rule 130 sec 28 - declaration against interest (Dead Man Statute) - 4 requisites

requisites for the admissibility of res gestae

spontaneous acts - 4
verbal acts - 4

types of res gestae - 2

Exchequer Rule - a trial court's error as to the admission of evidence was presumed to have
caused prejudice and therefore, almost automatically required a new trial
Chain of custody, sec. 21, Art. II, RA 9165 - 4 STEPS
categories of OBJECT evidence - 3
pg 125
admissibility of OBJECT or REAL evidence - 4 requisites
Judicial notice, mandatory - 9
sec 1, rule 129

Judicial notice, discretionary - 3

sec 2, rule 129
real evidence that requires authentication - 5
not considered judicial admissions - 5
when judicial admissions may be contradicted - 2 sec 4, rule 129
Exception sa Original Document Rule - 5 sec 3, rule 130
Disqualifications by reason of privilege communication- 5, Rule 130, sec 24

Burden of proof never shifts!!

Conclusive presumptions - 2
Disputable presumptions- 37
Dying declaration - 6 (or 4); pg 11 notes fsl
Admission by silence - sec 33 rule 130; 5
Confession to be admissible as evidence - 5; sec 34 Rule 130
* Corpus delicti - 2

Best Evidence Rule - Original Document Rule

Hearsay Evidence Rule - Testimony based on personal knowledge

Disqualifications of witnesses - 4
Disqualifications by reason of privilege communication- 5

Q: Who are witnesses disqualified by reason of privileged communication?

A: The ff persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the ff cases: 5
a. Husband and wife;
b. Atty and client;
c. Priest and penitent;
d. Doctor and patient; and
 e. Public officer

Admission v Confession- 4
Admission v declaration against interest- 4

Admission by third party/ res inter alios acta rule

Kinds of res inter alia acta- 2 (admission by 3rd party & similar acts as evidence)
EXCEPTIONS- 5
a. Admission by a third person who is a co-partner, agent;
b. Acts, declaration, or omission of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly
interested with the party;
c. Admission by a co-conspirator;
d. Admission by privies; and
e. Admission by silence.

Declaration by silence: 5
The rule allowing silence of a person to be taken as an implied admission of the truth of the
statements uttered in his presence is applicable in criminal cases. But before the silence of a
party can be taken as an admission of what is said, it must appear:
(1) that he heard and understood the statement;
(2) that he was at liberty to interpose a denial;
(3) that the statement was in respect to some matter affecting his rights or in which he was then
interested, and calling, naturally, for an answer;
(4) that the facts were within his knowledge; and
(5) that the fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence would be material to the
issue (IV Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines, 1973 ed., p. 316). These
requisites of admission by silence all obtain in the present case. Hence, the silence of Mirasol
on the facts asserted by the accused and his witnesses may be safely construed as an
admission of the truth of such assertion.

Classifications of confession- 2 (Judicial and extrajudicial)

Requisites in order that confession is admissible- 4

Similar acts in evidence- sec 35, rule 130

EXCEPTIONS- 9

Unaccepted offer- sec 36, rule 130

Requirements of a valid offer of payment- 2

Hearsay- sec 37, rule 130

Nature- inadmissible EXCEPT as otherwise provided in the Rules Of Court
EXCEPTIONS to such rule- 13 - page 516 UP
Q: When is a statement not hearsay?
A: A statement is not hearsay, if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to
cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is:

a. Inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under oath subject to the
penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing or other proceeding or in a deposition;
b. Consistent w the declarant’s testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied
charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive; OR
c. One of identification of a person made after perceiving him or her.

They are of three kinds:

1) The Non-Hearsay Statements also referred to as the Independently

relevant statements and therefore admissible.

a)Statements the making of which are the very fact in issue.

b)Statements which are circumstantial evidence of the fact in

issue

2) The Hearsay Statements which are inadmissible under Section 37.

3) The Hearsay Statements but admissible as an exception under
Sections 38 to 50. (13 exceptions)

Dying declarations are grounded on- 2 (necessity and trustworthiness)

Kinds. Of dying declaration- 3, page 451 tan
Requisites to be admissible- 4 or 6 huhu

Requisites of declaration against interest- 4

Admissions against interest v declarations against interest- 2

“Pedigree” includes the ff:

a. Relationship;
b. Family genealogy;
c. Birth;
d. Marriage;
e. Death;
f. The dates when and the places where these facts occurred; and
g. The names of the relatives;
h. It embraces also facts of family history intimately connected w pedigree.
Requisites in case of an act and declaration abt pedigree- 4
Forms of declaration abt pedigree- 2 (oral and written)

How to prove common reputation- 3

a. By testimonial evidence of a competent witness;
b. Monuments and inscriptions in public places;
c. By documents containing statements of reputation.
Requisites- 4

Res gestae v dying declaration- 3

Ways of impeaching an adverse party’s witness - 3

1. 1. By contradictory evidence;
2. 2. By evidence that the general reputation for truth, honesty or integrity of the witness is
bad; or
3. 3. By evidence that the witness has made at other times statements inconsistent with his
present testimony. (Sec. 11, Rule 132)

The other modes of impeaching a witness are:

1. By involving him during cross-examination in contradiction;
2. By showing the impossibility or improbability of his testimony;
3. By proving action or conduct of the witness inconsistent with his testimony; and
4. By showing bias, interest or hostile feeling against the adverse party. (Herrera, 1999)