Professional Documents
Culture Documents
LAW ON EVIDENCE
Yet, the truth referred to in the definition is not necessarily Note: Please refer to Rule 1, sec.4.
the actual truth but one aptly referred to as the judicial or the
legal truth. Actual truth may not always be achieved in
Facultad de Derecho Civil 1
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
NOTES ON EVIDENCE
Kenneth & King Hizon (3A) _____________________________________________
Technical rules of procedure and evidence are not strictly
applied and administrative due process cannot be fully A: According to such principle, as a general policy, the rules of
equated with due process in strict judicial terms. Also, evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and
reliance on the technical rules of evidence in labor cases is hearings.
misplaced.
Sec. 2.Scope. — The rules of evidence shall be the same in
Ong Chia v. Republic (328 SCRA 749) all courts and in all trials and hearings, except as otherwise
provided by law or these rules. (2a)
The rule on formal offer of evidence is not applicable to a
case involving a petition for naturalization unless applied by Q: Distinguish between evidence in civil cases from evidence
analogy or in a suppletory character and whenever in criminal cases.
practicable and convenient.
CIVIL CASES CRIMINAL CASES
Sasan, Sr. v. NLRC (G.R. No. 176240, 2008) The party having the burden The guilt of the accused has
of proof must prove his claim to be proven beyond
Technical rules of evidence are not binding in labor cases. by a preponderance of reasonable doubt.
Labor officials should use every reasonable means to evidence.
ascertain the facts in each case speedily and objectively, An offer of compromise is An offer of compromise by
without regard to technicalities of law or procedure, all in the not an admission of any the accused may be received
interest of due process. The rules of evidence prevailing in liability, and is not admissible in evidence as an implied
courts of law or equity are not controlling in labor cases. evidence against the offeror admission of guilt except
(Rule 130, Sec.27). those involving quasi-
Clarion Printing House, Inc. v. NLRC (461 SCRA 272) offenses (criminal
negligence) or those allowed
The NLRC is not precluded from receiving evidence, even for by law to be compromised
the first time on appeal, because technical rules of procedure (Rule 130, Sec. 27)
are not binding in labor cases. Concept of presumption of The accused enjoys the
innocence does not apply constitutional presumption
Bantolino v. Coca-Cola Bottlers, Inc. (403 SCRA 699) and generally there is no of innocence (Sec. 14, Article
presumption for or against a 3).
The rules of evidence are not strictly observed in proceedings party except in cases
before administrative bodies where decisions may be provided for by law (Art.
reached on the basis of position papers only. In this case, the 1756-common carrier).
court disregarded the findings of the CA which considered the
affidavits of the petitioners as mere hearsay and thus could Distinction between Proof and Evidence
not be admitted in evidence against their employers. The
Court unequivocally ruled that in a labor case, it is not Q: What is proof?
necessary for an affiant to appear and testify and be crossed-
examined by counsel for the adverse party on his affidavit. A: It is not the evidence itself. There is proof only because of
Administrative bodies are not bound by the technical rules of evidence. It is merely the probative effect of evidence and is
procedure and the rules obtaining in the courts of law. the conviction or persuasion of the mind resulting from
consideration of the evidence.
Within the field of administrative law, while strict rules of
evidence are not applicable to quasi-judicial proceedings, On the other hand, evidence is the medium or means by
nonetheless, in adducing evidence constitutive of substantial which fact is proved or disproved. Proof is the effect of
evidence, the basic rule that mere allegation is not evidence evidence because without evidence there is no proof.
cannot be disregarded.
Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus
Application of the Rules on Electronic Evidence
It means “false in one thing, false in everything.” It means
Sec.2. Cases covered.- These Rules shall apply to all civil that if the testimony of a witness on a material issue is
actions and proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial an willfully false and given with an intention to deceive, the jury
administrative cases. may disregard all the witness’ testimony. The witness in such
case is considered unworthy of belief as to all the rest of his
Scope of the Rules of Evidence evidence if he is shown to have testified falsely in one detail.
A: Before it can be applied, it must be shown that the witness People v. Abellera, G.R. No. 166617
have willfully falsified the truth on one or more material
points. The principle presupposes the existence of a positive The accused should have proven that he was in some place
testimony on a material point contrary to subsequent where it was physically impossible for him to at the locus
declarations in the testimony. criminis during the commission of the crime.
People v. Letigio (268 SCA 227) People v. Agustin, G.R. No. 175325
The above maxim does not lay down a categorical test of When the distance between the place where the crime was
credibility. While the witness may differ in their recollections committed and the accused said he was only 1 and ½ km, the
of an incident, it does not necessarily follow from their accused, who at the time had the use of a motorized vehicle,
disagreements that all of them should be disbelieved as liars has not established the physical impossibility.
and their testimonies completely discarded as worthless.
Alibi is not always false and without merit. Sometimes, the
People v. Pacapac (248 SCRA 77) fact that the accused was somewhere else may just be the
plain and unvarnished truth.
The maxim is not a positive rule of law or of universal
application. It should not be applied to portions of the Frame Up
testimony corroborated by other evidence, like where the
false portions could be innocent mistakes. It is not mandatory Frame up is also viewed with disfavor as it can easily be
but merely sanctions a disregard of the testimony of a concocted and is commonly used as a defense in most
witness of the circumstances so warrant. prosecutions arising from the Dangerous Drugs Act. The legal
presumption that official duty has been regularly performed
Alibi exists. For such claim to prosper, the defense must adduce
clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption
As a defense, alibi is inherently weak and crumbles in the that government officials have performed their duties in a
light of positive identification by truthful witnesses. It is regular and proper manner (People v. Del Monte).
evidence negative in nature and self-serving and cannot
attain more credibility than the testimonies of prosecution Self-Defense
witnesses who testify on clear and positive evidence.
It is likewise inherently weak because it can easily be
Alibi may also serve as a basis for acquittal if it can really be fabricated.
shown by clear and convincing evidence that it was indeed
physically impossible for the accused to be at the scene of the Alibi is one of the weakest defenses due to its being capable
crime at that time. of easy fabrication. It cannot prevail over the positive
identification of the accused as perpetrator of the crime. For
It cannot prevail over the positive identification of the it to prevail, the defense must establish that was physically
accused as perpetrator of the crime. Such positive impossible for the accused to have been at the scene of the
identification destroys the defense of alibi and renders it crime at the time of its commission, and not merely that the
impotent, especially where the such identification is credible accused was somewhere else.
and categorical (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 173308).
Delay and initial reluctance in reporting a crime
Q: What must be established for the defense of alibi to
prosper? Delayed reporting by witnesses of what they know about the
crime does not render their testimonies false or incredible,
A: for delay may be explained by the natural reticence of people
and their abhorrence to get involved in a criminal case. More
Also, it may be on account of fear of the threats posed by her a. The fact or proposition to be established (Factum
assailant. It must be viewed in the context of the victim’s probandum); and
perception and judgment not only at the time of the b. Facts or material evidencing the fact or proposition
commission of the crime but also at the time of the time to be established (Factum probans).
immediately thereafter. A rape victim is sometimes
overwhelmed by fear rather than by reason. Q: What is Factum Probandum?
Ingal v. People (G.R No. 173282) A: It refers to the fact to be proved; the fact which is in issue
and to which the evidence is directed.
Initial reluctance to volunteer information regarding a crime
due to fear of reprisal is common enough that it has been Q: What is Factum Probans?
judicially declared as not affecting a witness’ credibility. Also,
people react differently to emotional stress. There is simply A: It is the probative or evidentiary fact tending to prove the
no standard form of behavioral response that can be fact in issue.
expected from anyone when confronted with a strange,
startling or frightful occurrence. E.g. Kimmy claims to have been injured by the negligence of
Dora who denies having been negligent, the negligence of
See: People v. Teehankee, Jr. (249 SCRA 54); People v. Ortoa Dora and the causal connection between such negligence,
(GR. No. 176266); People v. Satioquia (414 SCRA 60); and the injuries of Kmmy taken as a whole, constitute the
factum probandum of the suit. The evidence offered by
People v. Sanidad (402 SCRA 381) Kimmy constitute the materials to prove liability of D. The
totality of the evidence to prove the liability refers to the
Delay by a witness in divulging what he or she knows about a factum probans.
crime is not by itself a setback to the evidentiary value of
such witness’ testimony, where the delay is sufficiently Yet, factum probandum in some cases may be affected by the
justified by any acceptable explanation. judicial admissions of a party. If the factum probandum
“signifies the fact or proposition to be established,” then
Also, Fear of reprisal or social humiliation are sufficient matters of judicial notice, conclusive presumptions and
explanations. Filipinas, especially those in the rural areas, are judicial admissions cannot qualify as parts of factum
by nature shy and coy, and rape stigmatizes the victim, not probandum of a particular case, because such matters need
the perpetrator. Delay is not a sign of fabrication. not be established or proved.
Positive and Negative Defenses Factum probandum refers to the elements of a cause of
action from the point of view of the plaintiff and the
In Philippine jurisprudence, a positive testimony normally elements of the defense from the standpoint of the
enjoys more weight than a negative testimony. A testimony defendant.
that a fact exists enjoys more weight than a testimony that
asserts that the same act does not exist. Q: What are the factum probandum in a suit for a collection
of money, in the absence of any admission by the
Positive evidence is more credible than negative evidence. defendant?
The reason for this rule is that the witness who testifies to a
negative may have forgotten what actually occurred, while it A:
is impossible to remember what never existed (Gomez v.
Gomez-Samson, G.R. No. 156282). 1. The existence of the debt of the defendant;
2. The maturity of the debt;
A denial evidence is the weakest defense and can never 3. The demand made by the plaintiff upon the defendant to
overcome a positive testimony particularly when it comes pay; and
from the mouth of credible witness. Evidence that is negative 4. The failure to pay despite the demand.
Q: How about in case of illegal possession of firearms and Q: May a private document be offered and admitted in
explosives? evidence both as documentary and as object evidence?
Q: When A was stabbed on the chest during a street brawl, NOTE: If the hearsay evidence prejudicial to the defendant is
he instinctively shouted for help. B, who was nearby, heard erroneously admitted despite the objection, under the
the shout and immediately ran towards A who, upon inquiry principle of curative admissibility, the court shall allow
by B, stated that C has stabbed him. What rule or rules of hearsay evidence favorable to the same defendant.
evidence could B’s testimony be received, if A dies?
Q: Does the doctrine of curative admissibility refer to a
A: The testimony could be admitted either as a dying situation where incompetent evidence was erroneously
declaration or as part of the res gestae. received by the court despite the objection from the other
party?
Conditional Admissibility
A: Local case law does not extensively address the matter but
Q: What is conditional admissibility? some American cases, they hold that the doctrine of curative
admissibility, in its broadest form, allows a party to introduce
A: It happens frequently enough that the relevance of a piece otherwise inadmissible evidence when necessary to counter
of evidence is not apparent at the same time it is offered, but the effect of improper evidence previously admitted by the
the relevance of which will readily be seen when connected other party without objection. Another case also allowed
to other pieces of evidence not yet offered. The proponent of curative evidence even if there was a failure to object to the
the evidence may ask that the evidence be conditionally objectionable document.
admitted in the meantime subject to the condition that he is
going to establish its relevancy and competency at a later It is submitted in our jurisdiction, the doctrine of curative
time. If the connection is not shown as promised, the court, admissibility should not be made to apply where the evidence
may upon motion of the adverse party, strike out from the was admitted without objection because the failure to object
record the evidence that was previously conditionally constitutes a waiver of the admissibility of the evidence. In
admitted. our jurisdiction, admissible evidence not objected to become
admissible.
Curative admissibility
NOTE: An objection to an otherwise inadmissible evidence is
Q: What is the doctrine of curative admissibility? not merely suggested but required by the Rules of Court.
A: It allows a party to introduce otherwise inadmissible Sec. 36, Rule 130, Rules of Court:
evidence to answer the opposing party’s previous
introduction of inadmissible evidence if it would remove any Objections to evidence offered orally must be made
unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the earlier immediately after the offer is made and objections to
inadmissible evidence (Adams v. Burlington, 1993). questions propounded in the course of the oral examination
of the witnesses shall be made as soon as the grounds
Thus, a party who first introduces either irrelevant or therefor shall become apparent.
incompetent evidence into the trial cannot complain of the
subsequent admission of similar evidence from the adverse NOTE: It is only where the objection was incorrectly
party relating to the same subject matter. overruled, the court should allow the other party to introduce
evidence to contradict the evidence improperly admitted in
Q: In an action for damages arising from a car accident, the order to cure the prejudice caused to the other party against
plaintiff, despite objections from the defendant, introduced whom the offered evidence was erroneously admitted.
evidence to show that in the past, the defendant had Common reason suggests that there is a waiver, there is no
injured pedestrians because of his negligence. Is this defect to cure.
evidence admissible? Discuss the effect of the doctrine of
curative admissibility. Q: What is the reason for the limitation as to the application
of the doctrine of curative admissibility?
A: This kind of evidence is admissible because evidence that a
person did certain thing at one time is not admissible to A: If no limitations are placed on the doctrine of curative
prove that he did the same thing. If we follow the doctrine of admissibility, the doctrine will predictably be open to abuse
curative admissibility, the court may be asked to give the and will encourage counsel not to object to an admissible
party against whom the evidence was admitted the chance to evidence to “open the door” for him to introduce
One American case puts it: “A breach of the rules of evidence People v. Darilay (421 SCRA 45)
by one party does not suspend those rules with respect to the
other party” Direct evidence is not dispensable to prove a crime charged.
It may be proved by circumstantial evidence.
Direct and Circumstantial Evidence
Bastian v. CA (G.R No. 160811)
Q: What is direct evidence?
Direct evidence of the commission of a crime is not the only
A: It means evidence which if believed, proves the existence basis on which a court draws its findings of guilt. Established
of a fact in issue without inference or presumption. It proves facts that form a chain of circumstances can lead the mind
a fact without the need to make an inference from another intuitively or impel a conscious process of reasoning towards
fact. a conviction.
Q: What is circumstantial evidence? If direct evidence is insisted on under all circumstances, the
prosecution of vicious felons who commit heinous crimes in
A: It indirectly proves a fact in issue through an inference secret or secluded places will be impossible to prove (People
which the fact finder draws from the evidence established v. Sevilleno).
(People v. Matito).
People v. Corpuz (412 SCRA 479)
When the evidence is circumstantial, a fact is established by
making an inference from a previously established fact. The When the prosecution’s evidence rests on circumstantial
court, thus, uses a fact from which an assumption is drawn. evidence alone, it is imperative that the chain of
circumstances establish the guilt of the accused beyond
Conviction by circumstantial evidence reasonable doubt. Accordingly, where the evidence admits 2
interpretations one of which is consistent with guilt and the
Q: In criminal cases, circumstantial evidence may be other with innocence, the accused must be acquitted.
sufficient for conviction if certain requisites are present.
What are they? Amora v. People (G.R. No. 154466)
A: It is a negative evidence. It is considered by the Court to be A: It includes that which alters the rules of evidence and
a very weak form of defense and can never overcome an receive less or different testimony than that required at the
affirmative or positive testimony particularly when the latter time of the commission of the offense in order to convict the
comes from the mouth of a credible witness. It is a negative accused (Mekin v. Wolfe, 2 Phil 74).
and a self-serving which cannot be given greater weight than
the testimony of credible witnesses who testified on Waiver of Rules of Evidence
affirmative matters (People v. Malicsi, 2008; People v.
Mendoza, 450 SCRA 328). Q: May the rules of evidence be waived?
NOTE: A mere denial, without any strong evidence to support A: Yes. When an otherwise objectionable evidence is not
it, can scarcely overcome the positive declaration by the objected to, the evidence becomes admissible because of
other victim of the identity and involvement of the accused in waiver.
the crime attributed to him (People v. Nieto, 547 SCRA 511).
Q: May the parties stipulate waiving the rules of evidence?
Greater probative value is given to evidence that is positive in
nature that that which is accorded to evidence that is A:
negative in character. Art. 6 of the NCC
Q: What is the rule regarding contradictory declarations and Art. 6. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary
statements? to law, public order, public policy, morals, or good customs,
or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by
A: Greater weight is generally given to positive testimonies law. (4a).
than to mere denials.
As long as no law or principles of morality, good customs and
Liberal Construction of the Rules of Evidence public policy are transgressed or no rights are violated, the
rules of evidence may be waived by the parties.
Q: How should the rules of evidence be construed?
A: Like all other provisions under the Rules of Court, the rules
of evidence must be liberally construed. Rules of Procedure B. Admissibility of Evidence
are merely tools intended to facilitate rather than to frustrate
the attainment of justice. Strict and rigid application of the Rule 128
rules must always be eschewed if it would subvert their
primary objective of enhancing substantial justice. Sec. 3.Admissibility of evidence. — Evidence is admissible
when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the
Q: What is the rule in the relaxation of the rules? law of these rules. (3a)
A: A satisfactory explanation and a subsequent fulfillment of Q: What elements should be present for an evidence to be
the requirements have always been required (Barcenas v. admissible?
Tomas, 454 SCRA 593).
A:
Absence of a vested right in the rules of evidence 1. The evidence is relevant
2. The evidence is not excluded by the rules (competent)
Q: Is there a vested right in the rules of evidence?
Q: What are the two axioms of admissibility by Wigmore?
A: No, because the rules of evidence are subject to change by
the SC pursuant to its powers to promulgate rules concerning A:
pleading, practice and procedure. 1. That none but facts having rational probative value are
admissible
Q: What is the rule regarding the change in the rules of 2. That all facts having rational probative value are
evidence? admissible unless some specific rule forbids them.
A: It is subject to the constitutional limitation on the NOTE: The first axiom is, in substance, the axiom of relevance
enactment of ex post facto laws. while the second axiom is of competence.
Illustrations A: No. What the law protects are private conversations and
communications.
1. In a prosecution for homicide, the witness swears that
the accused killed the victim because his ever truthful NOTE: It is considered unlawful to:
boyfriend told him so. The testimony although relevant is
not admissible because the witness was not testifying a. secretly overhear
based on his personal knowledge of the event. The b. intercept
testimony offered is relevant but incompetent. c. record private communication or spoken word when
2. In the prosecution for robbery, the wife of the accused doing so is without the authority of all the parties to such
testified that the husband admitted to her in confidence private communication.
that it was he who killed their neighbor. This testimony is
not admissible. If there is only one party authorizes the recording and the
3. A defense witness testifies having actually seen the other does not, there is a violation of law.
alleged victim fire a gun at the accused without the
latter’s provocation. The testimony is competent and Salcedo-Ortanez v. CA
relevant.
4. Documents obtained in violation of constitution Absent a clear showing that both parties to the telephone
guarantees although containing relevant matters are conversations allowed the recording of the same, the
inadmissible because they are illegally obtained as when inadmissibility of the subject tapes is mandatory under R.A.
evidence is illegally seized. 4200.
A: It means “of its own kind or class, i.e., the only one of its Q: Is a telephone extension line embraced by the any devise
kind; peculiar. otherwise described?
Q: What are the kinds of evidence the above rule cover? A: Yes. An extension telephone line cannot be placed under
the category of the enumerated devices (Ganaan v. IAC).
A:
1. any communication or spoken word The law considers it unlawful to knowingly possess any tape
record, wire record, disc record, or any such record, or copies
thereof of any communication or spoken word secured or
Under the Human Security Act of 2007, the provisions of R.A. This case demonstrates the inadmissibility of evidence due to
No. 4200 notwithstanding, a police or law enforcement the legal infirmity of an arrest for noncompliance with the
official may listen to, intercept, and record any requisites of the flagrante delicto exception. Accordingly, the
communication, message, conversation, discussion or written accused was not, at the moment of his arrest, committing
or spoken words between: crime nor was it shown that he was about to do so or that he
had just done so. He was like any of the other passengers
a. Members of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist innocently disembarking from the vessel. Also, from the
organization, association, or information received by the officers, they could have
b. Group of persons or of any person charged with or obtained a warrant since they had at least 2 days to comply
suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to with the bill of rights.
commit terrorism.
See: People v. Molina (352 SCRA 174)
Q: Is the written order f the CA necessary?
Malacat v. CA
A: Yes. Such written order of a division of the CA shall be
granted only upon a written application by a police or law A warrantless arrest cannot be justified where no crime is
enforcement official. This official must be one who is being committed at the time of the arrest because no crime
authorized by the Anti-Terrorism Council to file such may be inferred from the fact that the eyes of the person
application. Note that Sec. 8 of R.A. No. 9371 requires only an arrested were “moving fast” and “looking at every person “
ex parte application. passing by.
Q: For the written order to be issued, what are the matters See: People v. Mengote (210 SCRA 174)
to be established?
People v. Laguio (G.R. No. 128587)
A:
Reliable information alone, absent any overt act indicative of
1. There is probable cause to believe that the crime of a felonious enterprise in the presence and within the view of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism has been the arresting officers, is not sufficient to constitute probable
committed, or is being committed, or is about to be cause that would justify an in flagrante delicto arrest.
committed. The finding of probable cause must be
shown based upon the personal knowledge of the Valdez v. People (G.R. No. 170180)
applicant of facts and circumstances indicating the same.
People v. Dela Cruz (G.R. No. 182348) Evidence to be relevant must have such a relation to the act
in issue as to induce the belief in its existence or non-
Q: What are the elements of illegal possession of dangerous existence.
drugs?
Q: Explain the concept of relevance.
A:
A: It deals with the rational relationship between the
1. The accused is in possession of an item or object which is evidence and the fact to be proved. Thus, the evidence
identified to be a prohibited drug; adduced should be directed to the matters in dispute and any
2. Such possession is not authorized by law; and evidence which has neither direct nor indirect relationship to
3. The accused freely and consciously possessed the said such matters must be set aside as irrelevant.
drug. The possession must be with knowledge of the
accused or animun possidendi existed with the NOTE: The matter of relevance requires the existence of a
possession or control of said articles. fact in issue. This fact in issue must be a disputed fact. Thus, it
is obvious that the evidence offered to prove an undisputed
In this case, since the accused was not in possession of the fact is irrelevant, and as such, is inadmissible. Where there is
illegal drugs when he was arrested, his arrest was illegal and no issue as to a matter of fact, there exists no purpose for an
the confiscated drugs cannot be used in evidence against item of evidence.
him.
Q: What is the test for relevance?
Constructive possession
A: If the evidence induces belief as to the existence or the
In People v. Torres (501 SCRA 591), it was held that there was non-existence of the fact in issue, the evidence is relevant. If
constructive possession even when the accused was not at it does not issue such belief, it is irrelevant.
home when the prohibited drugs were found in the master’s
bedroom of his house. NOTE: Although competency of the evidence is a necessary
component of admissible evidence, the question that most
In People v. Tira (430 SCRA 134), there was constructive often arises in court is the relevance of the evidence. When
possession when illegal drugs were found concealed in the an advocate offers a piece of evidence for the court’s
bed and room of both accused. consideration, he offers the evidence to prove a fact. This
may either be:
People v. Lagman a. Immediate fact in issue
b. Ultimate fact in issue
The finding of illicit drugs and paraphernalia in a house or
building occupied by a particular person raises the Q: Jollibee is indebted to BDO. When the obligation falls
presumption of knowledge and possession thereof. due, he fails to pay and the bank sues for collection. As part
of the evidence of BDO, the accountant of Jollibee is placed
Also, illegal possession of regulated drugs is mala prohibita, on the stand and in the course of his examination he asked
and as such, criminal intent is not an essential element, but if he, in turn, is also indebted to BDO. The lawyer of Jollibee
the prosecution must prove the intent to possess. Possession interposes an objection to the question that it is
is not only actual. It may be constructive. impertinent. How would you rule on the objection?
Q: When does constructive possession exist? A: The objection of Jollibee that the question is impertinent
or irrelevant should be sustained. The issue in the case is the
A: It is when he has the right to exercise dominion and indebtedness of Jollibee to BDO and not the indebtedness of
control over the place where it is found. Exclusive possession the accountant of Jollibee to the bank.
or control is not necessary.
Test for determining the Relevancy of Evidence
Relevant Evidence
Q: What should be the test in determining the relevancy of
Sec. 4.Relevancy; collateral matters. — Evidence must have evidence?
such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its
A: In every proceeding, the credibility of the witness is always A: Competent evidence is one that is not excluded by law in a
an issue. The credibility of the witness has the inherent particular case.
tendency to prove and disprove the truthfulness of his
assertion and consequently, the probative value of the Q: What is the test of competence?
proffered evidence.
A: It is the law or the rules. If the law or a particular rule
Q: What if the credibility of a witness is found wanting? excludes the evidence, it is incompetent.
A: Sec. 11 of Art. 132, authorizes his impeachment by NOTE: Competence, in relation to evidence in general, refers
contradictory evidence, by evidence that in the past, he has to the eligibility of an evidence to be received as such.
made statements inconsistent with his present testimony or However, when applied to a witness, the term competent
by evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty or refers to the qualifications of the witness. In other words,
integrity is bad. competence refers to his eligibility to take the stand and to
testify. It is in the context that the term is normally associated
Q: How should the court assess the testimony of a witness? with.
A: The Court shall be guided by the rule that for evidence to Q: Is objection on the ground that it is incompetent an
be believed, it must not only proceed from the mouth of accepted form of objection?
credible witness, but must be credible in itself such as the
common experience of mankind can approve as probable A: No, because it is a general objection. The objection should
under the circumstances. specify the ground for its incompetence such as leading,
hearsay or parol.
Q: What is the purpose of cross-examination?
Note that courts neither need nor appreciate generalities.
A: The importance of the credibility of a witness in a judicial General objections are viewed with disfavor because specific
proceeding is highlighted by rules which allow the adverse objections are required by Sec. 36, Rule 132. Thus, for
party to test such credibility through a process called cross- purposes of trial objections, evidence is never incompetent. It
examination. is people who are. It is a sloppy usage to object to a
testimony or a document as incompetent. Such term more
NOTE: The adverse party can test the credibility of the appropriately describes a witness who under evidentiary
witness through cross-examination not only on matters taken rules, does not possess the qualifications of a witness or
up in the direct examination. The broad spectrum of the suffers from disqualification to be one.
questions allowable in a cross examination of a witness
includes questions on matters connected with those taken up Competence of electronic evidence
by direct examination. It includes questions designed to grant
the cross-examiner sufficient fullness and freedom to test the Electronic evidence is competent evidence and is admissible if
accuracy and truthfulness if the witness, his interest or bias, it complies with the rules on admissibility prescribed by the
or the reverse (Sec. 6, Rule 132). Rules of Court and is authenticated in the manner prescribed
(Sec. 2, Rule 3, Rules on Electronic Evidence).
Evidence of the bad reputation of the accused for being NOTE: To admit evidence and not believe it are not
troublesome and aggressive does not make the evidence incompatible with each other.
admissible to prove his guilt. After all, the culprit could have
been the person with the most endearing reputation. Jurisprudential tenets on probative value and credibility
When collateral matters are allowed 1. Whether or not a witness or evidence is credible is an
issue addressed to the judgment of the trial court (People
Q: Are collateral matters allowed? v. Castro, 2008).
2. The determination of the credibility of a witness is within
A: As a rule, evidence on a collateral matte is not allowed. It is the domain of the trial court (Llanto v. Alzona, 450 SCRA
not allowed because it does not have the direct relevance to 288) and is given great weight and respect because the
the issue of the case. trial court has the opportunity to observe the witness
and their demeanor during the trial.
Q: Is this rule absolute? 3. However, where the trial judge did not hear the
testimonies himself, he would not be in a better position
A: No. A collateral matter may be admitted if it ends in any than SC to assess the credibility of witnesses on the basis
reasonable degree to establish the probability or of their demeanor (BPI v. Reyes, 2008). It had the unique
improbability of the fact in issue. advantage of having personally observed the witnesses,
their demeanor, conduct, and attitude (People v. Nueva,
While the evidence may not bear directly on the issue, it will 2008).
be admitted if it has the tendency to induce belief as to the 4. Testimonies or child-victims are normally given full
probability or improbability of the issues of the case as when weight and credit, since where a woman, more so if he is
it would have the effect of corroborating or supplementing a minor, says that she is raped, she says in effect all that
facts previously established by direct evidence. is necessary to show that rape was committed. There
could not have been a more powerful testament to the
In civil cases, evidence of the moral character of a party is truth than this “public baring of unspoken grief” (People
admissible when pertinent to the issue of character involved v. Aguilar, 2007).
in the case. Also, evidence of the good character has been 5. No woman, much less one of tender age, would
previously impeached. broadcast a violation of her person, allow an examination
of her flesh, and endure public trial of her remaining
Admissible evidence distinguished from credible evidence dignity, unless she is solely impelled by the desire for
redress. Thus, when her testimony is plausible,
ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE CREDIBLE EVIDENCE spontaneous, convincing and consistent with human
Means that the evidence is of Refers to the worthiness of nature and the ordinary course of things, it can indeed
such character that the court belief, that quality which beget moral certainty of the guilt of the violator.
is bound to receive it or allow renders a witness worthy of 6. The court will not disturb the factual finding of the trial
it to be introduced at the belief. It means court unless there is a showing that the latter had
trial. It does not, however, “believability.” overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some fact or
guarantee credibility. circumstance of weight and substance that would have
affected the result of the case.
Candido v. CA Facts which are universally known, and which may be found
in encyclopedias, dictionaries and other publications, are
A document, or any article for that matter, is not evidence judicially noticed, provided they are of such universal
when it is simply marked for identification; it must be notoriety and so generally understood that they may be
formally offered, and the opposing counsel given an regarded as forming part of common knowledge of every
opportunity to object to it or to cross-examine the witness person.
called upon to prove or identify it. A formal offer is necessary
since judges are required to base their findings of fact and On the other hand, matters which are capable of
judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the unquestionable demonstration pertain to fields of
parties at the trial. Xxx The appellate court will have difficulty professional and scientific knowledge. As to matters which
reviewing documents not previously scrutinized by the court ought to be known to judges because of their judicial
below. The pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules of Court functions, an example would be facts which are ascertainable
on the inclusion on appeal of documentary evidence or from the record of the court proceedings, e.g., as to when the
exhibits in the records cannot be stretched as to include such court notices were received by a party (People v. Tundag, 342
pleadings or documents not offered at the hearing of the SCRA 704).
case.
Q: Can a court take judicial notice of a factual matter in
Suplico v. NEDA controversy?
In this case the Court took judicial notice of the declaration of A: No. Before taking such judicial notice, the court must
the President that the Philippine government had decided “allow the parties to be heard thereon” (Herrera v. Bollos,
not to continue with the ZTE-NBN Project due to several 374 SCRA 107).
reasons and constraints. They are official acts and thus, a
matter of mandatory judicial notice under Sec. 1 of Rule 129. Q: Where does the discretion lie?
Judicial knowledge and knowledge of the Judge Judicial notice of foreign laws;
Doctrine of Processual Presumption
Judicial notice may be taken of a fact which judges ought to
know because of their judicial functions (Sec. 2, Rule 129). Q: What is the rule on foreign laws?
Q: Is judicial notice the same as judicial knowledge? A: It is well-settled that our courts cannot take judicial notice
of foreign laws. Like any other facts, they must be alleged and
A: No. The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the proved. Australian marital laws for example, are not among
judicial knowledge of the court, and he is not authorized to those matters that judges are supposed to know by reason of
make his individual knowledge of a fact, not generally or their juridical functions (Garcia v. Garcia-Recio, 366 SCRA
professionally known, the basis of his action (Land Bank of 437).
the Philippines v. Wycoco, 419 SCRA 67; State Prosecutors v.
Muro, 236 SCRA 505). Q: The rule is foreign laws must be alleged and proved.
What is the effect of the absence of proof?
Q: Is judicial notice limited by the actual knowledge of the
individual judge or court? A: Then, the foreign law will be presumed to be the same as
the laws of the jurisdiction hearing the case under the
doctrine of processual presumption (Northwest Orient Airlines
v. CA, 241 SCRA 192).
A: The court may take judicial notice of the foreign law (PCIB 1. When in the absence of any objection, with knowledge of
v. Escolin, 56 SCRA 266). the opposing party, the contents if said other cases are
clearly referred to by title and number in a pending
NOTE: When the foreign law is part of a published treatise, action and adopted or read into the record of the latter
periodical, or pamphlet and the writer is recognized in his 2. When the original record of the other case or any part of
profession, or calling as expert in the subject, the court may the other case or any part of it is actually withdrawn
take judicial notice of the treatise containing the foreign law. from the archives at the court’s discretion upon the
request, or with the consent, of the parties, and
Judicial notice of the Law of Nations admitted as part of the record of the pending case
(Tabuena v. CA, 196 SCRA 650).
Q: What is the rule regarding Judicial notice of the Law of
Nations? Rule on Judicial Notice of Post office practices
A: When the foreign law refers to the law of nations, said law That a registered letter when posted is immediately stamped
is subject to a mandatory judicial notice under Se. 1 of Rule with the date of its receipt, indicating therein the number of
129. Under Sec. 2, Art. II of the Constitution, the Philippines registry, both on the covering envelope itself and on the
adopts the generally accepted principles of international law receipt delivered the letter to the office is not a proper
as part of the law of the land. subject of judicial notice. This post office practice is not
covered by any of the instances under the Rules and is not of
Judicial notice of Municipal Ordinances unquestionable demonstration (Republic v. CA, 107 SCRA
504).
Q: What is the rule regarding Judicial notice of Municipal
Ordinances? Judicial notice of banking practices
A: MTCs must take judicial notice of municipal ordinances in Q: May judicial notice be taken of the practice of banks in
force in the municipality in which they sit (U.S. v. Blanco, 37 conducting background checks on borrowers and sureties?
Phil 126).
A: Yes. It is noted that it is their uniform practice, before
An RTC must also take judicial notice of municipal ordinances approving a loan, to investigate, examine, and assess would-
in force in the municipalities within their jurisdiction but only be borrowers’ credit standing or real estate offered as
so required by law (City of Manila v. Garcia, 19 SCRA 413). security for the loan applied for (Solidbank Corp. v. Mindanao
Ferroalloy Corp., 464 SCRA 409).
The CA may take judicial notice of municipal ordinances
because nothing in the Rules prohibits it from taking Judicial notice of financial condition of the government
cognizance of an ordinance which is capable of
unquestionable demonstration (Gallego v. People, 8 SCRA Judicial notice could be taken of the fact that the government
813). is and has for many years been financially strapped, to the
point that even the most essential services have suffered
Judicial notice of a Court’s Own acts and records serious curtailment (La Bugal-B’laan Tribal Association v.
Ramos, 445 SCRA).
A court may take judicial notice of its own acts and records in
the same case (Republic v. CA, 277 SCRA 633). NOTICE: The official acts of the legislative, executive and
judicial departments are proper subjects of mandatory
Q: What is the rule regarding contents of the records of judicial notice (DENR v. DENR Region 12 Employees).
other cases?
Judicial notice of other matters
A: The court is not authorized to take judicial notice of the
contents of the records of other cases, even when such cases 1. The trial courts can take judicial notice of the general
have been tried or are pending in the same court, and increase in rentals of real estate especially of business
notwithstanding the fact that both cases may have been establishments.
heard or are actually pending before the same judge 2. A court cannot take judicial notice of an administrative
(Tabuena v. CA, 196 SCRA 650). regulation or of a statute that is not yet effective.
3. Judicial notice of the age of the victim is improper.
Sec. 4.Judicial admissions. — An admission, verbal or Admissions made in a motion are judicial admissions which
written, made by the party in the course of the proceedings are binding on the party who made them. Such party is
in the same case, does not require proof. The admission precluded from denying the same unless there is a proof of
may be contradicted only by showing that it was made palpable mistake (Herrera-Felix v. CA, 436 SCRA 87).
through palpable mistake or that no such admission was
made. (2a) EXCEPTION
Q: What are the elements for a judicial admissions be In those rare instances when the trial court, in the exercise of
considered? its discretion and because of strong reasons to support its
stand, may relive a party from the consequences of his
A: admission. It cannot be contradicted unless it can be shown
1. The same must be made by a party to the case. that the admission, the allegations, statements, or admissions
2. The admission to be judicial must be made in the course contained in a pleading are conclusive as against the pleader
of proceedings in the same case. Otherwise, it will be (Heirs of Pedro Clemeña v. Heirs of Irene B. Bien, G.R. No.
considered as an extra-judicial admission for purposes of 155508).
the other proceeding where such admission is offered.
3. Sec. 4 of Rule 129 does not require a particular form for An answer is a mere statement of fact which the party filing it
an admission. Such form is immaterial because the expects to prove, but it is not evidence (Spouses Santos v.
provision recognized either a verbal or a written Spouses Lumbao, G.R. No. 169129).
admission.
Under sec. 11 of Rule 8, if the complaint makes an allegation G.R: The admissions of the parties during pre-trial as
of usury to recover usurious interest, the defendant must not embodied in the pre-trial order are binding and conclusive on
only specifically deny the same but must also do so under them.
oath. Otherwise, there is an implied admission of the XPN: Unless there is a clear showing that the admission was
allegation of usury. entered through palpable mistake.
When an action or defense is founded upon a written Sec. 2. Pre-trial agreement- All agreements or admissions
instrument, the genuineness and due execution of the same made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be
instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse reduced in writing and signed by the accused and counsel,
party, under oath, specifically denies them and set forth what otherwise they cannot be used against the accused.
he claims to be the facts. Otherwise, there is a judicial
admission pursuant to sec. 8, Rule 9. Q: Does the rule requiring an admission made or entered
into during the trial conference to be reduced in writing and
Failure to deny the genuineness and due execution of an signed by the accused and his counsel before the same may
actionable document does not preclude a party from arguing be used in evidence against the accused, equally apply to
against the document by evidence of fraud, mistake, stipulation of facts made during the trial?
compromise, payment, statute of limitations, estoppels, and
want of consideration. He is however precluded from arguing A: No, a stipulation of facts entered into by the prosecution
that the document is a forgery because the genuineness of and defense counsel during trial in open court is
the document has been impliedly admitted by his failure to automatically reduced in writing and contained in the official
deny the same under oath. transcript of proceedings had in court. The conformity of the
accused in the form of his signature affixed thereto is
Q: Does the failure of A to file a reply and deny the dacion unnecessary in view of the fact than an attorney who is
and the confirmation statement under oath constituted a employed to manage a party’s conduct of a lawsuit has a
judicial admission of the genuineness and due execution of prima facie authority to make relevant admissions by
the said documents? pleadings, by oral or written stipulation which unless allowed
to be withdrawn are conclusive.
A: Yes. Also, in resolving a demurrer, the court should not
only consider the plaintiff’s evidence. It should also include Q: During pre-trial Bimby personally offered to settle the
judicial admissions, matters of judicial notice, stipulations case for 1M to the private prosecutor, who immediately put
made during the pre-trial, admissions, and presumptions the offer on record. Is Bimby’s offer a judicial admission of
(Casent Realty Development Corporation v. PhilBanking his guilt?
Corporation, G.R. No. 150731).
Sec. 27.Offer of compromise not admissible. — In civil cases, Admissions in a superseded pleading are to be considered as
an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, extrajudicial admissions which must be proven. Pleadings
and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror. that have been amended disappear from the record, lose
their status as pleadings and cease to be judicial admissions,
In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses and to be utilized as extrajudicial admissions, they must, in
(criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be order to have such effect, be formally offered in evidence.
compromised, an offer of compromised by the accused may
be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt. Admissions in dismissed pleadings
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an unaccepted offer of a Admissions made in pleadings that have been dismissed are
plea of guilty to lesser offense, is not admissible in evidence merely extrajudicial admissions.
against the accused who made the plea or offer.
Hypothetical admissions in a motion to dismiss
An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other
expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible in A motion to dismiss hypothetically admits the truth of the
evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury. allegations of the complaint (Magno v. CA, 107 SCRA 285).
(24a) However, the admission extends only to such matters of fact
that have been sufficiently pleaded and not to mere epithets
Implied admissions in the modes of discovery charging fraud, allegations of legal conclusions, or erroneous
statements of law, inferences from facts not stated, matters
Admissions obtained through depositions, written of evidence or irrelevant matters (De Dios v. Bristol
interrogatories or requests for admission are also considered Laboratories, 55 SCRA 349).
judicial admissions.
Admissions by counsel
Under Sec.3 of Rule 26, any admission made pursuant to the
request for admission is for the purpose of the pending action Q: What is the effect of admissions by counsel?
only. The admission shall not be considered as one for any
other purpose nor may the same be used against him in any A: They are generally conclusive upon a client (De Garcia v.
other proceeding. CA, 37 SCRA 129). Even the negligence of counsel binds the
client.
Sec. 2 of Rule 26 requires the other party to file and serve a
sworn statement either denying specifically the matter of Q: What is the exception to the rule?
which an admission or requested or setting forth in detail the
reasons why he cannot truthfully either admit or deny those A: In case where reckless or gross negligence of counsel
matters. The failure to do so will result into an implied deprives the client of due process of law, or when its
admission of each of the matters of which an admission is application will result in outright deprivation of the client’s
requested. Since the defendant failed to comply with the liberty, or property, or when the interests of justice so
requirements of the Rules, he is deemed to have made an require (Salazar v. CA, 376 SCRA 459).
implied admission of the matters subject of the request for
admission. NOTE: Admissions made for the purpose of dispensing with
proof of some facts are in the nature of judicial admissions.
Rule 26 Such admissions are frequently those of counsel, or of the
attorney of record, who is, for the purpose of the trial, the
Sec. 2 agent of his client. When such admissions are made for the
purpose of dispensing with proof of some fact, they bind the
Sec.3 client, whether made during or even after the trial.
A: This may be invoked when the statement of a party is Sec. 31.Admission by privies. — Where one derives title to
taken out of context or that his statement was made not in property from another, the act, declaration, or omission of
the sense it is made to appear by the other party. Here, what the latter, while holding the title, in relation to the property,
he denies is the meaning attached to his statement, a is evidence against the former. (28)
meaning made to appear by the adverse party as an
admission. Sec. 32.Admission by silence. — An act or declaration made
in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a
party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration
is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true,
C. Admissions, Confessions, and the and when proper and possible for him to do so, may be
Res Inter Alios Acta Rule given in evidence against him. (23a)
NOTE: An admission in a general sense includes confessions, Q: What are the effects of admissions?
the former being a broader term because accordingly, a
confession is also an admission by the accused of the fact A:
charged against him or of some fact essential to the charge. 1. An admission by a party may be given in evidence against
him. His admission is not admissible in his favor, because
A confession is a specific type of admission which refers only it would be self-serving evidence. Declarations of a party
to an acknowledgement of guilt. favorable to himself are not admissible as proof of the
facts asserted.
Q: May admission be implied? 2. The act, declaration, or admission of a party as to a
relevant fact may be given in evidence against him. This
A: Yes, like an admission by silence. rule is based on the notion that no man would make any
declaration against himself, unless it is true.
Q: What about confession?
Classification of admissions and confessions
A: No, it should be a direct and positive acknowledgment of
guilt. Q: What are the classification of and confessions?
Q: Explain admission in criminal cases. NOTE: A confession cannot be implied. It must be a positive
acknowledgment of guilt and cannot be inferred.
Example: Alleged admissions made by Pres. Estrada when his Illegal possession of firearms
options had dwindled (Estrada v. Desierto, 356 SCRA 108).
The corpus delicti in this crime is the accused’s lack of license
Effect of extra-judicial confession of guilt; Corpus Delicti or permit to possess or to carry the firearm, as possession
itself is not prohibited by law.
Q: Is extra-judicial confession sufficient to warrant
conviction? People v. Sasota (91 Phil 111)
A: An extra-judicial confession, unlike judicial confession is It is not necessary to recover the body or to show where it
not sufficient for conviction. The rule requires that the can be found in a case of murder or homicide. There are
confession be corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. cases like death at sea, where the finding or the recovery f
the body is impossible. It is enough that the death and the
Q: What is corpus delicti? criminal agency causing it be proven. Also, the element of
eath in the corpus delicti may be established by
A: It means the “body of the crime or the offense. Strictly circumstantial evidence. Thus, facts are admissible to show
speaking, it means the actual commission of the crime and the impossibility of rescue, as at sea, to show the existence
someone criminally responsible therefor. It is the substance and extent of wounds, and the deceased’s condition of
of the crime. health; and to show that the wound was sufficient to cause
death and that the party was reported death.
Q: What are the 2 elements of corpus delicti?
Murder or Homicide
A:
1. Proof of the occurrence of a certain event It is not necessary to recover the body of the victim or show
2. Some person’s criminal responsibility for the act where it can be found.
(People v. Boco, 309 SCRA 42).
Sec. 2(d) of Republic Act 7438
Q: How can the corpus delicti be proven?
Q: What are the requirements in order that an admission of
guilt of an accused during a custodial investigation be
admitted in evidence?
1. Any extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested, Note: R.A. No, 7438 (Sec.2(f)) has extended the meaning of
detained, or under custodial investigation shall be in custodial investigation to include the practice of issuing an
writing an signed by such person in the presence of his invitation to a person who is investigated in connection with
counsel or in the latter’s absence, upon a valid waiver, an offense he is suspected to have committed.
and in the presence of any of the parents, older brothers
and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the People v. Ador (432 SCRA 1)
municipal judge, district school supervisor, or priest or
minister of gospel are chosen by him; otherwise, such Any waiver of these rights should be in writing and
extrajudicial confession shall be inadmissible as evidence undertaken with the assistance of counsel. Otherwise, such
in any proceeding. admissions are barred as evidence even if such confession
2. The confession must be corroborated by evidence of were gospel truth.
corpus delicti (Sec.3, Rule 133).
Admission by silence
Sec. 3.Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground for
conviction. — An extrajudicial confession made by an Sec. 32.Admission by silence. — An act or declaration made
accused, shall not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a
corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (3) party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration
is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true,
Q: Is an oral confession admissible as evidence of guilt? and when proper and possible for him to do so, may be
given in evidence against him. (23a)
A: The oral confession is not admissible as evidence of guilt.
The confession is in the nature of an extrajudicial confession Q: Is admission by silence“admissible evidence”?
before an investigator while under custodial investigation.
A: Yes. The usual pattern for its admissibility involves a
Note: The above rights refer to an extrajudicial confession of statement by a person in the presence of a party to the
a person arrested, detained or is under custodial action, criminal or civil. The statement contains assertions
investigation because a confession made by the accused against the party, which, if untrue would be sufficient cause
before he is placed under custodial investigation need not for the party to deny. His failure to speak against the
comply with the above. statement is admissible as an admission.
People v. Cabiles (284 SCRA 199) The idea of the rule on admission by silence is that if an
accusation is made, and a reasonable person would have
Thus, if the accused talks to a person (mayor) in a private denied the same if it were false, the failure to deny the
meeting and confessed the crime, the constitutional accusation by the person accused may be construed as an
requirements in a custodial investigation do not apply. When implied admission of the truth of the accusation and may be
the accused talked to the mayor as a confidant and not as a given in evidence against him.
law enforcement officer, the uncounselled confession did not
violate his constitutional rights. Constitutional procedures on Not every silence is an implied admission. The silence of a
custodial investigation do not apply to spontaneous person under investigation for the commission of an offense
statements, not elicited through questioning by authorities, should not be construed as an admission by silence because
but given in an ordinary manner whereby the accused orally of constitutional reasons (R.A. 7438, Sec. 2 (b)).
admitted having committed the crime. Thus, the confession is
admissible in evidence against him, even when he did so Q: What are the requisites for admission by silence?
without the assistance of counsel.
A:
Aquino v. Paiste (G.R. No. 147782)
1. That he heard and understood the statement;
Custodial investigation involves any questioning initiated by 2. That he was at liberty to make a denial;
law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into 3. That the statement was about a matter affecting his
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any rights or in which he was interested and which naturally
significant way. It is only after the investigation ceases to be a calls for a response;
general inquiry into an unsolved crime and begins to focus on 4. That the facts were within his knowledge; and
a particular suspect, the suspect is taken into custody, and 5. That the fact admitted from his silence is material to the
the police carries out a process of interrogations that lend issue.
Res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet literally means A:
that “things done between strangers ought not to injure 1. Admission by a co-partner or agent
those who are not parties to them” 2. Admission by a co-inspirator
3. Admission by privies
Q: What are the 2 branches of this rule?
Q: What is the basis for the above admissions?
A:
A: The person making the statement is under the same
1. The rule that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced circumstances as the person against whom it is offered. Such
by an act, declaration, or omission of another; circumstances gave him substantially the same interest and
2. The rule that evidence of previous conduct or similar acts the same motive to make a statement about certain matters.
at one time is not admissible to prove that one did or did
not do same act another time. Admissions by a co-partner or agent
Sec. 28, Rule 130 Whatever is said by an agent to a third person, during the
course of the agency and within the scope of his actual or
Sec. 28.Admission by third party. — The rights of a party apparent authority, relative to the business contemplated by
cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of the agency, is for legal purposes also the statement of the
another, except as hereinafter provided. (25a) principal and is therefore, admissible against said principal.
Sec. 34, Rule 130 The declarations of a partner may be admissible against the
other partners of the partnership.
Sec. 34.Similar acts as evidence. — Evidence that one did or
did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to Q: Not every declaration or act made or done by a partner
prove that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at or agent is admissible against the other partners or the
another time; but it may be received to prove a specific principal. For the admission of a co-partner or agent to be
intent or knowledge; identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, admissible, what are the requisites which must concur?
custom or usage, and the like. (48a)
A:
The first branch holds that whatever one says or does or 1. The declaration or act of the partner and agent must
omits to do should only affect him but should not affect or have been made or done within the scope of his
prejudice others. Man’s actions and declarations should authority
affect him alone and should not affect others. Thus, if X 2. The declaration or act of the partner and agent must
makes a statement before the media admitting his have been made or done during the existence of the
participation on a murder, his statement is admissible against partnership or agency
him under Sec. 26 of Rule 130. 3. The existence of the partnership or agency is proven by
evidence other than the declaration or act of the partner
Sec. 26.Admission of a party. — The act, declaration or or agent.
omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in
evidence against him. (22) Q: What is the rule regarding any declaration made before
the partnership or agency existed?
The rest of his statement pointing to Y and Z as co-
participants in the murder are not admissible against Y and Z A: They are not admissible against the partners or the
under the first branch. Under this rule, the statement of X principal but remains admissible against the partner or agent
should not affect or prejudice Y and Z. making the declaration. It is also necessary for the application
of the exception that the proof of the agency or partnership
The above rule has reference only to extrajudicial be from an source independent of the declaration made by
declarations. Thus, statements made in open court by a the partner or agent.
witness implicating persons aside from his own judicial
admissions, are admissible as declarations from one who has NOTE: The above rules also apply to the declarations or acts
personal knowledge of the facts testified to. of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other persons jointly
interested with the party.
Exceptions to the Res Inter Alios Acta Rule (first branch)
Admissions by a co-conspirator
Q: The res inter alios acta provides that the rights of a party A: Yes, Sec. 2 of Rule 116 allows the accused, at arraignment,
cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or admission of to plead guilty to a lesser offense with the consent of the
another. Consequently, an extra-judicial confession is offended party and the prosecutor provided that the lessor
binding only upon the confession and is not admissible offense is necessarily included in the offense charged. He may
against his co-accused. What is the basis for this? also plead guilty to a lesser offense even after the
arraignment after withdrawing his plea of not guilty.
A: On a principle of good faith and mutual convenience, a
man’s own acts are binding upon himself, and are evidence
against him. So are his conduct and declarations.
Q: What is the effect of an offer to pay for the medical, When evidence of similar acts or previous conduct is
hospital or other expenses? admissible
A: It is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal Q: In what purposes may evidence of similar facts is
liability for the injured party. In other jurisdictions, this is also admissible?
known as the Good Samaritan Rule.
A:
Q: What is the Good Samaritan Rule? 1. Specific intent
2. Knowledge
A: It refers to the rendering of voluntary aid to a suffering 3. Identity
person. 4. Plan
5. System
Subsequent remedial measures 6. Scheme
7. Habit
No direct legal provision in this jurisdiction addresses the 8. Custom
question as it is. Under U.S. Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), it 9. Usage and the like
is prohibited the admission of evidence of subsequent
remedial measures when offered to prove the negligence of NOTE: Evidence of similar acts may frequently become
the defendant. Evidence of such measures may be admissible relevant especially in actions based on fraud and deceit,
to prove some other purpose like the fact that the defendant because it sheds light on the state of mind or knowledge of
had ownership of the hotel or control over the same and all person, his motive or intent, or they may uncover the
the fixtures therein. scheme, design, or plan.
Q: What is the basis of this rule? Q: Where will the admissibility of similar acts or previous
conduct?
A: The rule is based on the policy of encouraging potential
defendants to remedy hazardous conditions without fear tat A: It would depend on the purposes for which such acts or
their actions will be used as evidence against them. conduct are offered.
Evidence of similar conduct (Second branch) NOTE: The past acts of the accused are inadmissible to prove
that he acted in conformity with such previous acts.
G.R.: The law will not consider evidence that a person has
done a certain act at a particular time as probative of a
contention that he has done a similar act at another time.
Chapter III
Sec. 34.Similar acts as evidence. — Evidence that one did or OBJECT AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
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 I. Object Evidence
another time; but it may be received to prove a specific
intent or knowledge; identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, Rule 130
custom or usage, and the like. (48a)
Q: May a human being be a form of real evidence? Sec. 36.Testimony generally confined to personal
knowledge; hearsay excluded. — A witness can testify only
A: Yes. Where the racial characteristics of a party is at issue, to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge;
the court may, at its discretion, view the person concerned. that is, which are derived from his own perception, except
The court may likewise allow the exhibition of the weapon as otherwise provided in these rules. (30a)
allegedly used in attacking the victim, the bloody garment of
the victim or the personal effect, like the glove, left by the Thus, the following are the basic requisites for the
supposed assailant in the scene of the crime. admissibility of an object or real evidence:
Requisites for admissibility of object evidence A: The problem commonly lies in showing that the object
sought to be admitted is in fact the real thing and not a mere
Object evidence and the Right against Self-Incrimination Since it is called a chain, there must be links to the chain. The
links are the people who actually handled or had custody of
Q: May the right against self-incrimination be invoked the object. Each link must show how he received the object,
against object evidence? how he handled it to prevent substitution and how it was
transferred to another. Each must testify to make the
A: No. In People v. Malimit (264 SCRA 167), the court held foundation complete. This is the ideal way (though this is not
that the right against self-incrimination finds no application in absolutely required.
the case because no testimonial compulsion was involved.
Accordingly, such right is a prohibition of the use of physical There is a view that the prosecution is not required to elicit
or moral compulsion, to extort communication from him. It is testimony from every custodian or from every person who
a prohibition against legal process to extract from the had an opportunity to come in contact with the evidence
accused’s own lips, against his will, admission of guilt. It does sought to be admitted. As long as one of the chains testifies
not apply in this case where the evidence sought to be and his testimony negates the possibility of tampering and
excluded is not an incriminating statement but an object that the integrity of the evidence is preserved, his testimony
evidence. alone is adequate to prove the chain of custody.
Q: What are the classifications of object evidence? As a method of authenticating evidence, the chain of custody
rule requires that the admission of an exhibit be preceded by
A: evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in
a. Objects that have readily identifiable marks (unique question is what the proponent claims it to be. It would
objects); include the testimony about every link in the chain, in such a
b. Objects that are made readily identifiable (objects made way that every person who touched the exhibit would
unique); and describe how and from whom it was received, where it was
c. Objects with no identifying marks and cannot be marked and what happened to it while in the witness’ possession, the
(non-unique marks). condition in which it was received and the condition in which
it was delivered to the next link in the chain. The witness
If the object has a unique characteristic, it becomes readily would describe the precautions taken to ensure that there
identifiable (a serial number of a caliber 45 pistol). So long as had been no change in the condition of the item and no
the witness testifies that the object has a unique opportunity for someone not in the chain to have possession
characteristic, he saw the object on the relevant date, of the same.
remembers its characteristics, asserts that the object shown
to him in court is the same or substantially in the same The chain of custody rule is indispensable and essential when
condition as when he first saw it and alleges that those the item of real evidence is not distinctive and is not readily
characteristics are those of the object he is identifying in identifiable, or when its condition at the time of testing or
court, the authentication requirement is satisfied. trial is critical, or when a witness has failed to observe its
uniqueness. The rule also applies in case the evidence is
Otherwise, (like a typical kitchen knife without a serial susceptible to alteration, tampering, contamination and even
number), the witness may be able to testify the same if he substitution and exchange. Such dictates the level of
claims that he made the thing acquire a unique characteristic strictness in the application of the chain of custody rule.
like placing identifying marks on it. All he has to do is to
testify as to what he did to make the object identifiable and A unique characteristic of narcotic substance is that they are
that the object presented to him for identification in court not readily identifiable hence a more stringent standard than
has the characteristics he made on the object. that applied to readily identifiable object is necessary. This
standard entails a chain of custody of the item with sufficient
Chain of custody completeness to render it improbable for the original item to
be exchanged with another, contaminated or tampered with.
The third category includes drop of blood or oil, drugs in Xxx More than just the fact of possession, the fact that the
powder form, fiber, grains of sand and similar objects. In this substance said to be illegally possessed is the very same
case, the proponent of the evidence must establish a chain of substance offered in court as exhibit.
custody. The purpose is to guaranty the integrity of the
physical evidence and to prevent the introduction o evidence If the object is not readily identifiable, a chain of custody
which is not authentic but where the exhibit is positively must be shown. To avoid gaps in the chain of custody and
A: It means the duly recorded authorized movements and Q: When will the non-compliance with the procedure shall
custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant not render void and invalid the seizure of and custody of
sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each drugs?
stage, from the time of confiscation or seizure to receipt in
the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in A:
court for destruction. It shall also include the identity and
signature of the person who held temporary custody of the 1. When such compliance was under justifiable
seized item, the date and time when such transfer of custody grounds; and
were made in the course of safekeeping and use in court as 2. Integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized are
evidence, and the final disposition (People v. Obmiranis, G.R. properly preserved by apprehending team.
No. 181492).
People v. Del Monte (G.R. No. 179940)
Article II of R.A. No. 9165
The issue if there is non-compliance with the law is not
The apprehending team having initial custody and control of admissibility, but weight—evidentiary merit or probative
the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, value.
physically inventory and photograph the same in the
presence of the accused or the person/s from which such Demonstrative Evidence
items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her
representative or counsel, a representative from the media Q: What is demonstrative evidence?
and the DOJ, and any elected public official who shall be
required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a A: It is not the actual thing but it is referred to as
copy thereof (Sec. 1, par.1). demonstrative because it represents or demonstrates the
real thing. It is not strictly real evidence because it is not the
Note: A mere statement that the integrity and evidentiary very thing involved in the case.
value of the evidence is not enough. It must be accompanied
by proof. Examples: map, diagram, photograph, model
NOTE: The admissibility of photographic evidence is within Q: Is the testimony of the person who took the x-ray
the discretion of the trial court, and its ruling in this respect required?
will not be interfered with except upon a clear showing of an
abuse of discretion. A: Because the science of x-ray pictures is now well-founded
and generally recognized, almost all courts no longer require
Q: What is the rule regarding motion pictures and testimony as to the reliability of an x-ray machine.
recordings?
NOTE: In-court reenactment of material events by the
A: The rules that apply to motion pictures and recordings. witness has been held permissible to help illustrate the
Because of the possibility of tampering and distortion, courts testimony of a witness.
have traditionally required a stricter standard for laying the
foundation for motion pictures and tape recordings. Courts Ephermal Electronic Communications
then would require detailed testimony as to the qualifications
of the operator, a detailed description of the equipment Q: What are Ephermal Electronic Communications?
used, the conditions under which the photograph and the
recordings were taken. Modern courts however have taken
NOTE: The court has an inherent power to order a view when Q: In what situations do RDE apply?
there is a need to do so.
A:
Q: Is this mandatory? 1. Criminal actions
2. Civil actions
A: A view disrupts the usual trial process and is time- 3. Special proceedings
consuming. Hence, in almost all jurisdictions, trial judge is
granted discretion to grant or refuse a request for a view. Q: What is DNA?
NOTE: The inspection may be made inside or outside the A: It refers to deoxyribonucleic acid which is the chain of
courtroom. An inspection or view outside the courtroom molecules found in every nucleated cell of the body
should be made in the presence of the parties or at least with
previous notice to them. Q: What is DNA pofile?
Q: What may an order contain? A: Yes. The test after his conviction is termed a “post-
conviction.” It may be available to:
A: a. The prosecution
1. Take biological samples from any person or crime scene b. To the person conviction by final and executory
evidence judgment provided that the ff. requisites are
2. Impose reasonable conditions on the testing to protect present:
the integrity of the biological sample and the liability of 1. A biological sample exists
the test results. 2. Such example is relevant to the case
3. The testing would probably result in the
NOTE: The court may motu propio order a DNA testing. rehearsal of the judgment of conviction.
Q: Is a court order always required before undertaking a Q: Is a court order required for a post DNA testing?
DNA testing?
A: No. It may be available without need of prior court order.
A: No. RDE allows a testing without a prior court if done
before a suit or proceeding is commenced at the behest of Q: What remedy is available to the convict if the results of
any party including law enforcement agencies. the post DNA testing are favorable to him?
Q: Is the order of the court granting a DNA testing A: He may file a petition for a writ of habeas data in the court
appealable? of origin. The court shall then conduct a hearing and in case
the court finds that the petition is meritorious, it shall reverse
A: No, it is immediately executor as provided by Sec. 5 of the or modify the judgment of conviction and order the release of
RDE. the convict, unless his detention is justified for a lawful cause.
The rule also allows the petition to be filed either in the CA or
Q: Is there an automatic admission of the DNA evidence the SC, or with any member of said courts.
obtained in the testing?
Q: Are the DNA profiles of a person open to public scrutiny?
A: No, they are confidential. Q: What is the probative value of paraffin tests?
Q: To whom they may be released? A: They are merely corroborative, neither proving nor
disproving that a person did indeed fire a gun.
A:
1. The person from whom the sample was taken Q: What factors may affect the results?
2. Lawyers representing parties in the case or action where
the DNA evidence is offered and presented or sought to A: Factors such as the wearing of gloves, perspiration of
be offered and presented hands, wind direction, wind velocity, humidity, climate
3. Lawyers of private complainants in a criminal action conditions, the length of the barrel of the firearm, the open
4. Duly authorized law enforcement agencies or closed trigger guard of the firearm (People v. Buduhan,
5. Other persons as determined by the Court. 2008).
Q: May the person from whom the biological sample was Polygraph tests (Lie detector tests)
taken request that the result be disclosed to the person
designated in his request? Polygraph test operates on the principle that stress causes
physiological changes in the body which can be measured to
A: Yes, but such request must be in writing and verified and indicate whether the subject of the examination is telling the
filed with the court that allowed the DNA testing. truth. Sensors are attached to the subject so that the
polygraph can mechanically record the subject’s physiological
Q: What is the duty of the Trial courts? responses to a series of questions.
A: They are mandated to preserve the DNA evidence in its Q: What is the probative value of polygraph tests?
totality, including all biological samples, DNA profiles and
results or other genetic information obtained from DNA A: Courts uniformly reject the results of polygraph tests when
testing in accordance with the RDE. offered in evidence for the purpose of establishing the guilt
or innocence of the accused of a crime because it has not yet
Paraffin tests attained scientific acceptance as reliable and accurate means
of ascertaining truth or deception.
Q: State the rule regarding paraffin tests.
Q: Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or documentary Sec. 1 of Rule 3 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence
evidence?
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS
A: It is a real (object) evidence. Although it is conceded that
the bills contain letters, words or numbers and other modes SECTION 1. Electronic documents as functional equivalent of
of written expression, these facts alone do not make the bills paper-based documents. – Whenever a rule of evidence
documentary evidences. To be documentary evidence, the refers to the term of writing, document, record, instrument,
same must be offered as proof of their contents. The bills are memorandum or any other form of writing, such term shall
obviously presented to show that money exchanged hands in be deemed to include an electronic document as defined in
the buy-bust operations and not prove what is written on the these Rules.
bills.
NOTE: The rules of court including the statutes containing
Q: May a private document be offered and admitted in rules of evidence are suppletory to the Rules on Electronic
evidence both as documentary evidence and as object Evidence.
evidence?
Q: Who has the burden to prove its authenticity?
A: It depends on the purpose for which the document is
offered. If offered to prove its existence, condition or for any A: Sec. 1, Rule 5 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence:
other purpose other than the contents of a document, the
same is considered as an object evidence. When it is offered Sec. 2, Rule 5 the Rules on Electronic Evidence
as proof of its contents, the same is considered as a
documentary evidence. The document may be offered for SEC. 2. Manner of authentication. – Before any private
both purposes under the principle of multiple admissibility. electronic document offered as authentic is received in
evidence, its authenticity must be proved by any of the
Documents under the Rules on Electronic Evidence following means:
Q: What is electronic evidence under Sec. 1 [h] of Rules on (a) by evidence that it had been digitally signed by the
Electronic Evidence? person purported to have signed the same;
(b) by evidence that other appropriate security procedures
A:It refers to information, or the representation, data, or devices as may be authorized by the Supreme Court or by
figures, symbols, or other modes of written expressions, law for authentication of electronic documents were
described or however represented, by which a right is applied to the document; or
(a)By anyone who saw the document executed or written; Despite the word “best”, the rule does not proclaim itself as
or the highest and most reliable evidence in the hierarchy of
(b)By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or evidence. The word best has nothing to do with the degree of
handwriting of the maker. its probative value in relation to other types of evidentiary
rules. It does not mean “most superior” evidence. More
Note: If the document is electronically notarized, the manner accurately, it is the original document, or the primary
of authentication under Sec.3 of Rule 5 will not also apply. evidence rule.
When notarized, it is transformed into a public document and
is to be proved in accordance with the Rules of Court. It is not intended to mean that a weaker evidence be
substituted by a stronger evidence.
Sec. 3, Rule 5
The only actual rule that such term denotes is the rule
SEC. 3. Proof of electronically notarized document. - A requiring that the original of a writing must, as a general rule,
document electronically notarized in accordance with the be produced.
rules promulgated by the Supreme Court shall be considered
as a public document and proved as a notarial document Sec.3 of Rule 130
under the Rules of Court.
Sec. 3.Original document must be produced; exceptions. —
Sec. 30 of Rule 132 When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document,
no evidence shall be admissible other than the original
Sec. 30.Proof of notarial documents. — Every instrument document itself, except in the following cases:
duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by
law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, (a)When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot
the certificate of acknowledgment being prima be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the
facieevidence of the execution of the instrument or offeror;
document involved. (31a) (b)When the original is in the custody or under the control
of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and the
Evidentiary concepts involved in the presentation of latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice;
documentary evidence (c)When the original consists of numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot be examined in court without
To be admissible, documentary evidence must be relevant great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from
and competent. It is subject to general exclusionary rules them is only the general result of the whole; and
such as the rule against hearsay, best evidence rule and parol (d)When the original is a public record in the custody of a
evidence rule. public officer or is recorded in a public office. (2a)
A: It is to prevent fraud or mistake in the proof of the Primarily, it is the need to present to the court the exact
contents of a writing. words of a writing where a slight variation of words may
mean a great difference in rights. Secondly, it is the
Q: What are the 2 requisites for this rule to apply? prevention and detection of fraud. It is to avoid unintentional
or intentional mistaken transmissions of the contents of a
A: document through the introduction of selected portions of a
writing to which the adverse party has no full access.
1. The subject matter must involve a document; and
2. The subject of the inquiry is the contents of the It is also to prevent erroneous interpretations or distortions
document. of a writing, an objection based on this rule prevents a party
from proving the contents of a writing by a copy thereof or by
Thus, where the content of a document is not the issue, the oral testimony if the original writing itself is available.
rule cannot be invoked and more so when the evidence does
not involve a document. As long as the original evidence can be had, the court should
not receive in evidence that which is substitutionary in
The best evidence rule applies only when the subject inquiry nature, such as photocopies, in the absence of any clear
is the contents of a document. It applies only when the showing that the original writing has been lost or destroyed
purpose is to establish the terms of a writing. When the or cannot be produced in court. Such photocopies must be
evidence introduced concerns some external fact about a disregarded, being inadmissible evidence and barren of
writing like its existence, execution or delivery without probative weight.
reference to its terms, the rule cannot be invoked.
Waiver of the Rule
Sy v. CA (330 SCRA 550) Sec. 5.When original document is unavailable. — When the
original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be
Although the marriage certificate, license, and other pieces of produced in court, the offeror, upon proof of its execution
documentary evidence were only photocopies, the fact that or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad
these have been examined and admitted by the trial court, faith on his part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by a
with no objections having been made a to their authenticity recital of its contents in some authentic document, or by the
and due execution, means that these documents are deemed testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (4a)
sufficient proof of the facts contained therein.
Q: What are the requisites so that secondary evidence may
Q: What to do to apply the Best evidence rule? be admitted?
The exception also applies where the original consists of NOTE: The hierarchy of preferred secondary evidence must
inscriptions on immovable objects and monuments such as be strictly followed.
tombstones because they cannot be produced in court.
Q: What is secondary evidence?
Sec. 5 of Rule 130
A: The notice may be in the form of a motion for the Sec. 4.Original of document. —
production of the original, or made in open court in the (a)The original of the document is one the contents of which
presence of the adverse party, or via a subpoena duces are the subject of inquiry.
tecum, provided that the party in custody of the original has (b)When a document is in two or more copies executed at or
sufficient time to produce the same. about the same time, with identical contents, all such copies
are equally regarded as originals.
When the original consists of numerous accounts (c)When an entry is repeated in the regular course of
business, one being copied from another at or near the time
Q: What are the exceptions to the rule regarding secondary of the transaction, all the entries are likewise equally
evidence or when is such admissible? regarded as originals. (3a)
Q: What is the reason for the exceptions? Q: To be considered as originals, what are the requisites?
Thus, when a lawyer writes a pleading in two or more copies SECTION 1. Original of an electronic document. – An
which are executed at the same time, with identical contents, electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of
each document is an original. So are writings with identical an original document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a
contents made by printing, mimeographing, lithography and printout or output readable by sight or other means, shown
other similar methods executed at the same time. Thus, each to reflect the data accurately.
newspaper sold in the stand is an original in itself.
Sec.2
Q: What if carbon sheets are inserted between two or more
sheets of paper, and the signature on the first sheet being SEC. 2. Copies as equivalent of the originals. – When a
reproduced in the sheets beneath by the same stroke of the document is in two or more copies executed at or about the
pen or writing medium? same time with identical contents, or is a counterpart
produced by the same impression as the original, or from
A: All sheets are deemed as originals. the same matrix, or by mechanical or electronic re-
recording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other
NOTE: Where a document is executed in duplicate or equivalent techniques which is accurately reproduces the
multiplicate form, each one of the parts is primary evidence original, such copies or duplicates shall be regarded as the
of the contents of the document, and the other need not to equivalent of the original.
be produced. In such case, each is deemed an original. Notwithstanding the foregoing, copies or duplicates shall
not be admissible to the same extent as the original if:
If several copies of a document are made at the same time by
inserting in each page a carbon paper and only one of them is (a) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the
signed, the signed copy is the original and the others are only original; or
copies. (b) in the circumstances it would be unjust or inequitable to
admit a copy in lieu of the original.
Q: Which is the original in case of telegraph company who
failed to transmit a message? Original printout of facsimile transmissions
A: The original is the message submitted to the company for Q: Is a printout of a facsimile transmission an electronic data
transmission. But if the suit is for damages by sender against message or electronic document?
the company because of delay, the original would be the
message as received by the recipient. A: No, it does not include a facsimile transmission. It is not
the functional equivalent of an original under the Best
Q: In an action to collect the promissory note, which is the Evidence Rule and is not admissible as electronic evidence.
original copy?
Moreover, a photocopy of such fax transmission cannot be
A: The original is one typed and signed by both parties and considered as an electronic evidence.
which was lost.
Garvida v. Sales, Jr. 338 Phil 484
Q: Can the photocopies in the hands of the parties be
considered as duplicate originals? A facsimile is not a genuine and authentic pleading. It is, at
best, an exact copy preserving all the marks of an original.
A: No. They cannot be deemed as having been made at the Without the original, there is no way of determining on its
same time with the original because they were not signed face whether the facsimile pleading is genuine and authentic
unlike the original. and was originally signed by the party and his counsel. It may
in fact, be a sham pleading.
Originals under the Rules on Electronic evidence
A: It is the print-out or output readable by sight or other Among the various evidentiary rules, it is the parol evidence
means, provided it is shown to reflect the data accurately rule that has direct application to the law on contracts.
The term "agreement" includes wills. (7a) A: Only the parties. The rule that the terms of an agreement
are to be proven only by the contents of the writing itself
Q: What if the agreement is oral? refers to suits between parties to the contract and their
successors in interest. The rule does not bind suits involving
A: It does not apply. strangers to the contract.
NOTE: The contract does not define a contract as a Application of the Rule to Wills
document, a deed or an instrument. The document or the
deed or instrument are merely the tangible evidences of a The parol evidence rule applies to contractual obligations.
contract. It is the meeting of the minds between the parties But, it also includes wills. There can therefore, be no evidence
that constitutes the contract. of the terms of the will other than the contents of the will
itself.
Q: Is a written form required for the existence of a contract?
Q: May an express trust concerning immovable or any
A: No. The law provides that contracts shall be obligatory, in interest therein be proved by parol evidence?
whatever form they may have been entered into, provided all
the requisites for their validity are present such as: A: No.
a. Consent
b. Object How to introduce parol evidence
c. Cause
Q: Is the rule prohibiting parol evidence absolute?
Q: When a written agreement is entered, any extraneous or
parol evidence will be inadmissible for what purposes? A: No.
A: The proper remedy is not reformation of the instrument Waiver of Parol Evidence Rule
but an action for annulment (Art. 1359, NCC).
Q: Can the parol evidence rule be waived?
Q: What is an action for reformation?
A: Yes:
A: It presupposes that there is nothing wrong with the 1. by failure to invoke the benefits of the rule
contract itself because there is a meeting of minds of the 2. by failure to object to the introduction of evidence
parties. Art. 1359 does not in fact refer to a reformation of aliunde.
the contract but of the instrument.
Probative value
Examples:
1. The parties have agreed on the size of the land subject of Admissibility is not the equivalent of probative value or
the sale. By an act of fraud, a smaller area is indicated in credibility.
the deed.
C. Authentication and Proof of Documents (Rule 132)
A: Not only documents but also objects introduced in A: It means a deed, instrument, or other duly authorized
evidence need to be authenticated. paper by which something is proved, evidenced or set forth.
Authentication is the preliminary step in showing the Q: When may documents be considered as documentary
admissibility of an evidence. evidence?
Example: A weapon is found in the crime scene. To be A: Only when it is offered as proof of their contents.
admissible in evidence, it must be authenticated. This means Otherwise, it is a mere object when the purpose is merely to
that it must be shown to the satisfaction of the court that the prove its existence.
weapon in court is the very same weapon found in the scene
is the same. Thus, the court must call someone to Q: What are the classifications of documents?
authenticate the same. He could be the police investigator or
someone else who handled the evidence. A:
1. Public
Q: Is litigation involved in the authentication of either object 2. Private
or documentary evidence?
Rule 132
A: Yes, it is always involved.
Sec. 19.Classes of Documents. — For the purpose of their
Q: What is the presumption under our jurisdiction? presentation evidence, documents are either public or
private.
A: That objects and documents presented in evidence are, as
a rule, counterfeit. Thus, evidence is not presumed to be Public documents are:
authentic.
(a)The written official acts, or records of the official acts of
Q: Does authentication of a private document require a the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and
seal? public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign
country;
A: No. There shall be no difference between sealed and (b)Documents acknowledge before a notary public except
unsealed private documents insofar as their admissibility is last wills and testaments; and
concerned. (c)Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
documents required by law to the entered therein.
Authentication under Rules on Electronic Evidence All other writings are private. (20a)
Q: Who bears the burden of proof? Q: Do written official acts, or records of the official acts of
the sovereign authority refer only to those of the
A: The person seeking to introduce an electronic evidence. Philippines?
Q: What are the requirements for the authentication of an A: No. They refer also to those of a foreign country.
electronic evidence? Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last
wills and testaments which are private documents even if
A: notarized.
1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the
person purported to have signed the same NOTE: In the case of a public record of a private document
2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures required by law to be entered into a public record, the public
or devices as may be authorized by the SC or by law for document does not refer to the private document itself but
authentication an electronic documents were applied to the public record of that private document.
the document
Q: What is a private document?
A: The law does not give any exact definition. Agagon v. Bustamante (A.C. No. 5510)
Church registries The notarial seal converts the document from private to
public, after which it may be presented as evidence without
It is well-settled that Church registries of birth, marriages, and need for proof of its genuineness and due execution.
deaths made subsequent to the promulgation of General
Orders No. 68 and Act No. 190 are no longer public writings, Rule 132
nor are they kept by duly authorized officials. They are
private writings and their authenticity must be proved, as are Sec. 23.Public documents as evidence. — Documents
all other private writings. consisting of entries in public records made in the
performance of a duty by a public officer are prima
Importance of knowing whether a document is facie evidence of the facts therein stated. All other public
public or private ( Rule 132) documents are evidence, even against a third person, of the
fact which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the
Sec. 20.Proof of private document. — Before any private latter. (24a)
document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its
due execution and authenticity must be proved either: When a public officer in the performance of his duty makes
an entry in the public record, the document of such entry is
(a)By anyone who saw the document executed or written; deemed prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the entry.
or In case of public document, the facts stated therein
(b)By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or constitute evidence of the facts that gave rise to the
handwriting of the maker. execution of such documents and of the date of the
execution of the same.
Any other private document need only be identified as that
which it is claimed to be. (21a) Evidence of official records of official acts; attestation
Before the admission of a private document in evidence that While a public instrument does not require the
is offered as authentic, its due execution and authenticity authentication imposed upon a private document, there is a
must be proved. This does not apply to a public document necessity for showing to the court that indeed a record of the
which is admissible without further proof of its due execution official acts of official bodies, tribunals or public officer exists.
and genuineness.
Rule 132
Rule 132
The record of a public document may be evidenced by:
Sec. 30.Proof of notarial documents. — Every instrument
duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by Sec. 24.Proof of official record. — The record of public
law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when
the certificate of acknowledgment being prima admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official
facieevidence of the execution of the instrument or publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer
document involved. (31a) having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and
accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines,
Notarized documents, being public documents, do not with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the
require authentication, unlike private documents. They also office in which the record is kept is in foreign country, the
enjoy prima facie presumption of authenticity and due certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or
execution. It enjoys the presumption of regularity. It is a legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular
prima facie evidence of the truth of the facts stated therein agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the
and a conclusive presumption of its existence and due Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the
execution. To overcome this presumption, there must be record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office.
sufficient, clear and convincing evidence as to exclude all (25a)
reasonable controversy as to the falsity of the certificate. In
the absence of such proof, the document must be upheld. Sec. 25.What attestation of copy must state. — Whenever a
copy of a document or record is attested for the purpose of
The one who denies the due execution of deed where one’s evidence, the attestation must state, in substance, that the
signature appears has the burden of proving that contrary to copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part
the recital in the jurat, one never appeared before the notary thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be under
public and acknowledge the deed to be a voluntary act. the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if
Sec. 26.Irremovability of public record. — Any public record, Last wills and testament
an official copy of which is admissible in evidence, must not
be removed from the office in which it is kept, except upon Last wills and testaments must undergo an authentication
order of a court where the inspection of the record is process even if they are notarized in accordance with Art. 806
essential to the just determination of a pending case. (27a) of the NCC.
A notary public in a foreign country is not of those who can Art. 806. Every will must be acknowledged before a notary
issue the certificate mentioned in Sec.24. Non-compliance public by the testator and the witnesses. The notary public
with such rule will render the special power of attorney shall not be required to retain a copy of the will, or file
inadmissible in evidence. The argument that the lack of another with the Office of the Clerk of Court. (n)
consular authentication is a mere technicality that can be
brushed aside in order to uphold substantial justice is The Rules while declaring that the term “public document”
untenable. Failure to have the SPOA authenticated is not a includes one acknowledged before a notary public, it
mere technicality but a question of jurisdiction. nonetheless expressly excludes last wills and testaments
(Rule 132, Sec.19 (b).
Q: What are the evidence of public record of a private
document? Sec. 19.Classes of Documents. — For the purpose of their
presentation evidence, documents are either public or
A: A public record of a private document may be proved by private.
any of the following: Public documents are:
(a)The written official acts, or records of the official acts of
a. By the original record; or the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and
b. By a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign
record, with an appropriate certificate that such officer country;
has the custody (Sec. 27 of Rule 132). (b)Documents acknowledge before a notary public except
last wills and testaments; and
Sec. 27.Public record of a private document. — An (c)Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
authorized public record of a private document may be documents required by law to the entered therein.
proved by the original record, or by a copy thereof, attested All other writings are private. (20a)
by the legal custodian of the record, with an appropriate
certificate that such officer has the custody. (28a) Also, substantive law provides that no will shall pass either
real or personal property unless proved and allowed in the
Q: How to prove the lack of record? proper court. The same rule is echoed in Sec. 1 of Rule 75.
Sec.1. Allowance of will necessary. Conclusive as to The rule does not require expert testimony to prove the
execution.—No will shall pass either real or personal estate handwriting of a person. It may be proven by any witness
unless proved and allowed in the proper court. Subject to who believes it to be the handwriting of a person because:
the right of appeal, such allowance of the will shall be
conclusive as to its due execution. a. he has seen the person write; or
b. has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the
Poof of a Private Document (Rule 132) witness has acted or been charged, and has thus
acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person;
Sec. 20.Proof of private document. — Before any private c. by a comparison made by the witness or the court, with
document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party
due execution and authenticity must be proved either: against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be
genuine to the satisfaction of the judge.
(a)By anyone who saw the document executed or written;
or Ancient documents (Rule 132)
(b)By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
handwriting of the maker. Sec. 21.When evidence of authenticity of private document
not necessary. — Where a private document is more than
Any other private document need only be identified as that thirty years old, is produced from the custody in which it
which it is claimed to be. (21a) would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished by
any alterations or circumstances of suspicion, no other
Where the private document is offered in evidence as evidence of its authenticity need be given. (22a)
authentic, there is a need to prove its due execution and
authenticity. Sec. 20 recognizes 2 ways of proving the due This is the exception to the rule requiring proof of the
execution and genuineness of a private document: genuineness and due execution of a private document.
Accordingly, when a document is ancient, evidence of its
a. Rely on the personal knowledge of the witness (he authenticity need not be given. There is no necessity for
personally witnessed the execution or writing of the observance of the authentication process. Yet, it must be
document); and established that document is ancient and that it has the
b. The witness testifies or shows evidence that the characteristics of a document provided in Sec. 21. When all
signature or handwriting of the maker is genuine. these are done, no other evidence of its authenticity need be
given.
The rule only applies when a private document is offered as
authentic as when it is offered in evidence to prove that the Q: When is a document considered as ancient?
document was truly executed by the person purported to
have made the same. Thus, where it is offered in evidence A: A private document is considered as ancient when it is
not as authentic, its genuineness and due execution need not more than 30 years old, is produced from a custody in which
be proven as when the only purpose is for the efferor to show it would naturally be found if genuine and is unblemished by
that a certain piece of document exists. any alterations or circumstances of suspicion. Yet, while a
witness is not needed to prove the due execution and
Q: How to prove the genuineness of a handwriting? authenticity of the document, a witness is needed to identify
the same.
A: Sec. 22 of Rule 132
Note: If the authenticity of a private document has been
Sec. 22.How genuineness of handwriting proved. — The admitted by the parties, the rule requires no further
handwriting of a person may be proved by any witness who authentication.
believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he
has seen the person write, or has seen writing purporting to Q: How to explain alterations in a document?
be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged,
and has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such A: Sec. 31 of Rule 132
person. Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be
given by a comparison, made by the witness or the court, Sec. 31.Alteration in document, how to explain. — The party
with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party producing a document as genuine which has been altered
against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be and appears to have been altered after its execution, in a
genuine to the satisfaction of the judge. (23a) part material to the question in dispute, must account for
A: Sec.33 of Rule 132 Competent witness means evidence that is not excluded by
law or by rules. As a applied to a witness, competence means
Sec. 33.Documentary evidence in an unofficial language. — that the witness is qualified to take a stand and testify. It
Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be means that he is fit or he is eligible to testify on a particular
admitted as evidence, unless accompanied with a matter in a judicial proceeding.
translation into English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of
proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed to have If a witness cannot perceive or even if he can perceive he
such translation prepared before trial. (34a) cannot remember what he has perceived, he is incompetent
to testify. If he has no personal knowledge of an event the
Impeachment of judicial record truth of which he wants to prove, he is also incompetent to
testify. Competence of a witness therefore, refers to his
Judicial record refers to the record of judicial proceedings. It personal qualifications to testify. Competence also includes
does not only include official entries or files or the official acts the absence of any factor that would disqualify him from
of a judicial officer but also the judgment of the court. being a witness.
Sec. 29.How judicial record impeached. — Any judicial The presentation and introduction of every kind of evidence
record may be impeached by evidence of: (a) want of needs the intervention of a witness. It is a legal truth that
jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer, (b) collusion identification precedes authentication. Being inanimate, a
between the parties, or (c) fraud in the party offering the document or an object cannot speak for itself.
record, in respect to the proceedings. (30a)
Presumption in favor of competence of a witness
Registration of contracts
A person who takes the stand as a witness is presumed to be
Where a contract is required by law to be registered, the qualified to testify. A party who desires to question the
same must be, as a rule, in a public document. For example, competence of a witness must do so by making an objection
for purposes of registration and convenience, acts and as soon as the facts tending to show incompetency are
contracts which have for their object the creation, apparent.
transmission, modification or extinguishment of real rights
over immovable property must appear in a public document. Qualifications of a witness (Rule 130, Sec. 20)
A witness must be able to perceive an event. It would be Sec. 21.Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or
absurd to ask a blind man what he saw, or of a deaf person immaturity. — The following persons cannot be witnesses:
what he heard. The witness must also have personal
knowledge of the facts surrounding the subject matter of his (a)Those whose mental condition, at the time of their
testimony. Otherwise, he lacks the competence to testify. production for examination, is such that they are incapable
of intelligently making known their perception to others;
Rule 130, Sec. 36.Testimony generally confined to personal (b)Children whose mental maturity is such as to render
knowledge; hearsay excluded. — A witness can testify only them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which they
to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge; are examined and of relating them truthfully. (19a)
that is, which are derived from his own perception, except
as otherwise provided in these rules. (30a) Sec. 22.Disqualification by reason of marriage. — During
their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify
Sec. 23.Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of Drug abuse will not render a person incompetent to testify. It
adverse party. — Parties or assignor of parties to a case, or becomes relevant only if the witness was under the influence
persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an of drugs at the same time he is testifying or at the time the
executor or administrator or other representative of a events in question were observed.
deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind,
upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased Q: What is the rule regarding questions concerning the
person or against such person of unsound mind, cannot credibility of witnesses?
testify as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of
such deceased person or before such person became of A: They are best left to the sound discretion of ht trial court
unsound mind. (20a) as it is in the best position to observe his demeanor and
bodily movements.
Sec. 24.Disqualification by reason of privileged
communication. — The following persons cannot testify as G.R.: The findings of the trial courts on the credibility of
to matters learned in confidence in the following cases: witnesses deserve a high degree of respect and will not be
disturbed
(a)The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage,
cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to XPN: When the trial court had overlooked, misunderstood, or
any communication received in confidence by one from the misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight and
other during the marriage except in a civil case by one substance which could reverse a judgment of conviction.
against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the other or the latter's direct Q: What is the reason for the general rule?
descendants or ascendants;
(b)An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be A: The trial courts had observed the witnesses’ deportment
examined as to any communication made by the client to and manner of testifying, the furtive glance, blush of
him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a conscious shame, hesitation, flippant or sneering tone,
view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney's calmness, sigh, or the scant or full realization of an oath—all
secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the of these are useful aids for an accurate determination of a
consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact witness’ honesty and sincerity.
the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity;
(c)A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or Other factors that do not affect the competency of witness
obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the
patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by Q: What are the factors which do not, as a general rule,
him or any information which he may have acquired in affect the competency of witness?
attending such patient in a professional capacity, which
information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity, A: Sec. 20 of Rule 130:
and which would blacken the reputation of the patient;
(d)A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the a. Religious or
person making the confession, be examined as to any b. political belief,
confession made to or any advice given by him in his c. interest in the outcome of the case, or
professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by d. conviction of a crime unless otherwise provided by
the church to which the minister or priest belongs; law
(e)A public officer cannot be examined during his term of
office or afterwards, as to communications made to him in Q: Give an example under the phrase “conviction of a crime
official confidence, when the court finds that the public unless otherwise provided by law”?
interest would suffer by the disclosure. (21a)
A: Those who have been convicted of falsification of a
Q: Is bias a basis for declaring a witness incompetent to document, perjury or false testimony are disqualified from
testify? being witnesses at a will (Art. 821, NCC). As a consequence,
these persons may not also testify as witnesses in the probate
A: No. of a will where the subject of the testimony is the very fact of
execution of the will in their presence.
Sec. 21 of Rule 130 NOTE: When the court finds that substantial doubt exists
regarding the ability of the child to perceive, remember,
Sec. 21.Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate
immaturity. — The following persons cannot be witnesses: the duty to tell the truth in court, the court shall conduct a
(a)Those whose mental condition, at the time of their competency examination of a child.
production for examination, is such that they are incapable
of intelligently making known their perception to others; Q: How will the court conduct the competency examination
(b)Children whose mental maturity is such as to render of a child?
them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which they
are examined and of relating them truthfully. (19a) A: Motu propio or on motion of a party.
Q: What requisites must concur in order to disqualify a Q: What proof is required to prove the necessity of a
witness by reason of mental incapacity? competency examination of a child?
Q: What if he is over 18 years of age, can he be considered A: Only by the judge. If counsels of the parties desire to ask
as a child? questions, they cannot do so directly. They are allowed to
submit questions to the judge which he may ask the child in
A: Sometimes, he may. If he is found by the court as unable his discretion.
to fully take care of himself or protect himself from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of Q: What should be the nature of the questions?
physical or mental disability or condition (Sec. 4 [a], Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness, A.M. No. 004-07-SC). A: They shall be appropriate to the age and developmental
level of the child. The questions shall not be related to the
Competency of a child witness issues at the trial but shall focus on the ability of the child to
remember, to communicate, to distinguish between truth
Q: What is the presumption under the law? and falsehood and to appreciate the duty to testify truthfully
Marital Disqualification Rule (Spousal Immunity) A: It does not matter if the facts subject of the testimony
(Rule 130) occurred or came to the knowledge of the witness before the
marriage. The affected spouse may still invoke the rule by
Sec. 22.Disqualification by reason of marriage. — During objecting to the testimony as long as the testimony is offered
their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify during the marriage.
for or against the other without the consent of the affected
spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or in Q: What if there was no objection on the part of the other
a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the spouse?
other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants. (20a)
A: The testimony is admissible where no objection is
Q: What is the purpose of this rule? interposed by the spouse who has the right to invoke the
prohibition.
A: It is based on the society’s intent to preserve the marriage
relations and promote domestic peace. It is intended to Q: So, may the rule be waived? How?
discourage the commission of perjury.
A: Yes, either expressly or impliedly.
Alvarez v. Ramirez (473 SCRA 72)
Q: Does the rule apply only to testimony?
1. There is identity of interests between the husband and
wife A: No, it also covers production of documents (State v.
2. If one were to testify for or against the other, there is a Bramlet).
consequent danger of perjury
3. The policy of law is to guard the security and confidences Exceptions to the Marital disqualification rule
of private life, even at the risk of an occasional failure of
justice, and to prevent domestic disunion and Q: What are the Exceptions to the Marital disqualification
unhappiness rule?
4. Where there is want of domestic tranquility there is
danger of punishing one spouse through the hostile A:
testimony of the other. 1. in a civil case by one against the other, or
2. in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against
Q: What is the scope of the rule? the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants
A: The rule forbids each spouse to testify for or against the Q: What is the landmark decision under Ordoño v. Daquigan
other without the consent of the affected spouse except in (62 SCRA 270)?
cases authorized by the rule. The prohibition extends not only
to a testimony adverse to the spouse but also in favor. It also A: The court allowed the wife to testify against her husband
extends both criminal and civil cases because the rule does who was accused of raping her daughter. Accordingly, “The
not distinguish. better rule is that, when an offense directly attacks or directly
and vitally impairs the conjugal relations, it comes within the
Q: How about in criminal cases? Q: For the rule to apply, what are the requisites which
should be present?
A: The privilege of one to testify against the other is not
confined to crimes committed by one against the other, but A:
covers crimes committed by one against the direct 1. There must be a valid marriage between the husband
descendants or ascendants of the latter such as the child or and wife
the parents. However, crimes committed against a spouse’s 2. There is a communication received in confidence by one
collateral relatives such as uncles, aunties, and cousins or from the other
nephews and nieces are not covered by the exception 3. The confidential communication was received during the
because they are neither direct ascendants nor descendants. marriage.
Testimony where spouse is accused with others Zulueta v. CA (253 SCRA 699)
Q: May a spouse testify in a trial where the spouse is a co- The law insures absolute freedom of communication
accused? between the spouses by making it privilege. Neither may be
examined without the consent of the other as to any
A: The disqualification is between the husband and the wife, communication received in confidence by one from the other
but the rule does not preclude the wife from testifying when during the marriage, save for specified exceptions.
it involves other parties or accused. The court stressed that
the testimony cannot be used against accused-appellant Since the application of the rule requires confidential
directly or through the guise of taking judicial notice of the information received by one spouse from the other during
proceedings in the murder case without violating the marital the marriage, information acquired by a spouse before the
privilege. “What cannot be done directly cannot be done marriage even if received confidentially will not fall squarely
indirectly” (People v. Quidato, 297 SCRA 1). with Sec. 24(a) but divulging the same may be objected to
under Sec. 22 of Rule 130. The tenor of Sec. 22 distinguish as
Testimony be the estranges spouse to when the information subject of the testimony was
acquired and thus, may cover matters which occurred or
When the marital and domestic relations are so strained that adverse information acquired prior to the marriage. It is
there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and sufficient that the witness-spouse testifies during the
tranquility which may be disturbed, the reason based on such marriage. It is unlike sec. 22(a) which requires that the
harmony and tranquility fails. In such case, identity of confidential information be received during the marriage.
interests disappears and the consequent danger of perjury
based on the identity is non-existent (Alvarez v. Ramirez, Note: Sec.22 (a) is clear: confidential information received
2005; People v. Castañeda, 271 SCRA 504). from a third person is not covered by the privilege.
A: If the testimony and affidavit are evidence of the case Sec. 24(a) prohibits the Under Sec. 22, the
against her husband for child prostitution, the evidences are examination of a spouse as prohibition is a testimony for
admissible. The marital privilege communication rule under to matters received in or against the other.
Sec. 24 of Rule 130 and the marital disqualification rule under confidence by one from the
Sec. 22 of Rule 130 do not apply to and cannot be invoked in other during the marriage.
a criminal case committed by a spouse against the direct
descendants of the other (Ordono v. Daquigan). Attorney-Client Privilege (Rule 130)
Explanation of distinction between Marital Disqualification Sec. 24 (b)An attorney cannot, without the consent of his
Rule and Marital Privilege Communication Rule client, be examined as to any communication made by the
client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or
Sec. 24(a) has reference to confidential communications with a view to, professional employment, nor can an
received by one spouse from the other during the marriage. attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined,
Sec.22 does not refer to confidential communication between without the consent of the client and his employer,
spouses. It will not come into play when the fact pattern in a concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been
problem makes reference to confidential communications acquired in such capacity;
between H and W during the marriage. Sec. 24(a) will instead
apply. Q: What are the requisites for the privilege to arise?
It does not extend to communications where the client’s A lawyer shall preserve the confidence and secrets of his
purpose is the furtherance of a future intended crime or client even after the attorney-client relation is terminated.
fraud or for the purpose of committing a crime or a tort.
Accordingly, the relation between A and C is one of trust and
Q: Does the privilege preclude inquiries into the fact that confidence of the highest degree. A lawyer becomes familiar
the lawyer was consulted? with all the facts connected with his client’s case. He learns
from his client the weak points of the action as well as the
A: No, they are not privileged. Even the identity of the client strong ones.
is not privileged as well as that of the lawyer. Yet, under the
last-link doctrine, non-privilege information, such as the Mercado v. Vitriolo (p.286)
identity of the client is protected if the revelation of such
information would necessarily reveal privilege information. It is the glory of the legal profession that its fidelity to its
client can be depend on, and that a man may safely go to a
Q: Do the statements have to be made personally? lawyer and converse with him upon his rights or supposed
rights in any litigation with absolute assurance that the
A: The statements of the client need not have been made to lawyer’s tongue is tied from ever disclosing it.
the attorney in person. Those made to the attorney’s
secretary, clerk or stenographer for transmission to the Q: What are the factors essential to establish the existence
attorney for the purpose of the professional relationship or of the privilege?
with a view to such relationship or those knowledge acquired
by such employees in such capacity are covered by the A:
privilege.
1. Where legal advice of any kind is sought,
Note: For the statements to be privilege, the same should be 2. From a professional legal adviser in his capacity as
confidential. If the communications made by the client to his such,
attorney were also made to third persons, the intention of 3. The communications relating to that purpose,
secrecy does not appear. There can be no attorney-client 4. Made in confidence,
privilege where the information is given with the expectation 5. By the client,
that it will be revealed to others. 6. Are at his instance permanently protected,
7. From disclosure by himself or by the legal advisor,
Q: Does the privilege apply in suits between the attorney 8. Except the protection be waived.
and the client?
Q: Are matters disclosed by a prospective client to a lawyer
protected by the rule?
A: Yes, even if the prospective client does not thereafter A: To encourage the patient to freely disclose all the matters
retain the lawyer or the latter declines the employment. which may aid in the diagnosis in the treatment of a disease
or an injury. For this purpose, it is necessary to shield the
Q: Why is such covered by the rule? patient from embarrassing details concerning his condition
(Falkinburg v. Prudential Insurance, Co.).
A: To make the prospective client free to discuss whatever he
wishes with the lawyer without fear that what he tells the It is designed to promote the health and not the truth. The
lawyer will be divulged or used against him, and for the patient is the person to be encouraged and he is the holder of
lawyer to be equally free to obtain information from the the privilege (Metropolitan Life and Insurance Co v.
prospective client. Kauffman).
NOTE: A communication from a prospective client other than Q: What are the kinds of information which are prohibited
on account of the prospective lawyer-client relation is not from disclosure?
privileged (Pfeider v. Palanca, 35 SCRA 75).
A:
Q: What is a confidential communication? 1. Any advice given to the client
2. Any treatment given to the client
A: It refers to information transmitter by voluntary act of 3. Any information acquired in attending such patient
disclosure between attorney and client in confidence and by provided that the advice, treatment or information was
means which, so far as the client is aware, discloses made or acquired in a professional capacity and was
information to no third person other than one reasonably necessary to enable him to act in that capacity
necessary for the transmission of the information or the 4. That the information sought to be disclosed would tend
accomplishment of the purpose for which it was given. to blacken the reputation of the patient.
Q: Is a compromise agreement prepared by a lawyer Q: Does the rule require that the relationship be a result of a
pursuant to the instruction of his client and delivered to the contractual relationship?
opposing party, an offer by client to his counsel for
settlement, or a document given by a client to his lawyer A: No. It could be a result of a quasi-contractual relationship
not in his professional capacity covered by the as when the patient is seriously ill and the physician treats
confidentiality rule? him even if he is not in a condition to give his consent as in
the situation described in Art. 2167 of the NCC.
A: No, the element of confidentiality not being present.
Art. 2167 of the NCC
Physician-Patient Privilege (Rule 130)
Q: Are the results of the autopsy deemed covered by the
Sec. 24.Disqualification by reason of privileged privilege?
communication. — The following persons cannot testify as
to matters learned in confidence in the following cases: A: No, autopsies are not intended for treatment.
(c)A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or Q: When can it be said that the physician is acting in a
obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the professional capacity?
patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by
him or any information which he may have acquired in A: When he attends to the patient for either curative or
attending such patient in a professional capacity, which preventive treatment.
information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity,
and which would blacken the reputation of the patient; Q: Does the privilege survive the death of the patient?
Q: Do this privilege apply to criminal case? A: Yes. Death does not permit the living to impair the
deceased’s name by disclosing communications held
A: It applies to civil cases, whether the patient is a party or confidential by law (Westover v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.).
not. The phraseology of the rule implies that the privilege
cannot be claimed in a criminal case presumably because the Q: May the privilege be waived?
interest of the public in criminal prosecution shall be deemed
more important than the secrecy of the communication. A: Yes, either expressly or impliedly. When the patient
answers questions on cross on matters which are supposed
Q: What is the purpose of the privilege? to be privileged, the waiver exists. Also, when there is
Priest/Minister-Penitent Privilege (Rule 130) Hence, the disclosure or non-disclosure is not dependent on
the will of the officer but on the determination by a
Sec. 24.Disqualification by reason of privileged competent court.
communication. — The following persons cannot testify as
to matters learned in confidence in the following cases: Q: When is the privileged applicable?
(d)A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the A: It can only be invoked not only during the term of the
person making the confession, be examined as to any office of the public officer but also after.
confession made to or any advice given by him in his
professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by NOTE: National security and state secrets are confidential and
the church to which the minister or priest belongs; a court will most likely uphold the privilege.
A: The person making the confession holds the privilege and Q: What is the origin of the executive privilege?
the priest or minister hearing the confession in his
professional capacity is prohibited from making a disclosure A: It originated in the case Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita
of the confession without the consent of the person (488 SCRA 1).
confessing.
Q: What is “executive privilege”?
Q: What is the scope of the privilege?
A: It is the power of the government to withhold information
A: It also covers not only a confession made by the penitent from the public, the courts, and the Congress.
and any advice given by the minister or priest. It must have
been given pursuant to the course of the discipline of the NOTE: It was originally used in Almonte v. Vasquez (244 SCRA
denomination or sect to which the minister or priest belongs. 286). The court acknowledged that there are certain types of
Thus, the priest must be duly ordained or consecrated by his information which the government may withhold from the
sect. public like military, diplomatic, and national security secrets.
Q: Are all kinds of confession covered? Q: What is the basis of the privilege?
A: No, the communication must be made pursuant to A: It is rules that the President and those who assist him must
confessions of sins. The rule states any advice given by him in be free to explore alternatives in the process of shaping
his professional character or in a spiritual capacity. policies and making decisions and to do so in a way many
would be unwilling to express except privately.
Q: When a penitent discusses business arrangements with
the priest, is this covered by the privilege? Q: What are the matters involving state secrets?
a: No. A:
1. Military
Privileged Communications to Public Officers (Rule 130) 2. Diplomatic
3. Other national security matters
Sec. 24.Disqualification by reason of privileged
communication. — The following persons cannot testify as
to matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
A: It requires that all public officials enumerated above shall Q: According to Chief Justice Puno, what are the 2 standards
have to secure prior consent of the President prior to which must be met to show specific need for the
appearing before the House of Congress to give effect to the information on the part of the branch of the government
purpose of the EO. seeking its disclosure?
A: No, only one executive official may be exempted from the Privileged communications under the Rules on electronic
power of inquiry of Congress—the President upon whom the evidence
executive power is vested is beyond the reach of Congress
except through the power of impeachment. Sec. 3 of the Rules on electronic evidence
Section 7, Art. III of the Bill of Rights SEC. 3. Privileged communication. – The confidential
character of a privileged communications is not solely on
xxx the ground that it is in the form of an electronic document.
Q: What matters may be disclosed in relation to the right to Parental and Filial Privilege (Rule 130)
information on matters of public concern?
SECTION 1.Examination to be done in open court. — The A: The testimony in such case may be barred.
examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing
shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation. No special wording is necessary for an affirmation, provided
Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the that the language used is designed to impress upon the
questions calls for a different mode of answer, the answers individual the duty to tell the truth. It may be an abuse of the
of the witness shall be given orally. (1a) court’s discretion to require the use of the words “swear” or
“affirm” in the oath if the language would violate the witness’
The Rule provides for the examination of the witness in open religious beliefs where the witness could otherwise testify
court and unless the question calls for a different mode, the truthfully.
answer of the witness shall be given orally. This allows the
court to observe the demeanor of the witness and also allows Examination of witness and record of proceedings
the adverse party to cross-examine the witness.
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing
Q: What are those testimonies which need not be given in shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation.
open court? Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the questions
calls for a different mode of answer
A:
The questions propounded to a witness and his answers
1. Under the Rules of Summary Procedure, the affidavits of thereto, the statements made by the judge or any of the
the parties shall constitute the direct testimonies of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case, shall
witnesses who executed the same (Sec.15); be recorded by means of shorthand or stenotype or by other
2. In civil cases, the parties are required to submit the means of recording found suitable by the court (Sec. 2, Rule
affidavits of their witnesses and other pieces of evidence 132).
on the factual issues, together with their position papers,
setting forth the law and facts relied upon (Sec.9); In fact the entire proceedings of the trial or hearing must be
3. Depositions need not be taken in open court. They may recorded.
also be taken before a notary public or before any person
authorized to administer oaths; A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the
4. In criminal case, either party may utilize the testimony of official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and certified as
a witness who is deceased, out of the country, or one correct by him shall be deemed prima facie a correct
who is unavailable or unable to testify despite the statement of such proceedings.
exercise of due diligence, even if the testimony was one
used in another case or proceeding, judicial or Rights and obligations of a witness (Rule 130)
administrative, provided the said proceeding involved
the same parties and subject matter and the adverse Sec. 3.Rights and obligations of a witness. — A witness must
party had the opportunity to cross-examine the witness answer questions, although his answer may tend to
(Sec. 1(f), Rule 115). establish a claim against him. However, it is the right of a
witness:
Oath or affirmation (1)To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
questions, and from harsh or insulting demeanor;
The witness must take either an oath or an affirmation but (2)Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice
the option to take an oath or affirmation is given to the require;
witness and not to the court. (3)Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent
to the issue;
Q: What is an oath? (4)Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a
penalty for an offense unless otherwise provided by law; or
A: It is an outward pledge made under an immediate sense of (5)Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his
responsibility to God or a solemn appeal to the Supreme reputation, unless it to be the very fact at issue or to a fact
Being in attestation of the truth of some statement. from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a
witness must answer to the fact of his previous final
Q: What is an affirmation? conviction for an offense. (3a, 19a)
A: It is a substitute for an oath and is a solemn and formal Q: What is the foremost among the rights of the witness?
declaration that the witness will tell the truth.
A: The right not to give an answer which will tend to degrade
Q: What if the witness refuses to take either? his reputation, unless otherwise provided by law.
Kinds of examinations (Rule 132) A: The rule allows questions designed to test the accuracy
and truthfulness of the witness, his freedom from interest
Sec. 5.Direct examination. — Direct examination is the and bias, or the reverse and to illicit all important facts
examination-in-chief of a witness by the party presenting bearing upon the issue.
him on the facts relevant to the issue. (5a)
Q: What is the exception to this rule?
Sec. 6.Cross-examination; its purpose and extent. — Upon
the termination of the direct examination, the witness may A: Where the witness is an unwilling or a hostile witness as so
be cross-examined by the adverse party as to many matters declared by the court, he may be cross-examined only as the
stated in the direct examination, or connected therewith, subject matter of his examination-in-chief (Sec. 12).
with sufficient fullness and freedom to test his accuracy and
truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the Q: What are the 2 basic purposes of cross-examination?
reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the
issue. (8a) A:
1. To bring out facts favorable to counsel’s not established
Sec. 7.Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent. — by the direct testimony
After the cross-examination of the witness has been 2. To enable counsel to impeach or to impair the credibility
concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling him, of the witness.
to explain or supplement his answers given during the cross-
examination. On re-direct-examination, questions on 3. Re-direct examination- this is conducted after the cross
matters not dealt with during the cross-examination, may examination of the witness. The party who called the
be allowed by the court in its discretion. (12) witness on direct examination may re-examine the same
witness to explain or supplement his answers given
Sec. 8.Re-cross-examination. — Upon the conclusion of the during the cross-examination. It is the examination of a
re-direct examination, the adverse party may re-cross- witness by counsel who conducted the direct
examine the witness on matters stated in his re-direct examination after the cross examination. Accordingly,
examination, and also on such other matters as may be the counsel may elicit testimony to correct or repel any
allowed by the court in its discretion. (13) wrong impression or inferences that may have been
created on the cross-examination. It may also be the
Q: What are the kinds of examinations? opportunity to rehabilitate a witness whose credibility
has been damaged. In its discretion, the court may even
A: allow questions on matters not touched in the cross-
1. Direct examination- Direct examination is the examination.
examination-in-chief of a witness by the party presenting
him on the facts relevant to the issue. It is actually the 4. Re-cross examination- examination conducted upon the
procedure for obtaining information from one’s own conclusion of the re-direct examination. Here the
witness in an orderly fashion. The purpose is to illicit adverse party may question the witness on matters
facts about the client’s cause of action or defense stated in the re-direct examination
Impeachment by showing bad reputation Examining another witness to elicit from his lips the prior
conviction of another witness is not the correct procedure
NOTE: Not every aspect of a person’s reputation may be the unless the witness is one who is competent like an official
subject of impeachment. custodian of records.
Q: What may be the aspect for the impeachment of bad Impeachment of the adverse party as a witness
reputation due to the person’s bad reputation?
Q: Does the fact that the witness is the adverse party
A: necessarily mean that the calling party will not be bound by
1. For truth the former’s testimony?
2. For honesty
3. For integrity (Sec. 11, Rule 132) A: No. The fact remains that it was at his instance that his
adverse was put into the witness stand. Under the rule
Q: What is the presumption under the law? permitting the impeachment of an adverse witness, although
the calling party does not vouch for the witness’ veracity, he
A: A witness is presumed to be truthful and of good is nonetheless bound by his testimony if it is not contradicted
character, the party presenting him does not have to prove or remains unrebutted (Gaw v. Chua, 2008).
he is good because he is presumed to be one. It is only after
his character has been attacked, can he prove his being good. Exclusion and separation of witness (Rule 132)
Inadmissibility of Character Evidence A: In a criminal case, the prosecution cannot prove the bad
moral character of the accused in its evidence-in-chief. It can
Q: What is “character”? only do so in rebuttal.
A: It is the aggregate of the moral qualities which belong to This means that the prosecution may not offer evidence of
and distinguish an individual person; the general results of the character of the accused unless the accused himself has
one’s distinguishing attributes. It refers to what a man is and offered evidence of his good character.
depends on the attributes he possesses.
Q: State the relevant provision.
Q: Is it the same as reputation?
A:
A: No. The reputation depends on the attributes which others
believe one to possess. Character signifies reality while Sec. 51. Character evidence not generally
reputation signifies what is accepted to be reality at present. admissible; exceptions: —
Sec. 51. Character evidence not generally Evidence of good moral character of the accused
admissible; exceptions: —
Sec. 51. Character evidence not generally
(a)In Criminal Cases: admissible; exceptions: —
Q: May he prove his character by evidence of specific Q: In civil cases, when is the evidence of the moral character
instances of good conduct? of a party admissible?
Sec. 51. Character evidence not generally Sec. 48. General rule. — The opinion of witness is not
admissible; exceptions: — admissible, except as indicated in the following sections.
(42)
(a)In Criminal Cases:
Sec. 49. Opinion of expert witness. — The opinion of a
(3)The good or bad moral character of the offended party witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
may be proved if it tends to establish in any reasonable experience or training which he shown to posses, may be
degree the probability or improbability of the offense received in evidence. (43a)
charged.
Sec. 50. Opinion of ordinary witnesses. — The opinion of a
NOTE: This provision pertains only to criminal cases, not to witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in
administrative cases. evidence regarding —
(a)the identity of a person about whom he has adequate
The character evidence must be limited to the traits and knowledge;
characteristics involved in the type of an offense charged. (b)A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity;
and
Character evidence in child abuse cases (c)The mental sanity of a person with whom he is
(Sexual Abuse Shield Rule) sufficiently acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his impressions of the
Q: What pieces of evidence are not admissible in any emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
criminal proceeding involving alleged sexual child abuse? (44a)
Admissibility of opinion evidence Q: If the police officer will testify that he notices Candida to
be hysterical and on the verge of collapse, would such
Q: Is the opinion of the witness admissible? testimony be considered as opinion, hence, inadmissible?
Q: When is the opinion of an ordinary witness admissible? Q: What is the basis for excluding hearsay evidence?
Hearsay is an out of court statement offered for the truth of Sec. 49.Opinion of expert witness. — The opinion of a
the matter asserted. witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
experience or training which he shown to posses, may be
Q: What are the specific elements of Hearsay evidence? received in evidence. (43a)
1. A statement that is offered to show its patent falsity, so Independent relevant statements
as to suggest the defendant’s conscious guilt;
2. Statements relating to the state of mind of the declarant It is a rule that a declarant’s statement may have relevance to
and the statements relating to the state of mind of the an issue in a case from the mere fact that the words were
listener. This constitute circumstantial evidence of an spoken or written, irrespective of the truth or falsity of the
assertion and where the making of the statement is the assertion. This is known as independently relevant
significant fact because it either gives rise to the statements. These statements are admissible for some
inference about the declarant’s state of mind or indicates relevant reason independent of their truth or falsity. They are
its effect on the hearer. The truth of the statement is not relevant because the statement itself is either the very fact in
the issue here. issue or a circumstantial evidence of a fact in issue. Some
authorities call such statements as the operative acts which
Out-of-court statements offered to prove mental state of give rise to legal consequences.
the declarant
They are not hearsay. Thus, a witness may be asked questions
As long as an out-of-court statement is offered for a non- concerning what the accused told him that other persons are
hearsay purpose (a purpose other than to prove the truth of involved in the conspiracy if the purpose of the testimony is
the matter asserted), the statement is admissible if it has not to prove that such persons were really involved but only
relevance to the matter in issue. to prove what the accused had mentioned (People v. Cusi, Jr.,
14 SCRA 944).
E.g. a statement which demonstrates by inference from the
tenor of the statement the state of mind of the speaker or Their relevance to the matter in issue is not dependent on
the declarant. their truth or falsity. Its relevance lies in its tenor or the fact
that it was said.
Out-of court statement offered to prove its effect on the
listener/hearer E.g: Prior-out of court declarations of a witness inconsistent
with his testimony on the stand are admissible, not to prove
An out-of-court statement may be offered not only to prove the truth of what was said. What is important is that the
the state of mind of the declarant. It may also be used to statements were uttered.
show the state of mind of the hearer or listener. It described
in terms of the effect of the declarant’s statement on the Estrada v. Desierto
hearer and why the listener acted in a particular manner.
Q: What are the 2 classes of independently relevant
When the statement is offered for the truth of the matter statements?
asserted but is offered to show the mental effect of the
statement on the hearer, the statement is not a hearsay. A:
Words offered to prove the effect on the hearer are
admissible when they are offered to show their effect on one 1. Those statements which are the very facts in issue; and
whose conduct is at issue. It is the bearer’s reaction to the 2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of
statement which is sought to be proved. It is his reaction to fact in issue.
the statement that is relevant, not the truth of the assertion a. Statements of a person showing his state of mind—
in the statement. Since the hearer is present in court, he can his mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention,
be crossed-examined on whether or not he heard the ill-will and other conditions;
statement accurately, believed the statement to be true, and b. Statements of a person which shows his physical
whether or not he really acted in conformity with his belief. condition, as illness and the like;
c. Statements of a person from which an inference may
Out-of-court statement offered to prove that the statement be made as to the state of mind of another—
was made knowledge, belief, motive, good or bad faith, etc. of
the latter;
Where the statement is not offered for the truth of the d. Statements which may identify the date, place and
matter asserted, but merely to show what was said, the person on question; and
statement is not hearsay. e. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a
witness.
Beyond the mere fact that the words were uttered, the
statement proves nothing as to its averments because the Q: Is a newspaper clipping of the report to the reporter who
out-of-court declaration’s relevance is independent of the was present during the press conference during the press
truth of its assertion. conference stating that X admitted the robbery admissible?
A: Yes. It is a non-hearsay evidence offered for the purpose of Dying declarations (Rule 130)
showing that the statement of X was made to a reporter
regardless of the truth or falsity of the statement. The Sec. 37.Dying declaration. — The declaration of a dying
admissibility depends now on whether the fact that the person, made under the consciousness of an impending
statement was made is relevant to the case. It would be death, may be received in any case wherein his death is the
hearsay if offered to prove the truth that X was the robber. subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding
Also, the statement made by X to a reporter may be admitted circumstances of such death. (31a)
as an admission under Sec. 26, Rule 130.
Q: What is a dying declaration?
Rule 130
A: It is also known as the ante mortem statement. It is an
Sec. 26.Admission of a party. — The act, declaration or evidence of the highest order and is entitled to utmost
omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in credence since no person aware of his impending death
evidence against him. (22) would make a careless and false accusation.
Q: What are the exceptions to the hearsay rule? Q: What may be the purpose of a dying declaration?
Q: Is it correct to assert that the exceptions to the hearsay People v. Cerilla (539 SCRA 251)
rule are not hearsay?
The law considers the point of death as a situation so solemn
A: No, they are hearsay evidence but they are deemed and awful as creating an obligation equal to that which is
admissible hearsay for certain reasons. Under appropriate imposed by an oath administered in court.
circumstances, a hearsay statement may possess
circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness sufficient to Q: In what proceedings a dying declaration admissible?
justify non-production of the declarant in person. Another
justification may be simply dictated by the necessity to admit A: As originally conceived, they are admissible only in criminal
an out-of-court statement. cases particularly in homicide cases. However, because of the
changes under the Rules of Evidence in 1989, the law allowed
Q: Give examples of these exceptions. the use of dying declarations even in non-criminal cases.
Today, the Rules of court no longer places any limitation on
A: the type of action in which a dying declaration may be
1. Declaration against interest introduced. As long as the relevance is clear, a dying
2. Act or declaration about pedigree declaration may now be used or introduced in a criminal or a
3. Entries in the course of business civil action and the relevance is satisfied where the subject of
4. Entries in official records inquiry is the death of the declarant himself.
5. Commercial lists
6. Learned treatises Q: How should the objection be made?
NOTE: Their admissibility is predicated on a compelling A: It should be premised on any of the requisites for its
necessity admissibility embodied under Sec. 37. Thus, a counsel who
To admit a dying declaration in evidence, it must be shown A: The statement is admissible. A dying declaration as in the
that the declarant believed at the time the statement was facts in the case at bar, may be offered in a civil case that the
made, that he was in a dying condition and had given up the cause and circumstances of the death of the declarant are the
hope of surviving. subjects of the inquiry.
NOTE: It is conceded that in determining the consciousness, Q: What is the rationale behind the admissibility of the
the attendant circumstances should be carefully weighed in dying declaration?
determining the consciousness of the impending death and
the sincerity of such belief. A: As held in the case People v. Lamasan, no person who
knows of careless or false accusation.
Example: the fatal quality of the wound, the statements
made by the physician that his situation is hopeless, etc. Q: Does the dying declaration need to be directed to a
particular person?
Q: If declatant’s statement was made under consciousness
of an impending death, will a subsequent belief in recovery A: The dying declaration of the deceased need not be
before his actual death bar the admissibility of his directed to a particular person inquiring from the declarant as
statement? to the circumstances of his death. Anyone who has
knowledge of what the declarant said, whether it be directed
A: No. The admissibility only depends upon whether at the to him or not, whether he had made inquiries from the
time of the declaration was made the deceased believed that declarant or not, can testify thereto (People v. Valdez, 347
the injury received is fatal. SCRA 594).
Q: Will the remark “I do not know…I do not know who Assailing a dying declaration
stabbed me” admissible?
Q: Is a dying declaration create a conclusive presumption of
A: Yes, there is nothing in the rules which prohibits the credibility of the admitted declaration?
admissibility of a dying declaration that is favorable to the
accused. A: No. No evidentiary rule grants a dying declaratipm a
favored status in the hierarchy of evidence. It may be
It would be unfair to restrict the use of dying declarations by attacked in the same manner as on would do to a testimony
the prosecution. It is well-settled that it will be received on in open court. It may be impeached through the normal
behalf of the defendant (Mattox v. U.S.). methods provided for under the rules.
Q: What is the etymological meaning of res gestae? Talidanao v. Falcom Maritime, 2008
A: It means things done. It was originally used by the courts in In spontaneous exclamation or statements, the res gestae is
the other side of the world in the early 1800’s to create the startling occurrence, whereas in verbal acts, the res
hearsay exceptions whenever it was difficult to justify the gestae are the statements accompanying the equivocal act.
admission of a piece of hearsay evidence at a time when the
hearsay theory was far from being developed in the law of
evidence.
A. Spontaneous statements
It was used as a justification to escape from the strict
application of the hearsay rule. Q: What should be the characteristics for a spontaneous
statement to be admitted?
Res gestae is said to have reference to events speaking by
themselves through the instinctive words and acts of A:
participants when narrating the events. What is done or said 1. That there is a startling event or occurrence taking place
by the participants under the immediate spur of transaction 2. That while the event is taking place or immediately prior
becomes part of the transaction. to or subsequent thereto, a statement has been made
3. The statements were made before the declarant had the
Q: What is the rationale behind the concept? time to contrive or devise a falsehood
4. That the statement relates to the circumstances of the
A: It is the event that speaks for itself through the startling event or occurrence or that the statements
spontaneous words or instinctive words or conduct of the must concern the occurrence in question and its
witness and not the witness for and about the event. immediate attending circumstances.
The use of the term res gestae has falledn out of favor and Q: Where is the admissibility of a spontaneous statement
acts formerly called parts of the res gestae are now anchored on?
designated by specific names.
A: It is anchored on the theory that the statement was
The judicial dislike for use of the term res gestae is clearly uttered under the circumstances where the opportunity to
expressed in an Amercian case when it considered the phrase fabricate is absent. The statement is a reflex action rather
as “accountable for so much confusion that it had best be than a deliberate act, instinctive rather than deliberate. Thus,
denied any place whatever in legal terminology; if it means the declaration was made under the conditions suggestive of
anything but an unwillingness to think at all, what it covers the truth.
cannot be put in less intelligible terms (U.S. v. Matot).
The justification for the excited utterance exception is that a
Res gestae under the Rules of Court spontaneous declaration of an individual who has recently
suffered an overpowering and shocking experience is likely to
be truthful.
The Rules on Electronic Evidence also expressly exempt Q: Will the same rule apply if the declarant is available as a
business records from the hearsay rule: witness?
Declarations against interest (Rule 130) Also, the declaration could be against one’s penal interest
because if one admits to a crime, he is also civilly liable, a
Sec. 38.Declaration against interest. — The declaration liability that is pecuniary (People v. Toledo, 51 Phil. 826).
made by a person deceased, or unable to testify, against the
interest of the declarant, if the fact is asserted in the Declaration about pedigree (Rule 130)
declaration was at the time it was made so far contrary to
declarant's own interest, that a reasonable man in his Sec. 39.Act or declaration about pedigree. — The act or
position would not have made the declaration unless he declaration of a person deceased, or unable to testify, in
believed it to be true, may be received in evidence against respect to the pedigree of another person related to him by
himself or his successors in interest and against third birth or marriage, may be received in evidence where it
persons. (32a) occurred before the controversy, and the relationship
between the two persons is shown by evidence other than
People normally speak freely and with untruth when the such act or declaration. The word "pedigree" includes
statement is in their interest, but are usually unwilling to relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the
speak falsely against their interest. dates when and the places where these fast occurred, and
the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family
This is founded on the necessity on account of the history intimately connected with pedigree. (33a)
impossibility of obtaining other evidence from the same
source, the declarant being unavailable in person to testify on
Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree (Rule 130) A: When they are made in official records by public officer in
the Philppines or in the performance of a legal duty. They are
Sec. 40.Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. — admissible as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the
The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to entries.
the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one of its
members, may be received in evidence if the witness Q: What are the requisites for admissibility under this rule?
testifying thereon be also a member of the family, either by
consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family bibles or other A:
family books or charts, engravings on rings, family portraits 1. That the entry was made by a public officer, or by
and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. (34a) another person specially enjoined by law to do so;
2. That it was made by the public officer in the
Q: What does this exception involve? performance of his duties, or by such other person in
the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law;
A: and
1. A statement by a member of the family either by 3. That the public officer or other person had sufficient
consanguinity or affinity; knowledge of the facts by him stated, which must
2. The statement is about the reputation or tradition of have been acquired by him personally or through
the family in respect to the pedigree of any member official information.
of the family; and
3. The reputation or tradition is one existing previous Commercial lists and the like (Rule 130)
to the controversy.
Sec. 45.Commercial lists and the like. — Evidence of
Common reputation (Rule 130) statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an
occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other
Sec. 41.Common reputation. — Common reputation existing published compilation is admissible as tending to prove the
previous to the controversy, respecting facts of public or truth of any relevant matter so stated if that compilation is
general interest more than thirty years old, or respecting published for use by persons engaged in that occupation
marriage or moral character, may be given in evidence. and is generally used and relied upon by them therein. (39)
Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be
received as evidence of common reputation. (35) Q: What is the rule for such commercial lists and reports of
matters of interest be admissible?
Q: When is reputation admissible in evidence?
A: They must be made by persons engaged in that occupation
A: It is when such reputation refers to a matter of public or and are generally used and relied upon by them and those
general interest, or respecting marriage or moral character lists and reports are published.
and said matter is more than 30 years old. It must exist prior
to the controversy. It may be established by monuments and Learned treatises (Rule 130)
inscriptions.
Q: What is the testimony contemplated under this Q: Also, what are the foundations which must be
provision? established?
Exception to the hearsay rule under the rule on examination Q: What is burden of proof?
of a child witness
A: Onus probandi refers to the obligation of a party to the
Q: What requisites should be present for a statement made litigation to persuade the court that he is entitled to
by a child, in a child abuse case, not otherwise admissible relief.
under the hearsay rule to be admitted in evidence in a
criminal or non-criminal proceeding?
Rule 131
A:
Northwest Airlines v. Chiong, 2008 A: The one who attacks the constitutionality of a law has the
onus probandi to show why the law is repugnant to the
Although initially, the burden of proof was with the passenger constitution. The reason for the rule is the presumption that
to prove that there was a breach of contract of carriage, the the legislature intended to enact a valid, sensible, and just
burden of evidence shifter to the airline when the former law and one which operates no further than may be
adduced sufficient evidence to prove the fact alleged. necessary to effectuate the specific purpose of the law (Perez
v. People, 2008).
BPI v. Sps. Royeca, 2008
Test for determining where the burden of proof lies
In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof must
establish his case by preponderance of evidence, or evidence Q: What is the test for determining where the burden of
which is more convincing to the court as worthy of belief than proof lies?
that which is offered in opposition thereto. Thus, the party,
whether the plaintiff or plaintiff, has the onus to prove his A: It is to ask which party to an action or suit will fail if he
assertion in order to obtain a favorable judgment. offers no evidence competent to show the facts averred as
the basis for the relief he seeks to obtain (Aznar Brothers
Q: Who has the burden of proof in a case involving non- Realty v. Aying, 458 SCRA 496).
payment of obligation?
The burden of proof lies on the party who wants to establish
A: The general rule is that the burden rests on the defendant a legal right in his favor. If he claims a right granted by law, he
to prove payment, rather than on the plaintiff to prove non- must prove his claim by competent evidence, relying on the
payment. The debtor has the burden of showing with legal strength of his own evidence and not upon the weakness of
certainty that the obligation has been discharged by that of his opponent (China Banking Corp. v. Ta Fa Industries,
payment. 2008).
NOTE: The burden of proof may shift from one side to the However, the rule does not apply where evidence presented
other as the exigencies of the trial require and shifts with is not equally weighty, such as where the evidence of the
alternating frequency. As the trial progresses, one party may prosecution is overwhelming (Malana v. People, G.R. No.
have presented evidence that weigh heavily in his favor and 173612).
sufficient to convince the court of the justness of the claim. If
this occurs, the other party has the burden to come forward Ubales v. People, G.R. No. 175692
in his own evidence to counteract whatever positive
impression which the evidence of the other party may have It is better to acquit ten guilty individuals than to convict one
been created in the mind of the court. innocent person. Every circumstance against guilt and in favor
of innocent must be considered. Also, an accused should not
Q: Distinguish burden of proof and burden of evidence. be convicted by reason of the weakness of his alibi. It is
fundamental that the prosecution must prove its case beyond
A: reasonable doubt and must not rely on the weakness of the
evidence of the defense.
BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
The obligation of a party to The duty of the party to go Mayon Hotel and Restaurant v. Adana (458 SCRA 609)
present evidence on the facts forward with the evidence to
in issue necessary to overthrow any prima facie In labor cases, if doubt exists between the evidence
establish his claim or defense presumption against him presented by the ER and the EE, the scales of justice must be
by the amount of evidence tilted in favor of the latter. The policy is to extend the
required doctrine to a greater number of employees who can avail of
the benefits under the law, which is inconsonance with the
Equipoise rule or equiponderance doctrine avowed state’s policy to give maximum aid and protection to
labor (Nicario v. NLRC, 295 SCRA 619).
Q: What is the basis of the Equipoise rule or equiponderance
doctrine?
A: It is a quantum of evidence applicable to civil cases. It People v. Ganguso (250 SCRA 268)
means “greater or superior weight of evidence.” It is more
convincing and more credible than the one offered by the Reasonable doubt standard is demanded by the due process
adverse party. It means evidence which is more convincing to clause of the constitution which protects the accused from
the court as worthy of the belief than that which is offered in conviction except upon proof beyond reasonable doubt of
opposition thereto. every fact necessary to constitute the crime which he is
charged. Xxx Moral certainty is only required, or that degree
Q: What should the court consider to determine the of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
existence of preponderance of evidence? The conscience must be satisfied that the accused is
responsible for the offense charged.
A:
1. All the facts and circumstances of the case; People v. Santiago, 420 SCRA 248 (p. 416)
2. The witness’ manner of testifying, their intelligence, their
means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they
testify, the probability or probability of their testimony; Sec. 5.Substantial evidence. — In cases filed before
3. The witness’ interest or want of interest, and also their administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be
personal credibility so far as the same may ultimately deemed established if it is supported by substantial
appear in the trial; evidence, or that amount of relevant evidence which a
4. The number of witnesses, although does not mean that reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a
preponderance is necessarily with the greater number. conclusion. (n)
Note: To persuade by preponderance of evidence is not Q: In what cases does this degree of evidence apply?
totake the evidence quantitatively but qualitatively.
A: This applies to administrative cases-those filed before
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT administrative and quasi-judicial bodies and which requires
that in order to establish a fact, the evidence should
Sec. 2.Proof beyond reasonable doubt. — In a criminal case, constitute that amount of relevant evidence which a
the accused is entitled to an acquittal, unless his guilt is reasonable man might accept as adequate to support a
shown beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable conclusion.
doubt does not mean such a degree of proof, excluding
possibility of error, produces absolute certainly. Moral Tongko v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Company (G.R. No.
certainly only is required, or that degree of proof which 167622)
produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. (2a)
The settled rule that in administrative and quasi-judicial
It is the constitutional presumption of innocence that lays proceedings, proof beyond reasonable doubt is not required
such burden upon the prosecution. The prosecution must in determining the legality of the ER’s dismissal of an EE, and
prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and must not rely on not even a preponderance of evidence is necessary as
the weakness of the evidence of the defense. substantial evidence is considered sufficient. Substantial
evidence is more than a mere scintilla of evidence or relevant
Yet, when the accused invokes a justifying circumstance like evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
self-defense, the burden of proof rests upon the defense to support a conclusion, even if other minds, equally reasonable,
prove that the killing was justified. might conceivably opine otherwise.
Note: Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a Duduaco v. Laquindanum, 466 SCRA 428
degree of proof that excludes all possibility of error. Only
moral certainty is required. Administrative proceedings against judges are highly penal in
character and are to be governed by the rules applicable to
Reasonable doubt does not refer to any doubt or a mere criminal cases. The quantum of evidence proof required to
possible doubt because everything in human experience is support administrative charges against judges should thus be
subject to possible doubt. It is that state of case which, after a more than substantial and requires proof beyond reasonable
comparison of all the evidence , does not lead the judge to doubt.
have in his mind, a moral certainty of the truth of the charge.
PREPONDERANCE OF SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE A: Bare allegations of bias and partiality of the judge are mot
EVIDENCE enough in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to
Applies to civil cases Applies to cases filed before overcome the presumption that the judge will undertake his
administrative or qua-judicial noble role to dispense justice according to law and evidence
bodies without fear or favor. Extrinsic evidence is required to
It means greater or superior Requires that in order to establish bias, bad faith, malice or corrupt purposes, in
weight of evidence. It is the establish a fact, the evidence addition to the palpable error that may be inferred from the
more evidence that is more should constitute the decisions of the decision or order itself (Rivera v. Mendoza,
convincing and more credible amount of relevant evidence A.M. No. RTJ-06-2013, 2006.
than the one offered by the which a reasonable mind
adverse party. might accept as adequate to Q: What should be the quantum in case of annulment or
support a conclusion reconveyance of title?
Quantum of evidence in a petition for a writ of amparo A: A party seeking it should establish not merely by
preponderance of evidence but by a clear and convincing that
Q: What is the quantum of evidence in a petition for a writ the land sought to be reconveyed is his.
of amparo?
Q: What should be the quantum in case of allegation of
A: The parties shall establish their claims by substantial frame-up and extortion?
evidence (Sec. 17, The Rule on the Writ of Amparo).
A: To substantiate the defense, including instigation, the
Effect of Failure to prove administrative liability on the evidence must be clear and convincing.
criminal case
NOTE: Denial is a weak form of evidence, particularly when it
Q: What is the effect of the failure to prove administrative is not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence.
liability on the criminal case?
A notarized instrument enjoys the presumption of due
A: The findings and conclusions in one should not necessarily execution. Only a clear and convincing evidence to the
be binding on the other. The evidence presented in the contrary can overcome this presumption (Viaje v. Pamintel,
administrative case may not necessarily be the same 2006).
evidence to be presented in the criminal case. The
prosecution is certainly not precluded from, adducing A person claiming moral damages must prove the existence
additional evidence to discharge the burden of proof required of bad faith by clear and convincing evidence for the law
in the criminal case. presumes good faith.
Also, the dismissal of the criminal case is not per se bar to Evidentiary weight of electronic evidence
administrative sanctions (Paredes v. CA, 2007).
Q: What factors should be considered in assessing the
Clear and convincing evidence Evidentiary weight of electronic evidence?
A: By an affidavit stating facts of direct personal knowledge of A: When the assumption is made from the facts without any
the affiant or based on authentic records. The affidavit must direction or positive requirement of law.
affirmatively show the competence of the affiant to testify on
the matters contained. Q: How would you categorize the presumption that an
accused is innocent until proven guilty?
Q: What are the kinds of presumptions? A: It may be contradicted or overcome by other evidence.
They are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be
A: contradicted and overcome by other evidence.
Q: What is the basis of the Conclusive presumptions under A: It is based on the grounds of public policy, fair dealing,
the Rules of Court? good faith and justice, and its purpose is to forbid one to
speak against his own act, representations, or commitments,
A: They are based on the doctrine of estoppel. Under this to the injury of one to whom they were directed and who
doctrine, the person making the representation cannot claim reasonably relied thereon (Harold v. Aliba, 2007).
benefit from the wrong he himself committed.
Disputable presumptions
Q: What is the common term for the first conclusive
presumption? Example: The presumption that official duty has been
regularly performed. This includes the presumptions of
A: Estoppel in pais or estoppel by conduct. regularity of service of summons.
A: It is an equitable principle rooted upon natural justice, A: No. Under Rule 17 of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo, the
prevents persons from going back on their own acts and respondent public official cannot invoke the presumption
representations, to the prejudice of others who have relied that official duty has been regularly performed to evade
on them. responsibility or liability.
The essential elements of Estoppel in pais may be considered NOTE: The presumption of innocence of the accused prevails
in relation to the party sought to be estopped, and in relation over the presumption that law enforcement agents were in
to the party invoking the estoppel in his favor. the regular performance of their duty.
Q: Is there a presumption of the compensability of an If there is doubt as to the fact whether the transaction is in
ailment? the nature of a mortgage, the presumption, in order to avoid
a forfeiture is always in favor of a position to redeem, to
A: No. subserve abstract justice and avert injurious consequences.
Presumptions of Death
Chapter VII
1. Absence of 7 years- if it is known whether or not the OFFER OF EVIDENCE AND TRIAL OBJECTIONS (Rule 132)
absentee is still alive, he is considered dead for all
purposes but not for the purpose of succession Sec. 34.Offer of evidence. — The court shall consider no
2. Absence of 10 years- the absentee shall be considered evidence which has not been formally offered. The purpose
dead for the purpose of opening his succession only after for which the evidence is offered must be specified. (35)
an absence of 10 years. Before the lapse of 10 years, he
shall not be considered dead if the purpose is the Sec. 35.When to make offer. — As regards the testimony of
opening of his succession a witness, the offer must be made at the time the witness is
3. Absence of 5 years- in relation to the immediately called to testify.
preceding number, if the absentee disappeared after the
age of 75 years, his absence for 5 years is sufficient for Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after the
the purpose of opening his succession in which case, it is presentation of a party’s testimonial evidence. Such offer
not necessary to wait for the lapse of 10 years.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within Yet, where the absence of an offer of a testimonial evidence
three (3) days after notice of the unless a different period is was not objected to as when the witness was cross-examined
allowed by the court. by the adverse party despite failure of counsel to make an
offer of the testimony of the witness, the court must consider
In any case, the grounds for the objections must be the testimony.
specified. (36a)
A document, or any article for that matter, is not evidence
Sec. 37.When repetition of objection unnecessary. — When when it is simply marked for identification; it must be
it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the formally offered, and the opposing counsel given an
examination of a witness that the question being opportunity to prove or identify it. A formal offer is necessary
propounded are of the same class as those to which since judges are required to base their findings of fact and
objection has been made, whether such objection was judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the
sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat parties at the trial.
the objection, it being sufficient for the adverse party to
record his continuing objection to such class of questions. Q: What is the distinction between the identification of
(37a) documentary evidence and its formal offer as an exhibit?
Sec. 38.Ruling. — The ruling of the court must be given A: The former is done in the course if the trial and is
immediately after the objection is made, unless the court accompanied by the marking of the evidence as an exhibit,
desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the while the second is done only when the party rests its case/
question presented; but the ruling shall always be made
during the trial and at such time as will give the party Q: When is a formal offer of evidence not required?
against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the
situation presented by the ruling. A:
1. In a summary proceeding because it is a proceeding
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need where there is no fill-blown trial;
not be stated. However, if the objection is based on two or 2. Documents judicially admitted or taken judicial notice of;
more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one or 3. Documents, affidavits and depositions used in rendering
some of them must specify the ground or grounds relied a summary judgment;
upon. (38a) 4. Documents or affidavits used in deciding quasi-judicial or
administrative cases;
Sec. 39.Striking out answer. — Should a witness answer the 5. Lost objects previously marked, identified, described in
question before the adverse party had the opportunity to the record, and testified by witness who had been
voice fully its objection to the same, and such objection is subject of cross-examination in respect to said objects.
found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the
objection and order the answer given to be stricken off the People v. Matte
record.
Q: What are the requirements for an evidence not formally
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out offered is allowable?
of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise
improper. (n) A:
1. The evidence must have been duly identified by
Sec. 40.Tender of excluded evidence. — If documents or testimony duly recorded; and
things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the 2. The same must have been incorporated in the records of
offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the the case.
record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may
state for the record the name and other personal People v. Libnao, G.R No. 136860
A: Objections to a documentary evidence shall be made after General and Specific Objections
it is offered and the offer of such evidence shall be made
after the presentation of a party’s testimonial evidence. An objection must point out the specific ground of the
objection, and if it does not do so, no error is committed in
A party is not deemed to have waived objection to overruling it.
admissibility of documents by his failure to object to the
same when they were marked, identified and then NOTE: The objection should be specific. Hence, an objector
introduced during the trial, because objection to must be explicit as to the legal ground he invokes. He cannot
documentary evidence must be made at the time it is simply manifest that he is interposing an objection. He has to
formally offered and not earlier. precisely state the exclusionary rule that would justify his
opposition to the proffered evidence.
People v. Diaz
Q: Give examples of general objections.
The mere fact that a document is marked as an exhibit does
not mean that it has thereby already been offered as part of A:
the evidence of a party. Yet, where the accused fails to object 1. Objection, the evidence is incompetent
to the admissibility of certain items during their formal offer, 2. Objection! Inadmissible!
he is deemed to have waived his right against their 3. Objection: Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial
admissibility. 4. Objection: Improper.
A: When a party makes a formal offer of his evidence, he A: They do not clearly indicate to the judge the ground upon
must state the nature or substance of the evidence, and the which the objections are predicated. They assign no grounds
specific purpose for which the evidence is offered. to the objection.
Q: What is the nature of a waiver? Admissibility of evidence should not be equated with weight
of evidence.
A: Waiver implies the existence of a right a claim, a privilege,
or something one is entitled to. It is by its nature a unilateral Q: Does the rule of waiver by failure to object applicable to
act. the admission of documentary evidence?
Q: Does it have to be a positive act? A: Yes. Failure to object waives an objection that there was
an irregularity in the taking of an affidavit or deposition, that
A: No. A waiver may result from failure to perform an act. the document is not what it purports to be on its face, or that
When the claim, or privilege is abandoned, repudiated, it is not relevant.
renounced, or not asserted, there is a waiver.
Rulings on objections
Applied to objections, there is a waiver there is failure to
point out some defect, irregularity, or wrong in the admission Q: When should the ruling of the court be given?
or exclusion of evidence. Such failure may take various forms
and may either be expressed or implied. A: Immediately after the objection is made except when the
court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the
Q: What if no objection is made to an otherwise question presented. However, the court must give its ruling
inadmissible evidence? during the trial and at such time as will give a party an
opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling.
A: The objection is deemed to have been waived by the party
upon whom making the objection is incumbent. NOTE: Words like “submitted” or “the objections are noted”
are not appropriate rulings and neither sustains or overrules
Note that the right to object is merely a privilege which the the objections.
party may waive. Thus, once admitted, the testimony is in the
case for what it is worth, and the judge has no power to Q: What do you mean by “sustained”?
disregard it for what it is worth, and the judge has no power
to disregard it for the sole reason that it could have been A: The judge considers the question as improper and the
excluded if objected to, nor can he strike it out on his own witness will not be allowed to answer the question. This
motion (Marella v. Reyes. 12 Phil 1). means the exclusion of a testimonial evidence.
Q: When an objection to evidence is deemed waived, what A: This means that for the court, the question is proper and
exactly does the non-objecting party waive? the witness will be allowed to answer.
A: He waives objections to its admissibility. The evidence NOTE: The ruling sustaining the objection must specify the
becomes admissible but the waiver involves no admission ground or grounds relied upon.
that the evidence possesses the weight attributed to it by the
offering party. Tender of excluded evidence (Offer of proof) (Rule 132)
Q: Is waiver an admission that the evidence is credible? Sec. 40.Tender of excluded evidence. — If documents or
things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the
A:
1. Where the counsel tells the court what the proposed
testimony will be. This is the method prescribed in the
Rules of Court. The counsel shall state for the record the
name and personal circumstances of the witness.
2. By using the question and answer form REFERENCE:
NOTE: Whichever method is to be used lies in the discretion Riano, Willard B., EVIDENCE: The Bar Lecture Series, 2009, Rex
of the trial court. Whichever method of tender is used, the Book Store.
advocate must see to it that the offer must be specific
enough to contain the facts and circumstances of the matter
sought to be proved by the excluded evidence.