EVIDENCE

RULE 128
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.
B. Connecting the chain of events through
Evidence during Trial:
 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.
C. Factum Probandum and Factum Probans

 Factum Probandum – The ultimate facts to be

proven. These are the propositions of law.
 Examples:
 • murder was committed thru treachery
 Factum Probans – The evidentiary Facts. These
addresses questions of fact.
 Examples:
 • exit wounds were in front indicating that victim
was shot at the back
 Thus, the outcome of every trial is determined by:

 • Propositions of law, and

 • Questions of fact.
D. Proof and Evidence

 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.
 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]
E. Exclusionary Rule. (Fruit of the poisonous
tree doctrine)
 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”.
F. Principle of Chain of Custody of Evidence

 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.
II. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

 A. Concepts of evidence:
General Provisions

 1. It is a means of ascertainment – used to arrive at a legal

conclusion
 2. It is sanctioned by the rules of court – meaning, not excluded
by the rules on relevancy and admissibility
 3. It is used in a judicial proceeding – there is a jural conflict
involving different rights asserted by different parties
 4. It pertains to the truth respecting a matter of fact – evidence
represents a “claim” either for the prosecution or for the defense
where issues (clashes of view) are present.