Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rules On Criminal Evidence Summary Outline
Rules On Criminal Evidence Summary Outline
Evidence
I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATION:
As an element of our Criminal Justice System, it is the duty of every law enforcement agencies to
provide the prosecution with the materials and information (Evidence) necessary in order to support
conviction.
Every person is entitled to be presumed innocent of a crime or wrong, unless proven otherwise. This is a
prima facie presumption which must be overcome by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Trial refers to “the examination before a competent tribunal, according to the laws of the land, of
the facts in issue in a cause, for the purposes of determining such issue” (U.S. v. Raymundo, 14
Phil 416).
Evidence helps in the determination of Questions of Facts by helping the judge reconstruct the
chain of events from the conception up to the consummation of a criminal design.
Factum Probandum – The ultimate facts to be proven. These are the propositions of law.
Examples:
• murder was committed thru treachery
• robbery was made through force upon things
Examples:
• exit wounds were in front indicating that victim was shot at the back
• destroyed locks indicative of force upon things
Evidence – the means to arrive at a conclusion. Under the Revised Rules of Court, evidence is
defined as “the means, sanctioned by the rules, for ascertainment in a judicial proceeding, the
truth, respecting a matter of fact”.
Proof – the result of introducing evidence. The establishment of a requisite degree of belief in the
mind of the judge as to the facts in issue. It refers to the accumulation of evidence sufficient to
persuade the trial court.
Burden of proof – the duty of the affirmative to prove that which it alleges.
1. Criminal Action – proof beyond reasonable doubt [that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind]
2. Civil Action – preponderance of evidence [evidence of greater weight or more convincing
than that which is offered to refute it]
3. Administrative Action – sufficiency of evidence [that amount of relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion]
Evidence ILLEGALLY OBTAINED are inadmissible for reasons of public policy. This is so because
of the constitutional requirement of due process. Due process has been defined as “the law that
hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after fair trial”.
As a result, jurisprudence has evolved a rule that renders inadmissible any evidence obtained in
an illegal search from being introduced in trial.
If the evidence is of a type which cannot be easily recognized or can readily be confused or
tampered with, the proponent of the object must present evidence of its chain of custody. The
proponent need not negate all possibilities of substitution or tampering in the chain of custody, but
must show that:
The evidence is identified as the same object which was taken from the scene;
It was not tampered with, or that any alteration can be sufficiently explained (i.e. discoloration due
to the application of ninhydrine solution, etc.); and
The persons who have handled the evidence are known and may be examined in court with
regard to the object.
A. Concepts of evidence:
Admissibility of Evidence:
For evidence to be admissible, it must be:
1) relevant to the issue [relevancy test], and
2) not excluded by the law or rules of court [competency test].
Note: To determine the relevancy of any item of proof, the purpose for which it is sought to be
introduced must first be known (There must be a formal offer).
Whether or not the factual information tendered for evaluation of the trial court would be helpful in
the determination of the factual issue that is disputed.
It is the tendency of the evidence to establish the proposition that it is offered to prove.
“Collateral Matters” not admissible except when it tend in any reasonable degree to establish
probability or improbability of the fact in issue.
Collateral matters – matters other than the fact in issue and which are offered as a basis for
inference as to the existence or non-existence of the facts in issue.
1. Antecedent circumstances – facts existing before the commission of the crime [i.e. hatred,
bad moral character of the offender, previous plan, conspiracy, etc.]
2. Concomitant circumstances – facts existing during the commission of the crime [i.e.
opportunity, presence of the accused at the scene of the crime, etc.]
3. Subsequent circumstances – facts existing after the commission of the crime [i.e. flight,
extrajudicial admission to third party, attempt to conceal effects of the crime, possession of stolen
property, etc.]
Judicial notice is based on necessity and expediency. This is so because what is known need not
be proved.
Different kinds of judicial notices:
1. mandatory
2. discretionary
3. hearing required
Yes. A forged or spurious document when presented in court for examination is considered as the
original fake/forged document. Thus, a mere photocopy of the allegedly forged or spurious
document is only secondary to the original questioned document.
Secondary Evidence
When the original document has been:
1. lost,
2. destroyed, or
3. cannot be produced in court.
Qualifications of witnesses:
1. can perceive
2. can make known their perception to others
3. not disqualified by reason of mental incapacity, immaturity, marriage, privileged
communications, or “dead man’s statute”.
Exception:
1. admission by a co-partner or agent
2. admission by a conspirator
3. admission by privies
4. admission by silence
In the above cases, the admission of one person is admissible as evidence against another.
Testimonial Knowledge:
General Rule: A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge;
that is, which are derived from his own perception. Any statement which derives its strength from
another’s personal knowledge is hearsay, and is therefore inadmissible.
Exceptions:
1. Dying declarations (ante-mortem statements)
2. Declaration against interest
3. Act or declaration about pedigree
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
5. Common reputation
6. Part of the res gestae
7. Entries in the course of business
8. Entries in official records
9. Commercial lists and the like
10. Learned treatises
11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
12. Examination of child victim/witness in cases of child abuse
Burden of proof – the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law.
Presumption – an inference as to the existence of a fact not actually known, arising from its usual
connection with another which is known or a conjecture based on past experience as to what
course human affairs ordinarily take.
2 kinds of presumptions:
1. Conclusive presumptions [jure et de jure] – based on rules of substantive law which cannot be
overcome by evidence to the contrary.
2. Disputable presumptions [prima facie presumptions, rebuttable presumptions] – based on
procedural rules and may be overcome by evidence to the contrary.
Note: For Kinds of disputable presumptions, see Sec. 3, Rule 131 of the Revised Rules of Court.
Presentation of Evidence:
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be done is open court, and
under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a
different mode of answer, the answer of the witness shall be given orally.
Direct examination – the examination in chief of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts
relevant to the issue.
Cross examination – the examination by the adverse party of the witness as to any matter stated
in the direct examination, or connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom from interest
or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue.
Re-direct examination – second questioning by the proponent to explain or supplement answers
given in the cross examination.
Re-cross examination – second questioning by the adverse party on matters stated on the re-
direct and also on such matters as may be allowed by court.
Classes of Documents:
Documents are either public or private.
1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of sovereign authority, official bodies
and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or a foreign country.
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments.
3. Public records (1) kept in the Philippines, or private documents (2) required by law to be
entered therein.
Verba legis non est decendendum – from the words of the law there can be no departure.
Dura lex sed lex – the law may be harsh but it is the law.
Nulum crimen, nulla poena sine lege – there is no crime when there is no law punishing the
same.
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea – the act cannot be criminal where the mind is not
criminal.
Actus mi invictu reus, nisi mens facit reum – an act done by me against my will is not my act.
Pro Reo – principle in Criminal Law which states that where the statute admits of several
interpretations, the one most favorable to the accused shall be adopted.
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus – false in one part of the statement would render the entire
statement false (note: this maxim is not recognized in our jurisdiction)