a court of competent
jurisdiction; or
• That a person is an inmate of an asylum for the
insane.
 QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES

ALL PERSONS WHO:

• can perceive and perceiving
• can make known their perception to others
(Sec. 20, Rule 130)

• must take either an oath or an affirmation

(Sec. 1, Rule 132)
• must not possess the disqualifications
imposed by law or by the rules (Riano, Evidence: A
Restatement for the Bar, p. 246, 2009 ed.)
IN OTHER WORDS, a prospective witness must
show that he has the following abilities:
• TO OBSERVE: the testimonial quality of
perception.
• TO REMEMBER: the testimonial quality of
memory.
• TO RELATE: the testimonial quality of
narration. and
• TO RECOGNIZE A DUTY TO TELL THE TRUTH:
the testimonial quality of sincerity.
PROBLEM:
In a personal injury trial, the plaintiff seeks to
present W, an eyewitness, to testify as to what he
saw during the incident in question.
The defendant, objects to the presentation of W
because of W’s various convictions for perjury.
Rule on the objection.
ANSWER:
OBJECTION OVERRULED. Section 20 of Rule 130 of
the Rules of Court does not disqualify W as witness
by reason of his convictions in various perjury cases.
Being an eyewitness to the occurrence, assuming
that he is not disqualified under any other rule of
evidence, W must be allowed to testify on facts
acquired through his perception.
 NO DISQUALIFICATION
GENERAL RULE:
The following are not grounds to disqualify a
witness.
• Conviction of a crime
• Religious or political belief
• Interest in the outcome of the case
EXCEPTIONS:
Unless the disqualification is provided by law as in
the following cases:
• Those convicted of falsification of document,
perjury or false testimony are prohibited from
being witnesses to a will. (Art. 821, NCC)
• Those convicted of an offense involving moral
turpitude cannot be discharged to become a
State witness. (Sec. 17, Rule 119; Sec. 10, R.A. 6981)
• Those who fall under the disqualifications
provided under Sections 21-24, Rule 130.
 DISQUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES

• mental incapacity or immaturity.

• by reason of marriage.
• death or insanity of adverse party.
• privileged communication.

NOTE: The qualifications and disqualifications of

witnesses are determined as of the time they are
produced for examination in court or at the taking of
the depositions.
 MENTAL INCAPACITY
IMMATURITY
MENTAL INCAPACITY:
A person whose mental condition, at the time of
his production for examination, is such that he is
incapable of intelligently making known his
perception to others, is not qualified to take the
witness stand; but he can still be a witness during
his lucid interval.
MENTAL IMMATURITY
A child whose mental maturity is such as to render
him incapable of perceiving the facts respecting
which he is examined and of relating them
truthfully in not qualified as a witness.
QUESTION:
Does mental unsoundness of a witness at the time
the fact to be testified occurred affect his
competency?
ANSWER:
No, because it will only affect his credibility.
As long as the witness can convey ideas by words
or signs and can give sufficiently intelligent
answers to questions propounded, he is a
competent witness even if he is feeble-minded
(People v. De Jesus, G.R. No. L-39087, Apr. 27, 1984) or a mental
retardate (People v. Gerones, G.R. No. 91116, Jan. 24, 1991) or a
schizophrenic. (People v. Baid, G.R. No. 129667, July 31, 2000)
QUESTION:
Are deaf-mutes competent to testify in court?
ANSWER:
Yes, provided:
• they understand and appreciate the sanctity of
an oath.
• they comprehend the facts they are going to
testify on.
• they can communicate their ideas through a
qualified interpreter. (People v. Tuangco, G.R. No. 130331, Nov.
22, 2001)
 CHILD WITNESS RULE
(IMMATURITY)
RULE:
Children who appear to the court to be of such
tender age and inferior capacity as to be incapable
of receiving correct impressions of the facts
respecting which they are called, or of relating
them truly, cannot be witnesses.
IMPORTANT: The child witness must not only
understand the obligation of an oath but MUST
also be shown to know such obligation before
testifies.
Q: Do you know what is to tell a lie?
A: Yes.
Q: Is it right to tell a lie?
A: No.
Q: Do you think you would be punished if you told
a lie?
A: Yes.
Q: Did any one ever tell it is not nice to tell a lie?
A: No.
Q: Nobody told you this?
A: No.
Q: Do you know what it is to come here and tell
what you know about this case?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you tell me what an oath means?
A: I don’t know what that means.
Q: You know what it is to tell a lie?
A: No.
Q: You know what it is to tell the truth?
A: Yes.
Q: Is it right to tell the truth?
A: Yes.
Q: What would be done to you if you told a lie
here today?
A: I would be punished.
Q: Who told you that?
A: My mother.
Q: Has your mother talked to you about telling
the truth, and telling a lie?
A: She told me it was a bad thing to tell a lie,
and it was a good thing to tell the truth.
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF
MARRIAGE/SPOUSAL IMMUNITY
CONCEPT:
A husband cannot be examined for or against his
wife without her consent; nor a wife for or against
her husband without his consent, except in a civil
case by one against the other or the latter’s
ascendants or descendants.
PURPOSE OF THE RULE:
The rule is intended to preserve the marriage
relation as one of full confidence and affection. A
marriage relation is regarded as more important
to the public welfare than the exigencies of
lawsuits.
PROBLEM:
A pig belonging to C disappeared from her
backyard where she had tied it. On the same day
that C missed her pig, A told her that it was B, A’s
husband, who took the pig.
In the criminal case filed against B, the prosecution
called C to testify on what A had told her.
B’s counsel promptly objected to C’s testimony on
the allegation that it violates the marital privilege
rule.
Is the objection proper?
ANSWER:

The testimony of C to the effect that on the

same day her pig disappeared, the wife of the
accused told her that it was her husband who
had taken the pig, aside from being hearsay, is
incompetent and inadmissible because even
before the court, the wife herself could not
have testified for or against her husband
without his consent. (People v. Reyes, 76 Phil. 354)
THINGS TO REMEMBER:
• The right to object to the competency of one
spouse pertains solely to the spouse-party and not
to the witness-spouse.
• No unfavorable inference may be drawn from the
fact that a party-spouse invokes the privilege to
prevent the witness-spouse from testifying against
him or her. To allow the inference to be drawn
would tend in effect to undermine the privilege by
indiscretion.
• The privilege may be waived as in the case of other
witnesses generally.
EXAMPLE: The accused is deemed to have waived
his or her privilege by calling the other spouse as a
witness for him or her thereby making the spouse
subject to cross-examination in the usual manner.
QUESTION:
What are the requisites in order for the spousal
immunity to apply?
ANSWER:
• The spouse for or against whom the testimony is
offered is a party to the case.
• The spouses are validly married. (If the marriage
is legally dissolved, the privilege no longer
applies)
• The testimony is one that is offered during the
existence of the marriage. (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement
for the Bar, p. 266, 2009 ed.)
• The case is not one of the exceptions provided in
the rule. (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 302, 1999 ed.)
QUESTION:
What are the exceptions to the spousal immunity
rule?
ANSWER:
• In a civil case by one against the other.
• In a criminal case for a crime committed by one
against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants.
• Where the testimony was made outside the
marriage.
PROBLEM:
H is charged in court with the crime of physical injuries
committed by him against his stepson, S, the son of his
wife, W, by the latter’s previous marriage. At the trial,
the prosecution called W to the stand to testify as an
eyewitness. H’s counsel objected under the spousal
immunity rule.
Is the objection valid?
ANSWER:
No, because the spousal immunity rule does not apply
when the spouse is to testify against the other in a
criminal case for a crime committed by one against the
other or the latter’s direct ascendants or descendants.
(Sec. 22, Rule 130). Since A is W’s direct descendant, she is
competent to testify against her husband.
QUESTION:
Suppose W’s testimony is offered in a civil case
for recovery of property filed by A against H, is
W competent to testify?

ANSWER:
No, because the spousal immunity rule applies
this time. The exception provided by the rule
refers to a civil case filed by one against the
other. The case here involves a case by S for
recovery of property against W’s spouse, H.
QUESTION:
What kind of testimony is covered by the
prohibition?
ANSWER:
The prohibition extends not only to testimony
adverse to the spouse but also to a testimony in
favor of the spouse. (Sec. 22, Rule 130; Riano, Evidence: A
Restatement for the Bar, p. 265, 2009 ed.)
NOTE: The spousal immunity rule does not apply
in the case of estranged spouses where the marital
and domestic relations are so strained that there is
no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and
tranquility which may be disturbed. (Alvarez vs.
Ramirez, October 14, 2005)
PROBLEM:
H and W, a married couple, has been estranged
from each other for over a year already. Upon
their separation, W went to live with her sister. For
unknown reason, the house of W’s sister is
burned, killing the latter. W survived.
W saw H in the vicinity of the house during the
incident. H is later charged with arson.
The prosecutor calls W to the witness stand and
offers her testimony to prove that H committed
arson.
Can W testify over the objection of her husband
on the ground of marital privilege?
ANSWER:
Yes. The marital disqualification rule is aimed at
protecting the harmony and confidences of marital
relations. Hence, where the marital and domestic
relations are so strained that there is no more
harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquility
which may be disturbed, the marital disqualification
rule no longer applies.
The act of H in setting fire to the house of his sister-
in-law, knowing that his wife is there, is an act
totally alien to the harmony and confidences of
marital relation which the disqualification primarily
seeks to protect. The criminal act complained of had
the effect of directly and vitally impairing the
conjugal relation. (Alvarez v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439, Oct. 14,
2005; 2006 Bar Question)
QUESTION:
If the accused marries the prosecution witness for
the sole purpose of sealing the lips of said witness,
will the prohibition apply?
ANSWER:
Yes. As long as a valid marriage exists at the time
of the trial, the witness-spouse cannot be
compelled to testify even where the crime charged
is against the person of the witness, and even
though the marriage was entered into for the
express purpose of suppressing the testimony.
 FILIAL PRIVILEGE RULE
CONCEPT:
No descendant can be compelled, in a criminal
case, to testify against his parents and ascendants.
BASIS:
The rule is in consideration of the solidarity of the
Filipino family and the traditional family respect
for elders.
SCOPE:
It is the descendant-witness and not the accused-
ascendant who may invoke the privilege.
NOTE:
A descendant may not be compelled to testify
against his parents notwithstanding Article 215
of the Family Code which allows the
compulsion of a descendant to testify against
his parents when such testimony is
indispensable in a crime against the
descendant or by one against the other.
Any conflict between the two provisions should
be resolved in favor of the Rules of Court
provision because although found in a
substantive law, the Family Code provision is
essentially procedural in nature.
 SURVIVING PARTIES RULE
DEAD MAN’S STATUTE
CONCEPT:
Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or persons
in whose behalf a case is prosecuted against an
executor or administrator or other representative
of a deceased person, or against a person of
unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against
the estate of such deceased person or against
such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to
any matter of fact occurring before the death of
such deceased person or before such person
became of unsound mind.
 ELEMENTS OF
DEAD MAN’S STATUTE
• The defendant in the case is the executor or
administrator or representative of a deceased
person or a person of unsound mind.
• The subject matter of the action is a claim or
demand against the estate of a deceased person
or a person of unsound mind.
• The testimony pertains to any matter of fact
occurring before the death of such deceased
person or before such person became of
unsound mind.
PROBLEM:
In 1995, A executed a promissory note in favor of C and
in the presence of B. A died in 1996, and in 1997, B sues
A’s administrator to collect the amount due on the note.
C, the original creditor, had previously assigned the note
to B who now brings the action.
May B and C testify on the execution of the note?
ANSWER:
Both of them are disqualified to testify on the execution
of the note, a matter occurring before the death of A.
REASON: B is a party against the estate of a deceased
person; while C is an assignor of B, a party to a case.
QUESTION:
What is the scope of the disqualification by reason
of death or insanity of the adverse party?
ANSWER:
A witness is prohibited from testifying as to any
matter of fact occurring before the death or
insanity of a party to the transaction.
IN OTHER WORDS: It is only parties who assert
claims against an estate who are rendered
incompetent to testify.
PROBLEM:
Plaintiff was an employee of the defendant partnership.
By virtue of a contract he had with X, a partner of the
defendant partnership, the plaintiff was to receive a
salary of 5% of the net profits of the partnership
business per annum.
Subsequently, X died. Plaintiff then instituted the action
to recover the amount alleged to be due him under the
terms of the agreement.
During the trial, the plaintiff took the stand to prove the
existence of the contract. Counsel for defendant
partnership objected on the ground that X, having died
prior to the trial of the action, the plaintiff could not be
a witness.
Will you, as judge, sustain the objection?
ANSWER:
Objection overruled; plaintiff can testify.
The action was not brought against the executor or
administrator of X, nor was it brought upon a claim
against his estate.
The action was brought against the partnership
which was in existence at the time of the trial of the
action, and which was a juridical person.
The fact that X had been a partner in the
partnership, and his interest therein might be
affected by the result of the action, is not sufficient
to bring the case within the ambit of the Dead Man’s
Statute.
QUESTION:
What is the reason underlying the adoption of the
dead man statute?
ANSWER:
To guard against the temptation to give false
testimony in regard to the transaction in question
on the part of the surviving party and to
discourage perjury.
To protect the estate from fictitious claims, and to
discourage perjury.
PROBLEM:
Upon the death of T, P filed a claim against T’s
estate, represented by his executor, for the
sum of P1 million.
During the trial of the case, P, plaintiff,
appeared as a witness and was asked certain
questions concerning an open account existing
between him (P) and the deceased T prior to
the latter’s death.
Should P be allowed to testify?
ANSWER:
The testimony offered by P should not be allowed.
It is clear that P was a party to an action against an
executor or administrator of a deceased person.
Therefore, he was absolutely prohibited from
being a witness in said action for the purpose of
giving testimony concerning such claim or
demand.
If testimony of the character offered by P is
allowed, then all sorts of fictitious claims might be
presented and allowed by deigning persons
without any protection whatever on the part of a
deceased person.
 PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS is used to
designate any information which one person
derives from another by reason of a confidential
relationship existing between the parties.
Upon grounds of public policy, the parties to such
privileged communications are made incompetent,
by law, to testify to such communications.
RELATIONSHIPS COVERED:
• Husband and Wife
• Attorney and Client
• Physician and Patient
• Priest and Penitent
• Public officer and Public Interest
 HUSBAND AND WIFE
[MARITAL PRIVILEGE RULE]
CONCEPT:
The husband or the wife during the marriage or
afterwards, cannot be examined without the consent of
the other as to any communication received in
confidence by one from the other during the marriage.
NOTE:
Letters from the husband to the wife should be
considered as included within the rule, as there exists no
difference between verbal and written communications.
REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION PRIVILEGE:
• There is a valid marriage.
• The privilege is invoked with respect to a
confidential communication between the
spouses during their marriage.
• The spouse against whom such evidence is
being offered has not given his consent to
such testimony.
PROBLEM:
C brings an action against A for the recovery of
money lost belonging to C, which was found
and kept by A.
At the trial, B, the former wife of A (their
marriage having been annulled) is presented as
a witness to testify that at the time of the
finding of the money, she was the wife of A and
saw him count it and put it in his pocket.
Is the testimony of B regarding A’s act, in
relation to the lost money, admissible?
ANSWER:
No. A’s act, in relation to the lost money, done
in the presence of the witness, A’s wife, during
the marriage, was confidential communication
to her by her husband the defendant, within
the meaning of the statute.
It was not necessary that the defendant‘s
communication to his wife, the witness, in
relation to the money, should be expressed in
words.
QUESTION:
When is the privilege NOT applicable?
ANSWER:
• in a civil case by one against the other.
• in a criminal case for a crime committed by
one against the other or the latter’s direct
ascendants or descendants.
QUESTION:
Are third persons who overhear the communication
between the spouses bound by the privilege?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
Third persons who, without the knowledge of the
spouses, overhear the communication are not
disqualified to testify.
EXCEPTION:
When there is collusion and voluntary disclosure
to a third party, that third party becomes an agent
and cannot testify.
 SPOUSAL IMMUNITY
MARITAL PRIVILEGE RULE

SI: Can be invoked only if one of the spouses is a

party to the action.
MPR: Can be claimed whether or not the spouse is a
party to the action.
SI: Applies only if the marriage is existing at the
time the testimony is offered.
MPR: Can be claimed even after the marriage has been
dissolved.
SI: Constitutes a total prohibition against the spouse
of the witness.
MPR: Applicable only to confidential or privileged
communications between the spouses.
 ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE

REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION OF PRIVILEGE:

• existence of attorney-client relation.
• the privilege is invoked with respect to a
confidential communication between them in the
course of professional employment.
• the client has not given his consent to the
attorney’s testimony; or if the attorney’s
secretary, stenographer or clerk is sought to be
examined, both the client and the attorney have
not given their consent. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 749, 2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
What is the purpose of the attorney-client
privilege?

ANSWER:

To encourage full disclosure by a client to his

attorney all pertinent matters as to further the
administration of justice.
QUESTION:
When is the attorney-client privilege NOT applicable?
ANSWER:
The privilege does not apply to communications which
are:
• intended to be made public.
• intended to be communicated to others.
• intended for an unlawful purpose.
• received from third persons not acting in behalf or
as agents of the client.
• made in the presence of third parties who are
strangers to the attorney-client relationship.
(Regalado, Vol. II, p. 750, 2008 ed.)
PROBLEM:
Pacman is under investigation by the BIR for tax
evasion. In the course of the investigation, the BIR
seeks to obtain a letter written on January 15 by
Pacman to his lawyer in which he stated: “Please
prepare a document donating all my boxing
earnings to my mother Dionisia but, in order to get
around our tax laws, I want it back-dated to
December 15.”
The lawyer refuses to produce the letter on the
ground of attorney-client privilege.
Production of the letter should be:
a. prohibited, because the statement is
protected by the attorney-client privilege.
b. prohibited, because the statement is
protected by the client’s privilege against
self-incrimination.
c. required, because the statement is for an
unlawful purpose.
d. required, because the attorney-client
privilege belongs to the client and can be
claimed only by him.
QUESTION:
What is the true test in applying the attorney-
client privilege?
ANSWER:
The test is whether the communication made is
with the view of obtaining from the lawyer his
professional assistance or advice regardless of
the existence or absence of a pending
litigation.
PROBLEM:
Pedro received a subpoena to testify in a criminal
case. He approached a judge for advice and the
latter told him to tell the truth. Pedro thereupon
proceeded to make statements to the judge.
Is the judge competent to testify on Pedro’s
statements?
ANSWER:
No, he cannot. The principle which regards as
confidential communications between attorney
and client is not affected by the fact that the
attorney was also a judge.
PROBLEM:
A tugboat owned by ABC Tugboat Services sank while
helping to tow the vessel of XYZ Shipping, Inc. Five of
the tugboat crew drowned.
At the maritime board inquiry, the four survivors of the
tugboat testified. ABC engaged Atty. Abe to defend it
against potential claims and to sue XYZ Shipping for
damages to the tugboat. Atty. Abe obtained signed
statements from the survivors. The heirs of the five
victims filed an action for damages against ABC.
The lawyer of the heirs sent written interrogatories to
Atty. Abe, asking whether statements of the survivors
may be obtained. Atty. Abe refused on the allegation
that the documents asked are privileged
communication.
Is Atty. Abe’s contention tenable?
ANSWER:
Yes. The contention of Atty. Abe is tenable
considering that he acted in his professional
capacity in bringing about the statements he
obtained from the survivors. The notes,
memoranda, and writings made by a counsel in
pursuance of his professional duty form part of
his private and confidential files in the cases
handled by him; hence privileged. (Air Phils. Corp v.
Penswell, Inc., G.R. No. 172835, Dec. 13, 2007).
QUESTION:
Who may claim the privilege?
ANSWER:
To the client only belongs the privilege and
therefore he alone can invoke it. And he may claim
it not only when his attorney is called upon to
disclose professional communications, but also
when he himself is asked to make the disclosure.
The client cannot be compelled to reveal
confidential communications made by him to his
attorney or the advice given by the latter to him.
Otherwise, the privilege could easily be defeated.
 DOCTOR-PATIENT PRIVILEGE

STATEMENT OF THE RULE:

A person authorized to practice medicine,
surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case,
without the consent of the patient, be
examined as to any information which he may
have acquired in attending such patient in
professional capacity, which information was
necessary to enable him to act in that capacity,
and which would blacken the character of the
patient.
 REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION OF PRIVILEGE:
• The action involves a CIVIL case.
• The relation of doctor and patient existed
between the person claiming the privilege or
his legal representative and the doctor.
• The advice or treatment given by him or any
information was acquired by the physician
while professionally attending to the patient.
• The information was necessary for the
performance of his professional duty.
• The disclosure of the information would tend to
blacken the reputation of the patient.
PROBLEM:
P v. D for partition of property. P seeks to offer in
evidence the testimony of a doctor to prove that D
is not the illegitimate son of X because the latter
was sterile.
D objects to the admission of the testimony on the
allegation that the same is covered by the physician-
patient privilege because the testimony would
blacken the reputation of X. It is alleged that X
became sterile because he contracted gonorrhea. P
argues that X is long dead and, as such, the privilege
may not be invoked.
Is the testimony of the doctor covered by the
physician-patient privilege?
ANSWER:
Yes. X's sterility arose when he contracted
gonorrhea, a fact which most assuredly would
blacken his reputation.
In fact, given that society holds virility at a
premium, sterility alone, without the attendant
embarrassment of contracting a sexually-
transmitted disease, would be sufficient to
blacken the reputation of any patient. (Gonzales v.
CA, G.R. No. 117740, Oct. 30, 1998).
QUESTION:
Does the fact that X is long dead bar the application of
the physician-patient privilege?
ANSWER:
No. The privilege of secrecy is not abolished or
terminated because of death. The purpose of the law
would be thwarted and the policy intended to be
promoted thereby would be defeated, if death removes
the seal of secrecy, from the communications and
disclosures which a patient should make to his
physician.
After one has gone to his grave, the living are not
permitted to impair his name and disgrace his memory
by dragging to light communications and disclosures
made under the seal of the statute (Gonzales v. CA, G.R. No.
117740, Oct. 30, 1998)
QUESTION:
What is the purpose of the doctor-patient
privilege?
ANSWER:
The privilege is intended to facilitate and make
safe, full, and confidential disclosure by a patient
to a doctor of all facts, circumstances, symptoms,
untrammeled by apprehension of their
subsequent and enforced disclosure and
publication on the witness stand, to the end that
the physician may form a correct opinion, and be
enabled safely and efficaciously to treat his
patient.
QUESTION:
Against whom may the privilege be claimed?
ANSWER:
The persons against whom the privilege may be claimed
are those duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery,
or obstetrics.
The privilege cannot be extended by construction to
persons employing other curative processes not coming
within the ordinary meaning of the terms “practice of
medicine, surgery or obstetrics.”
Accordingly, communications made by a patient to
dentists, pharmacists, and nurses who are not acting as
agents of physicians, surgeons or obstetricians, are not
privileged.
PROBLEM:
In a homicide case, the physician who performed
an autopsy on the body of the deceased was called
to testify.
Is the physician competent to testify?
ANSWER:
Yes. The testimony of the physician does not fall
within the inhibition of the provision. A dead man
is not a patient capable of sustaining the relation
of confidence toward his physician which is the
foundation of the rule given in the statute, but is a
mere piece of senseless clay which has passed
beyond the reach of human prescription, medical
or otherwise. Moreover, the deceased had not in
life been the patient of the physician.
QUESTION:
When is the privilege inapplicable?
ANSWER:
The doctor-patient privilege rule does not apply to
communications which are:
• not given in confidence.
• irrelevant to the physician’s professional
employment.
• made for an unlawful purpose.
• intended to be made public.
• waived without objection. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 751,
2008 ed.)
PROBLEM:
In an annulment case, the physician of an insane
asylum testified that the defendant-wife was a
patient in the asylum, and stayed there for a
certain length of time. The physician further
testified that the defendant came to the asylum
without a baby and left with one.
Is this testimony objectionable as involving
privilege communication?
ANSWER:
No, because the same is not an information
necessary for the proper treatment of the patient.
The matters stated are nothing but casual
informations of the witnesses, which are not
included in the privilege.
 PRIEST AND PENITENT

REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION OF PRIVILEGE:

• The confession must have been made to the

priest or minister in his professional capacity
according to the discipline of the church to
which the priest or minister belongs.
• The communication made must be confidential
and must be penitential in character. e.g.,
under the seal of the confessional. (Regalado, Vol.
II, p. 752, 2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
What is the purpose of this privilege?
ANSWER:
To allow and encourage individuals to fulfill their
religious, emotional or other needs by protecting
confidential disclosures to religious and spiritual
practitioners.
QUESTION:
When is the privilege inapplicable?
ANSWER:
When the communication is not penitential in
character as when what is divulged is the plan to
commit a crime.
 PUBLIC OFFICERS

STATEMENT OF THE RULE

A public officer cannot be examined during his

term of office or afterwards, as to
communications made to him in official
confidence, when the court finds that the
public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
 REQUISITES FOR
APPLICATION OF PRIVILEGE
• The communication must have been made to
a public officer.
• The communication was given to the public
officer in official confidence.
• The public interest would suffer by the
disclosure of the communication. (Regalado, Vol. II,
p. 752, 2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
When is the privilege inapplicable?
ANSWER:
The privilege is NOT applicable if what is asked:
• is useful evidence to vindicate the innocence of
an accused.
• lessen the risk of false testimony.
• is essential to the proper disposition of the
litigation.
• the benefit to be gained by a correct
disposition of the litigation was greater than
any injury which could inure to the relation by
a disclosure of the information.
 EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE

EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE refers to certain types of

information like military, diplomatic and other
national security matters which may be
withheld from the public because of their
sensitive nature.
 OTHER PRIVILEGED MATTERS

• The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any

proceeding concerning any information,
statement, or opinion received from the
child in the course of serving as a guardian
ad litem, unless the court finds it necessary
to promote the best interests of the child. [Sec.
5 (e), Rule on Examination of a Child Witness]

• Voters may not be compelled to disclose for

whom they voted
• Editors, publishers, or duly accredited
reporters of any newspaper, magazine or
periodical of general circulation cannot be
compelled to reveal the source of any news
report or any information given to them in
confidence, unless a court or the Congress or
a committee of Congress finds that such
revelation is demanded for State security. (R.A.
1477)

• Trade secrets cannot be disclosed although

this is not absolute as the court may compel
disclosure where it is indispensable for doing
justice (Francisco, p. 335, 1992 ed.)
• Bank deposits are absolutely confidential in
nature, except upon written permission of the
depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon
lawful order of a competent court. (RA 1405;
Francisco, p. 335, 1992 ed.)

• Conciliators, mediators and similar officials shall

not testify in any court or body regarding any
matter taken up at the conciliation proceedings
conducted by them. (Art. 233, Labor Code)
• Informers, for the protection of their identity,
cannot be compelled to testify by the prosecutor
when their testimony would merely be
cumulative and corroborative. (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 353,
1999 ed.)
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
 RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
OF A WITNESS

• To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or

insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor.

• Not to be detained longer than the interests

of justice require.
• Not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue.
• Not to give an answer which will tend to subject
him to a penalty for an offense. (right against
self-incrimination)
NOTE: This refers to immunity statutes wherein
the witness is granted immunity from criminal
prosecution for offenses admitted in his
testimony. Example: Sec. 8, RA 1379, the law
providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully
acquired property, and under PD 749, in
prosecutions for bribery and graft.
• Not to give an answer, which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it be to the very
fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in
issue would be presumed. But a witness must
answer to the fact of his previous final
conviction for an offense.
 KINDS OF IMMUNITY

USE IMMUNITY
• Prohibits the use of the witness' compelled
testimony and its fruits in any manner in
connection with the criminal prosecution of the
witness.
TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY
• Grants immunity to the witness from
prosecution for an offense to which his
compelled testimony relates.
QUESTION:
May a witness refuse to answer questions
material to the inquiry?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
A witness cannot refuse to answer questions.
The witness has the obligation to answer
questions, although his answer may tend to
establish a claim against him.
EXCEPTIONS:
• RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION: if his answer
will tend to subject him to punishment for an offense.
• RIGHT AGAINST SELF-DEGRADATION: if his answer will
have a direct tendency to degrade his character.
EXCEPTION TO EXCEPTION:
A witness may not invoke the right against self-
incrimination nor the right against self-degradation if:
• The question is directed to the very fact at issue or to
a fact from which the fact at issue would be
presumed.
• If it refers to his previous final conviction for an
offense. (Regalado, Vol. II, pp. 841-842, 2008 ed.)
NOTE:
The right right against self-incrimination pertains
only to natural persons and with respect to
testimonial compulsion only. This right may be
invoked in all kinds of proceedings where
testimony is to be taken, including investigation by
legislative bodies.
The constitutional assurance of the right against
self-incrimination is a prohibition against the use
of physical or moral compulsion to extort
communications from the accused. It is simply a
prohibition against legal process to extract from
the accused’s own lips, against his will, admission
of his guilt. (Ong v. Sandiganbayan & Office of the Ombudsman,
G.R. No. 126858, Sept. 16, 2005)
QUESTION:
Distinguish the right against self-incrimination of
the accused from that of an ordinary witness.
ANSWER:
ACCUSED: Cannot be compelled to testify or
produce evidence in the criminal case in which he
is the accused or one of the accused; he cannot be
compelled to do so even by subpoena or other
process or order of the court. He cannot be
required to testify either for the prosecution, for
his co-accused or even for himself.
ORDINARY WITNESS: May be compelled to testify
by subpoena, having only the right to refuse to
answer a particular incriminating question at the
time it is put to him.
QUESTION:
May a witness refuse to take the witness stand?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
No.
EXCEPTIONS:
• He is the accused in a criminal case.
• He is the respondent in a civil and administrative
case that partake the nature of or analogous to a
criminal proceeding. As long as the suit is criminal in
nature, the party can decline to take the witness
stand. It is not the character of the suit involved but
the nature of the proceedings that controls. (Rosete, et.
al. v. Lim, et. al., G.R. No. 136051, June 8, 2006).
QUESTION:
Pedro, a government official, is invited by the Senate to
appear as a resource person in a public hearing in one of
its committees. Because Pedro declined the invitation,
the Senate places him under arrest for contempt and
detains him. Pedro claims that his arrest and detention
violate his right against self-incrimination. Is Pedro’s
contention correct?
ANSWER:
No. The right against self-incrimination may only be
invoked when the incriminating question is being asked
because he has no way of knowing in advance the
nature or effect of the questions to be asked. That this
right may possibly be violated or abused is no ground
for denying the Senate committees their power of
inquiry. (In Re: Sabio, G.R. No. 174340, Oct. 17, 2006)
QUESTION:
Is the right against self-incrimination available to a
witness who has been admitted to the Witness
Protection Program?
ANSWER:
No. A witness admitted under the witness program
CANNOT refuse to testify or give evidence for the
prosecution of the offense or offenses for which he has
been admitted into the program on the ground of
constitutional right against self-incrimination.
However, he shall enjoy immunity from criminal
prosecution and cannot be subjected to any penalty or
forfeiture for any transaction, matter or thing
concerning his compelled testimony or evidence. (Sec. 14,
R.A. 6981)
QUESTION:
Who may be admitted to the Witness Protection,
Security and Benefit Program under RA 6981?
ANSWER:
Any person who has witnessed or has knowledge
or information about the commission of a crime
and has testified or is testifying or is about to
testify before any judicial or quasi-judicial body, or
before any investigating authority, may be
admitted under the witness protection program
provided:
•the offense in which his testimony will be used is
a grave felony as defined under the Revised
Penal Code or special laws.
• his testimony can be substantially
corroborated in its material points.
• he or any member of his family within the
second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity
is subjected to threats to life or bodily injury or
there is a likelihood that he will be killed,
forced, intimidated, harassed or corrupted to
prevent him from testifying, or to testify
falsely, or evasively, because or on account of
his testimony.
• he is not a law enforcement officer, even if he
would be testifying against the other law
enforcement officers. In such a case, only the
immediate members of his family may avail
themselves of the protection under the law.
(Sec. 3, R.A. 6981)
 STATE WITNESS
Any person who has participated in the
commission of a crime and desires to be a
witness for the State, can apply and shall be
admitted into the witness protection program
if the following circumstances are present:
• the offense in which his testimony will be
used is a grave felony as defined under the
Revised Penal Code or its equivalent under
special laws.
• there is absolute necessity for his testimony.
• there is no other direct evidence available for
the proper prosecution of the offense
committed.

• his testimony can be substantially

corroborated on its material points.

• he does not appear to be the most guilty.

• he has not at any time been convicted of any

crime involving moral turpitude.
NOTE:
An accused who is discharged from an
information or criminal complaint by the court
in order that he may be a State Witness
pursuant to Sections 9 and 10 of Rule 119 of
the Revised Rules of Court may, upon his
petition be admitted to the Program under R.A.
6981 if he complies with the other
requirements of the law.
R.A. 6981 does not prevent the discharge of an
accused so that he can be used as a State
Witness under Rule 119 of the Rules of Court.
(Sec. 10, R.A. 6981).
 ORDER IN THE
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
QUESTION:
What is the order in the examination of an
individual witness?
What are the purposes of each stage of the
examination?
ANSWER:
• DIRECT EXAMINATION
• CROSS EXAMINATION
• RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION
• RE-CROSS EXAMINATION
DIRECT EXAMINATION: Examination in chief of a witness
by a party presenting him on the facts relevant to the
issue.
PURPOSE: to elicit facts about the client’s cause of
action or defense.
CROSS EXAMINATION: Examination by the adverse party
as to any matters stated in the direct examination, or
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and
freedom to test his accuracy and truthfulness and
freedom from interest, or bias, or the reverse, and to
elicit all facts bearing upon the issue.
PURPOSE: to impeach the credibility of the testimony;
to impeach the credibility of the witness; to elicit
admissions; and to clarify certain matters.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION: Re-examination by the party
presenting the witness to explain or supplement his
answers given on cross-examination. Questions on
matters not dealt with during the cross-examination
may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
PURPOSE: To allow the witness to explain or amplify his
testimony during cross-examination; and to explain any
apparent contradiction or inconsistency in his
statements.
RE-CROSS EXAMINATION: Re-examination by the
adverse party on the witness on matters stated in his re-
direct examination, and also on such other matters as
may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
PURPOSE: To rebut damaging evidence brought out
during cross-examination.
 SCOPE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION

ENGLISH RULE:
If a witness is called to testify to a particular fact,
he becomes a witness for all purposes and may be
fully cross-examined upon all matters material to
the issue, the examination not being confined to
the matters inquired about in the direct
examination.
AMERICAN RULE:
Cross-examination is restricted to facts and
circumstances which are connected with the
matters that have been stated in the direct
examination of the witness.
QUESTION:
What rule is observed in our jurisdiction?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
English rule.
EXCEPTION:
The American rule is observed with respect to
cross-examination of an accused or a hostile
witness.
DOCTRINE OF INCOMPLETE TESTIMONY

GENERAL RULE:
When cross-examination cannot be done or
completed due to causes attributable to the party
who offered the witness, the incomplete
testimony is rendered incompetent and should be
stricken from the record.
EXCEPTION:
Where the prosecution witness was extensively
cross-examined on the material points and
thereafter failed to appear and cannot be
produced despite a warrant of his arrest. (People vs
Gorospe, gr. 51513, May 15, 1984)
QUESTION:
What is the effect of death or absence of a witness
after the direct examination by the proponent?
ANSWER:
• If the witness was not cross-examined because
of causes attributable to the cross-examining
party and the witness had always made himself
available for cross-examination, the direct
testimony of the witness shall remain on record
and cannot be stricken off because the cross-
examiner is deemed to have waived his right to
cross-examine. (Dela Paz v. IAC, G.R. No. 75860, Sept. 17,
1987)
• If the witness was partially cross-examined, but
died before the completion of his cross-
examination, his testimony on direct may be
stricken out but only with respect to the
testimony not covered by the cross-
examination. (People v. Señeris, G.R. No. L-48883, Aug. 6, 1980)

• The absence of a witness is not sufficient to

warrant the striking out of his testimony for
failure to appear for further cross-examination
where the witness has already been sufficiently
cross-examined, and the matter on which cross-
examination is sought is not in controversy. (Ibid.)
QUESTION:
Is the party who offered the testimony of a
witness bound by such testimony?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
Yes, he is bound by the testimony.
EXCEPTIONS:
When the witness is the:
• adverse party.
• hostile witness.
• unwilling witness.
• a witness required by law to be presented
(forced witness).
QUESTION:
Who is a hostile witness?
ANSWER:
A witness may be considered as unwilling
or hostile only if so declared by the court
upon adequate showing of his adverse
interest, unjustified reluctance to testify,
or his having misled the party into calling
him to the witness stand.
QUESTION:
What is the rule on recalling of a witness?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
A witness cannot be recalled without leave
of court as the recalling of a witness is a
matter of judicial discretion. (Sec. 9, Rule 132)
EXCEPTIONS:
• The examination has not been concluded.
• If the recall of the witness was expressly
reserved by a party with the approval of the
court.
NOTE: In these two cases the recall of a witness
is a matter of right. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 848, 2008 ed.)
NOTE: There must be a satisfactory showing of
some concrete, substantial ground for the
recall.
 LEADING AND
MISLEADING QUESTIONS

QUESTION:
What is a leading question?
ANSWER:
One which suggests to the witness the
answer which the examining party desires.
It is not allowed except:
• On cross-examination.
• On preliminary matters.
• When there is difficulty in getting direct
and intelligible answers from a witness
who is ignorant, or a child of tender years,
or is of feeble mind or a deaf-mute.
• To unwilling witness or hostile witness.
• Witness is an adverse party or an officer,
director, or managing agent of a public or
private corporation or of a partnership or
association which is an adverse party. (Sec.
10, Rule 132)
QUESTIONS:
Why are leading questions allowed during cross-
examination?
ANSWER:
The witness is not the cross-examining party’s
witness. He is expected to be adverse or hostile to
the cross-examiner. He is not expected to
cooperate.
NOTE: A question that merely suggests a subject
without suggesting an answer or a specific thing is
not a leading question.
EXAMPLE: “State whether anything transpired
between you and the defendant on the 17th of
May 2008.”
QUESTION:
What is a misleading question?
ANSWER:
It is one which assumes as true a fact not yet
testified to by the witness, or contrary to that
which he has previously stated.
It is not allowed, unless waived or when asking
hypothetical questions to an expert witness. It
is not allowed in any type of examination.
 THE ART OF OBJECTING

PURPOSE OF OBJECTION:
One author has described objecting as a
“skill offence” to prevent the introduction
of incompetent evidence from reaching the
ears of the judge and to preserve in written
form the objection to the incompetent
evidence in case of an appeal.
TIMELINESS OF OBJECTIONS:

Under Section 36 of Rule 132, Rules of

Court, objection must be made as soon as
the ground becomes apparent and the
ground for the objection must be
specified.
PERSONAL DISQUALIFICATION
OF A WITNESS:

The objection must be made when the

person is first called to the stand,
before the testimony begins, or as soon
as the ground of objection becomes
known.
OBJECTION TO A FACT
OR GROUP OF FACTS:
Objection must be made just after the offeror
has uttered his question or otherwise made his
offer of fact except that where the ground for
the objection is found only in some feature of a
witness’ answer which could not have been
foreseen upon until the answer was made, the
objection, in the form of a motion to strike out,
must be made after the answer.

OBJECTION TO WRITTEN DOCUMENT:

The opponent is entitled to see the same
before it is offered in evidence.
 OBJECTION MUST BE SPECIFIC

RULE:
An objection is specific when it states why or
how the evidence is irrelevant or incompetent.
PURPOSE OF SPECIFICITY OF OBJECTION:
The objection must be specified so that the
party offering the evidence may remove it, if
possible, and let the case be tried on its merits.
• If evidence is objected because the
question is leading, the form may be
changed.
• if the evidence is irrelevant, the relevancy
may be shown.
• if it is incompetent, its incompetency may
be removed.
• if it is immaterial, its materiality may be
established.
• if to the order of introduction, it may be
withdrawn and offered at another time.
• As a general rule, general objections are
insufficient, except where the ground on
which they are based is so manifest that the
trial judge cannot fail to understand it, as
when evidence is clearly irrelevant or
incompetent or inadmissible for any
purpose.

• Any objection stating that the offered

evidence is “incompetent” or “irrelevant” is
deemed a general objection. Other terms for
a general objection are: inadmissible;
improper; illegal; insufficient; prejudicial;
highly prejudicial.
 SPECIFIC GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS

THAT THE QUESTION IS LEADING:

A leading question is one which suggests to
the witness the desired answer. A question
which in form assumes a controverted fact, or
permits the simple “yes” or “no” answer.
THAT THE QUESTION IS MISLEADING:
A question which assumes as true a fact not
yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to
that which he has previously stated.
THE QUESTION CALLS FOR
HEARSAY EVIDENCE:
In other words, the witness is not testifying to
facts which he knows of his own personal
knowledge. However, there are various exceptions
to this rule.
THE QUESTION HAS NO BASIS:
For example, a doctor is asked to the cause of the
death of a person when there has yet been no
proof of death, or that the act of a conspirator or
an agent is being used as evidence against a co-
conspirator or the principal without first proving
the conspiracy or the agency.
THE WITNESS HAS NOT YET
BEEN PROPERLY QUALIFIED:
As when an expert is being asked to give his
opinion without first establishing his
qualifications as an expert; or an ordinary
witness is being asked to give his opinion on a
writing when it has not yet been shown that he
is familiar with the handwriting of the person
concerned; or a minor is asked questions on the
main issue before it is shown that he
understands the nature of an oath and is
sufficiently intelligent to perceive the matters on
which he will testify.
THE QUESTION ASSUMES A FACT:
In other words, the question assumes facts
not in evidence.
NO FOUNDATION HAS YET BEEN
LAID FOR THE QUESTION.
Secondary evidence is introduced to prove
the contents of writing when there has been
no proof of the destruction or loss of the
original.
THE WITNESS IS INCOMPETENT:
The witness is not qualified under the rules
of testimonial evidence, such as in the case
of an insane person, a husband against his
wife without her consent, an attorney
without the consent of the client, a doctor
without the consent of the patient.
THE EVIDENCE IS INCOMPETENT.
The evidence is excluded by law in a
particular case, such as confessions obtained
by force, violence, or where the accused was
not assisted by counsel or informed of his
right to remain silent.
THE EVIDENCE IS IRRELEVANT:
The offered piece of evidence has no
probative value on any issue in the case.

THE EVIDENCE IS IMMATERIAL:

The offered evidential fact is directed to

prove some matter which is not properly in
issue in the pleadings and as determined by
the applicable law.
THE EVIDENCE VIOLATES THE RULE ON
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION:
This refers to certain witnesses who are
partially incompetent to testify on certain
specified matters under Sections 20-21 of
Rule 130, as when the question invades the
field of confidential communication
between husband and wife, etc.
THE QUESTION IS VAGUE:
In other words, ambiguous, uncertain,
confusing, indefinite.
THE QUESTION CALLS FOR A CONCLUSION OF
LAW:
A witness must testify only to facts and leave
conclusions of law to the court.
THE QUESTION CALLS FOR A CONCLUSION OF
THE WITNESS:
A witness can testify only to facts which are of
his own knowledge, not to his conclusions.
THE QUESTION IS ARGUMENTATIVE:
The question puts to the witness hypothetical
facts or the witness is asked to draw his
conclusion from hypothetical facts.
THE QUESTION CALLS FOR THE
OPINION OF THE WITNESS:
Except in the matters where the opinion of an
ordinary witness is permissible, such as testimony
on the identity of a person whom he knows, or his
handwriting when he knows his handwriting.
THE QUESTION IS INADMISSIBLE UNDER
THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE:
• Refers to an effort to vary the terms of an
unambiguous writing by parol evidence.
• the instrument speaks for itself and cannot be
varied by oral interpretation.
THE QUESTION CALLS FOR A
SELF-SERVING EVIDENCE:
THE QUESTION VIOLATES THE
BEST EVIDENCE RULE:
• the original writing has not been accounted for.
• the purported explanation for failure to produce
the original writing is inadequate, and fails to
establish any competent excuse for non-
production of the original.
• The original writing speaks for itself, is the best
evidence, and cannot be varied by attempted
oral interpretation.
THE PREDICATE HAS NOT BEEN LAID FOR
IMPEACHING A PARTY OR A WITNESS:
Before a witness can be impeached by oral or
written statements previously made by him,
the oral statements must be related to him,
as to circumstances of time and place,
persons present, and he must be asked
whether he made the statements, and if so,
allowed to explain them; and in case of
written statements, they must be shown to
him before any question is asked of him
regarding the statements.
 GROUNDS OF OBJECTION TO
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

• The documentary evidence has not been

properly identified.
• Its genuineness and due execution has not
been proven.
• It is not admissible under the Best Evidence
Rule.
• It has been illegally obtained, such as where
the evidence has been obtained through
illegal search and seizure.
• In case of confession, the evidence was
obtained in violation of the constitutional
rights of the accused.
• The document is a forgery.
• The document contains alterations in
material matters which alterations have not
been satisfactorily explained.
• The necessary documentary stamps required
by the law have not been affixed.
• The document is immaterial and irrelevant to
the case.
PRESUMPTIONS
AND INFERENCES
QUESTION:
What are matters which need not be proved?

ANSWER:
• Facts admitted by the parties in their
pleadings. (Sec. 11, Rule 8)
• Admitted facts. (Sec. 4, Rule 129)
• Facts subject to judicial notice. (Sec. 3, Rule 129)
• Facts which are legally presumed. (Secs. 2 & 3,
Rule 131)
 CONCEPT OF PRESUMPTION

PRESUMPTION is an assumption of fact resulting

from a rule of law which requires such fact to be
assumed from another fact or group of facts found
or otherwise established in the case.

EXAMPLE: D is indebted to C in an amount payable

in instalments. If evidence is introduced that the
instalment payment for December has been
received by the creditor, a presumption arises that
previous instalments have been paid. (Art. 1176, CC)
 IMPORTANCE OF PRESUMPTION

A presumption is not evidence. It merely

affects the burden of offering evidence. A
presumption stands, unless overcome by
contradictory evidence.
A presumption shifts the burden of going
forward with the evidence. It imposes on
the party against whom it is directed the
burden of going forward with evidence to
meet or rebut the presumption.
 CLASSES OF PRESUMPTIONS

PRESUMPTION OF LAW:
It is a deduction which the law expressly
directs to be made from particular facts.
PRESUMPTION OF FACT:
It is a deduction which reason draws from the
facts proved without an express direction from
law to that effect.
PRESUMPTION OF LAW:
A certain inference must be made whenever
the facts appear which furnish the basis of the
inference.
PRESUMPTION OF FACT:
Discretion is vested in the tribunal as to
drawing the inference.
PRESUMPTION OF LAW:
Reduced to fixed rules and form a part of the
system of jurisprudence.
PRESUMPTION OF FACT:
Derived wholly and directly from the
circumstances of the particular case by means
of the common experience of mankind.
PRESUMPTION OF LAW:
Need not be pleaded or proved if the facts
on which they are based are duly averred
and established.

PRESUMPTION OF FACT:
Has to be pleaded and proved.
 INFERENCE DISTINGUISHED
FROM PRESUMPTION

An INFERENCE is a factual conclusion that can

rationally be drawn from other facts. It is a result
of reasoning process. It need not have a legal
effect because it is not mandated by law.
A PRESUMPTION is mandated by law and
establishes a legal relation between or among
the facts.
 KINDS OF PRESUMPTION

PRESUMPTIONS OF LAW:
Those which the law requires to be drawn from
the existence of established facts in the
absence of contrary evidence.
EXAMPLE: When a crime is charged, the
accused is presumed innocent until proven
guilty.
PRESUMPTIONS OF FACT:
Those which the experience of mankind has
shown to be valid, founded on general
knowledge and information; inferences which
naturally arise in common experience from
particular circumstances or known fact.
EXAMPLE: A person in possession of a forged
document is presumed to be the forger.
 KINDS OF PRESUMPTIONS OF LAW

CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS:
Those which are not permitted to be overcome by
any proof to the contrary.
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS:
Those which are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but
may be contradicted and overcome by other
evidence.
 CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS
ESTOPPEL IN PAIS:
Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or
omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to
believe a particular thing true and to act upon such
belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such
declaration, act, or omission, be permitted to falsify it.
EXAMPLE:
One who clothes another with apparent authority as his
agent and holds him out to the public as such, can not
be permitted to deny the authority of such person to act
as his agent to the prejudice of innocent third persons
dealing with such agent in good faith and in the honest
belief that he was what he appears to be.
• The tenant is not permitted to deny the title
of his landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of landlord
and tenant between them. (Sec. 2, Rule 131)
ADMISSIONS
 CONCEPT OF ADMISSION

ADMISSION is the acknowledgment of

facts or of circumstances from which guilt
may be inferred, tending to incriminate the
speaker, but not sufficient to establish his
guilt.
ADMISSION is sometimes referred to as the
“little brother of confession.”
EXAMPLE: In a homicide case, the accused
invokes self-defense.
 KINDS OF ADMISSION
JUDICIAL: one made in a judicial proceeding.
EXTRAJUDICIAL: one made out of court.
EXPRESS: one made in a definite, certain and
unequivocal language.
IMPLIED: those which may be inferred from the acts,
declarations or omissions of a party.
ADOPTIVE: It is a party’s reaction to a statement or
action by another person when it is reasonable to
treat the party’s reaction as an admission of
something stated or implied by the other person. A
third person’s statement becomes the admission of
the party embracing or espousing it.
Adoptive admission occurs when a party:
• expressly agrees with or concurs in an oral
statement made by another.
• hears a statement and later essentially repeats
it.
• utters an acceptance or builds upon the
assertion of another.
• replies by way of rebuttal to some specific
points raised by another but ignores further
points which he or she has heard the other
make.
• reads and signs a written statement made by
another. (Republic v. Kendrick Development Corp., G.R. No. 149576,
Aug. 8, 2006)
NOTE:
One good example of adoptive admission is the
alleged admissions made by President Estrada
when his options had dwindled when, according
to the Angara Diary, the Armed Forces withdrew
its support from him as President and
Commander-in-Chief.
Thus, Angara had to allegedly ask Senate President
Pimentel to advise Estrada to consider the option
of a “dignified exit or resignation.” Estrada did not
object to the suggested option but simply said he
could never leave the country.
According to the court, his silence on this and
other related suggestions can be taken as adoptive
admissions by him. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15,
Apr. 3, 2001)
EXPRESS ADMISSION:
• Accused defends that he killed the victim in self-
defense.
• A man executes an affidavit that a parcel of land
belongs to his wife.
IMPLIED ADMISSION::
• Payment of interest of a debt is an implied
admission of the existence of the debt.
• The immediate flight of the accused and his
lengthy sojourn in another province under an
assumed name are admissible to show
consciousness of guilt. “The wicked fleeth, even
when no man pursueth; but the righteous are as
bold as a lion”
 ADMISSION OF A PARTY

ADMISSION is an act, declaration, or omission of a

party as to a relevant fact which may be given in
evidence against him. (Sec. 26, Rule 130)
It is any statement of fact made by a party against
his interest or unfavorable to the conclusion for
which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts
alleged by him. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 754, 2008 ed.)
NOTE: Sections 26 and 32 of Rule 130 refer to
extrajudicial admissions.
QUESTION:
What are the requisites for an admission to be
admissible?
ANSWER:
• must involve matters of fact, not of law.
• must be categorical and definite.
• must have been knowingly and voluntarily
made.
• must be adverse to the admitter’s interests.
PROBLEM:
Abe was feeding a beautiful Belgian Mallinois dog when
a friend came and asked, “Is that your dog? Its cute.”
Abe answered, “Mine, of course.”
Three months later, a damage suit was filed against Abe
because the dog he was feeding and claimed as his own
had bitten a boy. Abe disowned the dog saying it was
his neighbor’s dog.
Can the plaintiff present Abe’s statement, “Mine, of
course” to show ownership of the dog?
ANSWER:
Yes, Abe’s statement is an admission which is relevant to
the fact in issue – the ownership of the dog.
Consequently, the admission is admissible in evidence
against him.
 SELF-SERVING DECLARATION

A self-serving declaration is an unsworn statement

made by the declarant out of court which is
favorable to his interests.
EXAMPLE: The question between A and B is
whether a certain deed is forged. A affirms that it
is genuine, B that it is forged. A may prove a
statement by B that the deed is genuine; and B
may prove a statement by A that the deed is
forged.
A cannot prove a statement by himself that the
deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by
himself that the deed is forged.
 RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE

RES INTER ALIOS ACTA

ALTERI NOCERE NON DEBET:
The principle literally means “things done between
strangers ought not to injure those who are not
parties to it.” It has two branches:
• The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an
act, declaration, or omission of another.
• Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing
at one time is not admissible to prove that he did
or did not do the same or similar thing at another
time.
QUESTION:
What are the exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule
(first branch)?
ANSWER:
• Admission by a co-partner or agent.
• Admission by a co-conspirator.
• Admission by privies (Sec. 29, 30, 31, Rule 130)
QUESTION:
What does the rule prohibit? (second branch)
ANSWER:
The rule prohibits the admission of the so-called
“propensity evidence” which is evidence that one did or
did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible
to prove that he did or did not do the same or similar
thing at another time.
 ADMISSION AND CONFESSION

ADMISSION: A statement of fact which does not involve

an acknowledgment of guilt or liability.
CONFESSION: A statement of fact which involves an
acknowledgment of guilt or liability.
ADMISSION: May be made by third persons and, in
certain cases, are admissible against a party.
CONFESSION: Can be made only by the party himself
and, in some instances, are admissible against his co-
accused.
ADMISSION: May be express or implied.
CONFESSION: Always express.
 INTRODUCTION OF
ADMISSION IN EVIDENCE
AS INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE:
Admissions are original evidence and no
foundation is necessary for their introduction in
evidence.
IF MADE ORALLY, it may be proved by any
competent witness who heard them or by the
declarant himself. It is not necessary the exact
words be repeated.
IF MADE IN A PRIVATE WRITING, there must be
some proof of the authenticity or identity of the
writing.
IF MADE IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT, no need of
identification because of the rule that public
documents are evidence of the fact that gave
rise to their execution and of the date of the
latter.
EXAMPLE:
P v. D for sum of money. P’s claim is for
100,000.
D disputes the amount and offers a demand
letter sent to him by P stating “Balance due:
75,000.”
The letter may be marked in evidence.
AS IMPEACHING EVIDENCE:
A proper foundation must be laid for the
impeaching questions, by calling the attention of
such party to his former statement so as to give
hive him an opportunity to explain before such
admissions are offered in evidence.
EXAMPLE:
A witness in a homicide case testified that he saw
the accused wearing a white shirt at the time of
the incident. He may be confronted on cross-
examination with his sworn statement where he
said he saw the accused wearing a dark shirt.
 ADMISSION OF A PARTY
AS TO A RELEVANT FACT
RULE: The act, declaration or omission of party as
to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against
him. This rule is based upon the presumption that
no man would declare anything against himself,
unless such declaration were true.
EXAMPLE: H and W are husband and wife. When
W died, W’s heirs sought to partition a parcel of
land registered in the name of W. H claims the
land to be conjugal.
The heirs of W may present in evidence an
affidavit previously executed by H attesting that
the land is his wife’s paraphernal property.
 ADMISSION BY SILENCE
DOCTRINE OF ACQUIESCENCE
Any act or declaration made in the presence and
within the observation of a party who does or says
nothing when the act or declaration is such as
naturally to call for action or comment if not true,
may be given in evidence against him.
SILENCE MEANS CONSENT.
EXAMPLE: He who stands, at the sale of his
property by another person, without objecting will
be precluded from contesting the buyer’s title.
 ADMISSION BY SILENCE
IN CRIMINAL CASES
•accusations or statements in the presence of
the accused are competent only when the
accused hears them and fully comprehends
their effect.
•accusations or statements are not in evidence
against the accused, where he remains silent
when they are uttered in the course of judicial
proceedings. His silence cannot be admitted as
an admission of their truth.
•accusations or statements made when the
accused is under custody or when the accused
is under threat are not admissible.
•failure of refusal of the accused to testify may
not be taken against him; he may even refuse
to answer any incriminating question.
 OFFER OF COMPROMISE
IN CIVIL CASES:
Not admissible. The court shall endeavor to
persuade the litigants Ito agree upon a fair
compromise.
IN CRIMINAL CASES:
Since criminal cases are not allowed to be
compromised, an offer of compromise by the
accused may be received in evidence as an
implied admission of guilt.
 ADMISSION BY THIRD PARTY
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA:
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by
an act, declaration, or omission of another, and
proceeding against one cannot affect another,
except as provided by the Rules of Court.
EXAMPLE: A, B and C are co-owners of a parcel
of land. A and B partitioned the property in
three parts. C did not participate, but he was
represented in the partition agreement by A. C
is not bound by the partition agreement.
 ADMISSION BY
CO-CONSPIRATOR

A conspiracy exists when two or more persons

come to an agreement concerning the
commission of a felony and decide to commit
it.
Two requisites for conspiracy to exist:
• Determination or decision to commit a crime.

•Agreement of two or more persons.

QUESTION:
May the admission of a co-conspirator be received
in evidence against his co-conspirators?
QUESTION:
Yes, provided the following requisites are
complied with:
• That the conspiracy be first proved by evidence
other than the admission itself.
• That the admission relates to the common
object.
• That it has been made while the declarant was
engaged in carrying out the conspiracy.
EXAMPLE:
After the formation but before the consummation
of the alleged conspiracy between A and his five
co-accused, A borrowed a gun from a friend,
stating that he and his co-accused were going to
kill B.
Such act or declaration of A could not be given in
evidence against his co-accused unless the
conspiracy be proven first.
The testimony of A’s friend to the effect that A
borrowed his gun and A told him that he and his
co-accused were going to kill B would be
admissible against A, but not against his co-
accused, unless the conspiracy between them be
proved first.
Without proof of conspiracy, the act or
declaration of A is not admissible against his
co-accused because such act or declaration of A
is res inter alios as to his co-accused, and so it
cannot affect them.
If there is conspiracy, each conspirator is privy
to the acts of the others; the act of one
conspirator is the act of all the co-conspirators.
NOTE: The above rules apply only to
extrajudicial declarations of a conspirator, not
to his testimony by way of direct evidence.
 CONFESSION
The acknowledgment in express words, by the
accused in a criminal case, of the truth of the
offense charged, or of some essential part
thereof.
JUDICIAL CONFESSION: plea of guilty made by
an accused in a fit state of mind be fore a court
of competent jurisdiction.
EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION: those made by
ANY person outside of the sitting of the court.
QUESTION:
What are the requisites for a confession to be
admissible as evidence?
ANSWER:
1. It must involve an express and categorical
acknowledgment of guilt;
2. Facts admitted must be constitutive of a
criminal offense;
3. It must have been given voluntarily;
4. It must have been intelligently made, the
accused realizing the importance or legal
significance of his act; and
5. There must have been no violation of Section
12 (Miranda Rights), Art. III (Bill of Rights) of
the 1987 Constitution.
QUESTION:
May the extra-judicial confession of an accused
be admitted in evidence against his co-
accused?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE: An extrajudicial confession is
not admissible against the confessor’s co-
accused. The confession is hearsay evidence
and violative of the res inter alios acta rule.
EXCEPTIONS: The confession may be admitted in
evidence against his co-accused in the following
cases:
1. In case of implied acquiescence of the co-
accused to the extrajudicial confession;
2. In case of interlocking confessions;
3. Where the accused admitted the facts stated
by the confessant after being apprised of such
confession;
4. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the
crime which was confessed by one of the
accused and said confession is used only as
corroborating evidence;
5. Where the confession is used as
circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of participation by the co-
conspirator;

6. When the confessant testified for his co-

defendant; and

7. Where the co-conspirator’s extrajudicial

confession is corroborated by other evidence
of record.
QUESTION:
What is the doctrine of interlocking
confessions?
ANSWER:
The doctrine enunciates the settled rule that
extrajudicial confessions independently made
without collusion which are identical with each
other in their essential details and
corroborated by other evidence against the
persons implicated, are admissible to show the
probability of the latter’s actual participation in
the commission of the crime.
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
 CHARACTER IN CRIMINAL CASES
• Character is never an issue in a criminal case
unless the accused elects to make it one.
• Only after the accused has introduced
evidence of his good character may the
prosecution rebut such claims by introducing
evidence of his bad character.
• When character evidence is introduced into a
criminal case, it must be limited to the traits
and characteristics involved in the type of
offense charged.
EXAMPLES:
In case of armed robbery, the accused may
introduce evidence that he has a good
reputation as an honest, peaceful citizen since
the qualities of honesty and peacefulness are
those which the prosecution must disprove in
establishing that the accused performed a
ruthless, dishonest act with force.
Thus, the accused may not prove that he is a
good driver.
The accused is allowed to prove his good moral
character to show the improbability that he
committed the crime charged.
 CHARACTER OF OFFENDED
PERSON IN CRIMINAL CASES
The good or bad moral character of the offended
person may be proved if it may establish in any
reasonable degree the probability or improbability
of the offense charged.
EXAMPLE: P is charged with the rape of W, a
woman sales agent who had stopped at his house
to induce him to buy her product. P alleges W’s
consent, and calls witnesses from neighboring
towns to tell of lascivious acts of the woman when
visiting other lone men in quest of sales.
This is admissible to evidence W’s character as
making more probable her consent.
 CHARACTER OF THE DECEASED
IN HOMICIDE CASES
GENERAL RULE: Evidence of the bad character
of the deceased in homicide cases is irrelevant.
EXCEPTION: When the issue of self-defense is
raised and the character of the slaying is
doubtful, evidence of the violent and
dangerous character of the deceased is
competent for the purpose of determining
whether the deceased or the accused was the
aggressor.
 CHARACTER OF THE DECEASED
IN MURDER CASES

RULE: The good or bad moral character of the

deceased in murder cases is not admissible.
REASON: The killing is committed with
treachery or evident premeditation.
 CHARACTER OF A PARTY
IN CIVIL CASES
Evidence of the good or bad moral character of
either the plaintiff or the defendant in a civil
case is not admissible, unless the issue involved
in the case is the character of a party.
EXAMPLE: P v D for damages arising from a
breach of promise of marriage. D may justify
the breach of the promise by evidence that he
discovered P to be of unchaste character, and
therefore, he refused to marry her.
 CHARACTER OF WITNESS
Evidence of good character of a witness may
not be given in evidence until such character
has been impeached.
The character of a witness must be attacked or
impeached before the testimony sustaining his
character may properly be admitted.
It is not necessary that there shall be a
successful impeachment of the witness. A mere
attempt to impeach such witness is enough to
warrant introduction of his good character.
 HEARSAY EVIDENCE
• Hearsay evidence signifies all evidence which
is not founded upon the personal knowledge
of the witness from whom it is elicited.
• It is information received by a witness from
another person before it reaches the ears of
the court.
• It is mere repetition of what the witness has
heard other say – hear say.
• The hearsay rule bars the testimony of a witness
who merely recites what someone else has told
him, whether orally or in writing.
EXAMPLE:
In a case involving a vehicular collision, the police
investigator testifies:
“According to the statements of witnesses at the
scene, defendant failed to stop at the stop sign
and collided with the plaintiff at the intersection.”
The testimony would be objectionable since what
the officer has related about the case is what the
bystanders told him – hear say.
NOTE: A statement otherwise objectionable as
hearsay does not become competent merely
because it was reduced to writing.
EXAMPLE: Even though the investigating officer
should take the precaution of having the witnesses
make written statements giving their version of
the occurrence, such statements would be
rejected for the same reasons his second-hand
repetition of their stories would be ruled out; they
are hearsay.
NOTE: Composite sketches are also hearsay
because the sketch is drawn by a police artist
based on what he has been told by a victim or
witness.
QUESTION:
What are the elements of hearsay evidence?
ANSWER:
• There must be an out-of-court statement.
• That the statement made out of court is
repeated and offered by the witness in court to
prove the truth of the matters asserted by the
statement. (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p.
348, 2009 ed.)
QUESTION:
What are the two concepts of hearsay evidence?

ANSWER:
• Any evidence, whether oral or documentary, is
hearsay if its probative value is not based on the
personal knowledge of the witness but on the
knowledge of some other person not on the
witness stand.
• It also includes all assertions which have not
been subjected to cross-examination by the
adverse party at the trial in which they are being
offered against him.
QUESTION:
Why is hearsay evidence inadmissible?

ANSWER:
A witness can testify only to those facts which
he knows of based on his personal knowledge
or those which are derived from his own
perception. Anything out of it is hearsay.
Hearsay evidence is inadmissible because
there is no opportunity for cross-examination;
therefore, it is not subject to the test of truth.
 INDEPENDENTLY
RELEVANT STATEMENTS
It is important to note that the hearsay
rule bars information relayed from one
person to another when offered to prove
the truth of the matter asserted therein.
Consequently, the hearsay rule does not
apply to independently relevant
statements, or those statements which are
relevant independently of whether they
are true or not true.
 CLASSES OF INDEPENDENTLY
RELEVANT STATEMENTS

FIRST: Statements which are the very fact in

issue in a case. The testimony of witnesses
thereto is not hearsay.
EXAMPLE: In a prosecution for slander, a
witness may testify that he heard the accused
say, “Magnanakaw ka!”
The making of the statement is the principal
fact in issue, and the witness is called upon to
testify as to a matter within his personal
knowledge.
SECOND: Statements of a party which are
circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.
EXAMPLE: Statement of a person showing his
state of mind.
e.g. While a person in attacking another, his
statement “I will kill you!” may show his
intention to kill.
e.g. If a man called another a liar, such
statement may be proved by the testimony of a
witness who heard such statement as evidence
of the excited mental statement of the
declarant.
 EXCEPTIONS TO HEARSAY RULE
• DYING DECLARATION
• DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
• ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE
• FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION REGARDING
PEDIGREE
• COMMON REPUTATION
• PART OF THE RES GESTAE
• ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS
• ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
• COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE
• LEARNED TREATISES
• TESTIMONY AT A FORMER TRIAL
 DYING DECLARATION
DYING DECLARATION: A declaration made
by a victim of a homicide while about to
die, and without any hope of recovery,
concerning the facts and circumstances
under which the fatal injury was inflicted,
and offered in evidence at the trial of the
person charged with having caused the
death of the declarant.
 REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
FIRST: The declaration must concern the cause
and surrounding circumstances of the declarant’s
death. A dying declaration is inadmissible as
evidence if it concerns or makes reference to the
cause and circumstances surrounding another
person’s death.
EXAMPLE: A husband and wife were killed at the
same time. The wife in her dying declaration
related the cause and circumstances attending the
injury which resulted in the death of both spouses.
The dying declaration is admissible insofar as it
concerned the wife’s death and inadmissible as to
the husband’s death.
SECOND: At the time the declaration was made,
the declarant was under a consciousness of an
impending death. (death was imminent; no hope
of recovery)
THIRD: The declaration must have been made
freely and voluntarily.
FOURTH: Declarant must have been competent to
testify as a witness if he had been called upon to
give testimony.
FIFTH: The declaration is offered in a criminal case
in which the death of the declarant is the subject
of the inquiry.
QUESTION:
What are the factors to be considered in
determining whether the declarant is conscious
of his impending death?
ANSWER:
• his utterances.
• the actual character and seriousness of his
wounds.
• his conduct and the circumstances at the
time he made the declaration, whether he
expected to survive his injury.
IMPORTANT:
A dying declaration may be oral or written. If
oral, the witness who heard it may testify
thereto without the necessity of reproducing
the word or words of the decedent, if he is
able to give the substance thereof.
An unsigned dying declaration may be used
as a memorandum by the witness who took
it down. (People v. Boller, G.R. Nos. 144222-24, Apr. 3,
2002)
REASON FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
NECESSITY, because the declarant’s death renders
impossible his taking the witness stand.
TRUSTWORTHINESS, for the declaration is made
“in extremity” when the party is at the point of
death and every hope of this world is gone; when
every motive for falsehood is gone.
NOTE: Dying declarations are admissible only in
criminal prosecutions for homicide, murder or
parricide. They are not admissible in civil actions,
and this is true even in civil actions to recover
damages for the death caused by the wrongful act.
 DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST

The declaration made by a person deceased, or

outside of the Philippines, or unable to testify,
against the interest of the declarant, if the fact
asserted in the declaration was at the time it
was made so far contrary to declarant’s own
interest, pecuniary or moral, that a reasonable
man in his position would not have made the
declaration unless he believed it to be true,
maybe received in evidence against himself or
his successors in interest, and against third
persons.
EXAMPLE:
:

During his lifetime, A executed an affidavit

admitting that he is the father of B.
This affidavit may be received in evidence
against the estate of A if B later seeks to
claim a portion of A’s estate.
The affidavit is a declaration of A against his
own pecuniary and moral interest.
QUESTION:
What are the distinctions between declaration
against interest and admission against interest?
ANSWER:
DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST:
Made by a person who is neither a party nor in
privity with a party to the suit.
ADMISSION AGAINST INTEREST:
Made by a party to a litigation or by one in
privity with or identified in legal interest with
such party.
DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST:
Admissible only when the declarant is
unavailable as a witness.
ADMISSION AGAINST INTEREST:
Admissible whether or not the declarant is
available as a witness.
PROBLEM:
X is charged with the kidnapping of H who has
disappeared after his abduction.
At the trial, the prosecution calls W to testify
that H had previously confided to him of his
affair with X’s wife.
By presenting W as a witness, the prosecution
intends to prove that the infidelity of his wife is
reason enough for X to contemplate revenge
against H.
Is the testimony of W admissible as evidence?
ANSWER:
Yes. H’s revelation to W regarding his illicit
relationship with X’s wife is admissible in
evidence pursuant to Section 38, Rule 130 of
the Revised Rules on Evidence.
With the deletion of the phrase "pecuniary
or moral interest" from the present
provision, it is safe to assume that
"declaration against interest" has been
expanded to include all kinds of interest,
that is, pecuniary, proprietary, moral or even
penal.
Having been missing since his abduction, H
cannot be called upon to testify. His
confession to W is definitely a declaration
against his own interest since his affair with
X’s wife was a crime.
Consequently, such a confession is
admissible in evidence because no sane
person will be presumed to tell a falsehood
to his own detriment. (People v. Bernal, G.R. No.
113685, June 19, 1997)
 ACT OR DECLARATION
ABOUT PEDIGREE

• Pedigree is the history of family descent

which is transmitted from one generation to
another by both oral and written declarations
and traditions.
• A person’s pedigree may be proved by the act
or declaration of a relative of him by birth or
marriage by reputation or tradition existing in
the family in respect to the pedigree of such
person who is already dead, or outside of the
Philippines, or unable to testify.
QUESTION:
What does “pedigree” include?
ANSWER:
Pedigree includes:
• Relationship.
• Family genealogy.
• Birth.
• Marriage.
• Death.
• Dates when and the place where these facts
occurred.
• Names of relatives.
• Facts of family history intimately connected with
pedigree. (Sec. 39, Rule 130)
 REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF ACTS OR
DECLARATIONS ABOUT PEDIGREE:
• Declarant is dead or unable to testify.
• Pedigree of a person is in issue.
• Declarant is a relative of the person whose
pedigree is in question.
• Declaration is made before the controversy
occurred.
• The relationship between the declarant and the
person whose pedigree is in question is shown
by evidence other than such act or declaration.
(Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, Mar. 3, 2004)
EXAMPLE:
X is the son of A, a Chinese, and of B, a
Filipina. X purchased from Y a residential
lot in Baguio City. The sale is later assailed
on the allegation that X was not a Filipino
citizen when he bought the property.
In order to prove that his parents A and B
were never married and, therefore, he
followed the citizenship of his mother, X
presented Z, sister of his mother. In
essence, Z testified as follows:
Q: Why do you say that your sister B was not
married to Chinese A? Why do you know it?
A: Because my mother told me that my sister
and A will not marry anymore because A was
already old and that since they understand
each other they could live together as husband
and wife whether they are married or not.
The testimony of Z as to the status of her
nephew X is not hearsay; her testimony covers
a declaration by her deceased mother about
the pedigree of X.
 FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION
REGARDING PEDIGREE
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
OF FAMILY REPUTATION OR
TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE
• There is controversy in respect to the pedigree of any
member of the family.
• The reputation or tradition of the pedigree of the
person concerned existed previous to the controversy.
• The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition
regarding pedigree of the person concerned must be
a member of the family of said person either by
consanguinity or affinity.
QUESTION:
What are the ways to establish family reputation
or tradition in respect to one’s pedigree?
ANSWER:
• Through testimony in open court of a witness
who must be a member of the family either by
consanguinity or affinity.
• Through entries in:
a. Family bible.
b. Family books or charts.
c. Engravings on rings.
d. Family portraits and the like.
QUESTION:
Distinguish between Section 39 and Section
40.
ANSWER:
SECTION 39:
Witness need not be a member of the
family.
SECTION 40:
Witness is a member of the family.
 THE RULE OF RES GESTAE

As an exception to the hearsay rule, RES GESTAE

(“things done“) refers to those exclamations
and statements by either the participants,
victims, or spectators immediately before,
during, or after the commission of a crime,
when the circumstances are such that the
statements were made as spontaneous
reactions or utterances inspired by the
excitement of the occasion, and there was no
opportunity for the declarant to deliberate and
fabricate a false statement.
 CONCEPT OF RES GESTAE

• Statements made by a person while a

startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto
with respect to the circumstances thereof,
may be given in evidence as a part of the res
gestae.
• So also statements accompanying an
equivocal act material to the issue, and giving
it legal significance may be received as part of
the res gestae.
 REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY
OF RES GESTAE
• The principal act or the res gestae is a startling
occurrence.
• The statement is spontaneous or was made
before the declarant had time to contrive or
devise, and the statement is made during the
occurrence or immediately prior or subsequent
thereto.
• The statement made must concern the
occurrence in question and it’s immediately
attending circumstances. (Capila v. People, G.R. No.
146161, July 17, 2006)
QUESTION:

What is the reason for the rule on res gestae?

ANSWER:
The reason for the rule is human experience. It
has been shown that under certain external
circumstances of physical or mental shock, the
state of nervous excitement which occurs in a
spectator may produce a spontaneous and
sincere response to the actual sensations and
perceptions produced by the external shock.
As the statements or utterances are made
under the immediate and uncontrolled
domination of the senses, rather than
reason and reflection, such statements or
utterances may be taken as expressing the
real belief of the speaker as to the facts he
just observed.
The spontaneity of the declaration is such
that the declaration itself may be regarded
as the event speaking through the
declarant rather than the declarant
speaking for himself.
EXAMPLES:
• statement of a victim within minutes after an
alleged assault.
• testimony of a police officer as to what the
victim told him not more than 30 minutes after
the commission of the alleged crime.
• The rape victim told her mother, “Mommy,
mommy, I have been raped. All of them raped
me.”
• The accused was named by the deceased after
he was shot.
PROBLEM:
Anthony rapes Melissa. After the rape,
Anthony flees. Melissa then rushes to the
police station and tells a police officer what
had happened. Anthony is charged with
rape.
During the trial, Melissa can no longer be
located. If the prosecution presents the
police officer to testify on what Melissa had
told him, would such testimony be hearsay?
ANSWER:
No, because it is part of the res gestae.
Moreover, it is also an independently
relevant statement. The police officer will
testify based on his personal knowledge;
that is, he will testify to the fact that Melissa
told him that she was raped by Anthony and
not to the truth of Melissa’s statement.
(People v. Gaddi, G.R. No. 74065, Feb. 27, 1989).
 TYPES OF RES GESTAE
VERBAL ACTS

Consist of utterances which accompany

some act or conduct.

The res gestae is the equivocal act

material to the issue and giving it legal
significance. It must be contemporaneous
with or must accompany the equivocal act
in order to be admissible.
REQUISITES:
• The fact or occurrence must be
equivocal.
• The verbal acts must characterize or
explain the equivocal act.
• The equivocal act must be relevant to the
issue.
• The verbal acts must be
contemporaneous with the equivocal act.
SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS
Statements or exclamations made
immediately after some exciting occasion by
a participant or spectator and asserting the
circumstances of that occasion as it is
observed by him.
The res gestae is the startling occurrence. It
may be prior to, simultaneous with, or
subsequent with the startling occurrence.
REQUISITES:

• There must be a startling occurrence.

• The statement must relate to the
circumstances of the startling occurrence.
• The statement must be spontaneous.
 ENTRIES IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF
BUSINESS (SHOP-BOOK RULE)

REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF ENTRIES IN

THE ORDINARY
COURSE OF BUSNESS
• The person who made the entry must be
dead or unable to testify.
• The entries were made at or near the time of
the transactions to which they refer.
• The entrant was in a position to know the
facts stated in the entries.
• The entries were made in his professional
capacity or in the performance of a duty,
whether legal, contractual, moral or
religious. and
• The entries were made in the ordinary or
regular course of business or duty. (Regalado,
Vol. II, pp. 791-792, 2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
How is regularity of the entries proved?
ANSWER:
The entries may be proved by the form in which
they appear as entries in the books or ledgers.
There is no need to present the testimony of the
clerk who manually made the entries. The person
who supervised such clerk is competent to testify
that:
• The account was prepared under his
supervision.
• That the entries were regularly entered in the
ordinary course of business (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 792,
2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
Is there an instance where business
entries may be admitted in evidence even
when the declarant is alive?
ANSWER:
Yes, but the entries will not be admitted
as an exception to the hearsay rule.
However, they may be availed of by the
entrant as a memorandum to refresh his
memory while testifying on the
transactions reflected therein.
 ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS

QUESTION:
What is an official record?
ANSWER:
An official records may be a:
• Register.
• Cash book.
• An official return or certificate. (Regalado,
Vol. II, p. 793, 2008 ed.)
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF ENTRIES IN
OFFICIAL RECORDS

• Entries were made by a public officer in the

performance of his duty or by a person in the
performance of a duty especially enjoined by
law.
• Entrant had personal knowledge of the facts
stated by him or such facts were acquired by
him from reports made by persons under a
legal duty to submit the same.
• Such entries were duly entered in a regular
manner in the official records.
QUESTION:
What is the probative value of entries in
official records?

ANSWER:
The entries are only prima facie evidence
of the fact stated therein.
QUESTION:
Should entries in the police blotter be given
probative value?
ANSWER:
No, as they are not conclusive evidence of
the truth of the contents therein but merely
of the fact that they were recorded. (People v.
Cabrera, Jr., G.R. No. 138266, Apr. 30, 2003)
QUESTION:
Distinguish between entries in the course of
business from entries in official record.
ANSWER:
BUSINESS RECORD:
It is sufficient that the entrant made the entries
pursuant to a duty be it legal, contractual, moral or
religious. Entrant must be dead or unable to
testify.
OFFICIAL RECORD:
The entrant, if a private individual, must have
acted pursuant to a specific legal duty specially
enjoined by law. Entrant need not be dead.
 TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A
FORMER PROCEEDING
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF
TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER
PROCEEDING
• Witness whose testimony is offered in
evidence is dead or unable to testify.
• The testimony or deposition was given in a
former case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, between the same parties
or those representing the same interests.
• Former case involved the same subject
as that in the present case, although on
different causes of action.
• Issue testified to by the witness in the
former trial is the same issue involved in
the present case.
• Adverse party had an opportunity to
cross-examine the witness in the former
case.
QUESTION:
What are the grounds, aside from death, which
make a witness unable to testify in a subsequent
case?
ANSWER:
• Insanity or mental incapacity or the former
witness’ loss of memory through old age or
disease.
• Physical disability by reason of sickness or
advanced age.
• The fact that the witness has been kept away by
contrivance of the opposite party.
• The fact that after diligent search the former
witness cannot be found. (Francisco, p. 342, 1992 ed.)
OPINION RULE
QUESTION:
What is an opinion?

ANSWER:
An opinion is an inference or conclusion
of a witness based or drawn from the
facts established.
QUESTION:
Is the opinion of a witness admissible in
evidence?

ANSWER:

GENERAL RULE:
The opinion of a witness is not admissible.
The witness must testify to facts within his
knowledge and may not state his opinion
even on his examination.
EXCEPTIONS:
• Opinion of an expert witness.
• Opinion of an ordinary witness as to:
 The identity of a person about whom he has
adequate knowledge.
 A handwriting with which he has sufficient
familiarity.
 The mental sanity of a person with whom he
is sufficiently acquainted.
 The witness’ impressions of the emotion,
behavior, condition or appearance of a
person.
QUESTION:
Who is an expert witness?
ANSWER:
He is one who belongs to the profession or
calling to which the subject matter of the
inquiry relates and who possesses special
knowledge on questions on which he
proposes special knowledge to express an
opinion. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 802, 2008 ed.)
QUESTION:
Is there a definite standard in determining the
degree of skill or knowledge that a witness must
possess in order to testify as an expert?
ANSWER:
None. It is sufficient that the following factors
are present:
• Training and education.
• Particularity or first-hand familiarity with the
facts of the case.
• Presentation of authorities or standards upon
which the opinion is based. (People v. Abriol, G.R.
No. 123137, Oct. 17, 2001)
 IMPEACHMENT OF A WITNESS

QUESTION:
What is impeachment of a witness?
ANSWER:
It is a technique usually employed as part
of cross-examination to discredit a witness’
testimony by attacking his credibility.
QUESTION:
What are the methods of impeaching the
adverse party’s witness?
ANSWER:
• by contradictory evidence.
• by evidence that the witness’ general
reputation for truth, honesty, or
integrity is bad.
• by prior inconsistent statements
(“laying the predicate")
By contradictory evidence:
Refers to the prior testimony of the same
witness or other evidence presented by him in
the same case, but not the testimony of
another witness.
By evidence that the witness’ general
reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is
bad.
Since the weight of the witness’ testimony
depends on his credibility, he may be
impeached by impairing his credibility by
showing his not pleasing reputation but only
as regards his reputation for truth, honesty or
integrity.
By prior inconsistent statements (“laying
the predicate")
Refers to statements, oral or documentary,
made by the witness sought to be
impeached on occasions other than the
trial in which he is testifying.
QUESTION:
May a witness be impeached by evidence of
particular wrongful acts?
ANSWER:
GENERAL RULE:
A witness may not be impeached by
evidence of particular wrongful acts.
EXCEPTION:
If it may be shown by the examination of
the witness, or the record of the judgment,
that he has been convicted of an offense.
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
(A.M. NO. 01-7-01-SC)
QUESTION:
In what cases do the Rules on Electronic
Evidence applies?
ANSWER:
The Rules on Electronic Evidence shall apply to
all civil actions and proceedings, as well as
quasi-judicial and administrative cases. (Sec. 2, Rule
1)
QUESTION:
What is Electronic Data Message?
ANSWER:
Electronic data message refers to information
generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means.
QUESTION:
How is an electronic document authenticated?
ANSWER:
1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by
the person purported to have signed the same.
2. By evidence that other appropriate security
procedures or devices as may be authorized by
the Supreme Court or by law for authentication
of electronic documents were applied to the
document. or
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and
reliability to the satisfaction of the judge. (Sec. 2,
Rule 5)
QUESTION:
What is Electronic Signature?
ANSWER:
It refers to any distinctive mark, characteristic,
and/or sound in electronic form, representing the
identity of a person and attached to or logically
associated with the electronic data message or
electronic document or any methodology or
procedure employed or adopted by a person and
executed or adopted by such person with the
intention of authenticating, signing or approving
an electronic data message or electronic
document.
For purposes of these Rules, an electronic
signature includes digital signatures. [Sec. 1, Rule 2]
 EPHEMERAL ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION
It refers to telephone conversations, text
messages, chat room sessions, streaming audio,
streaming video, and other electronic forms of
communication the evidence of which is not
recorded or retained.
Text messages are classified as ephemeral
electronic communication under the Rules on
Electronic Evidence, and shall be proven by the
testimony of a person who was a party to the
same or has personal knowledge thereof. (Vidallon-
Magtolis v. Cielito Salud, A.M. No. CA-05-20-P, Sept. 9, 2005)