ADAMSON UNIVERSITY College of Law Syllabus in Remedial Law II (Evidence) Second Semester-2012-2013

PROF. PEDRO T. DABU, JR.

I. MEANING OF EVIDENCE ( Section 1, Rule 128) i. Proof vs. evidence ii. Factum probans vs. factum probandum iii. Direct evidence vs. circumstantial evidence iv. Positive evidence vs. negative evidence v. Burden of proof (onus probandi) vs. burden of evidence II. KINDS OF EVIDENCE A. Object (Real) Evidence B Documentary Evidence C. Testimonial Evidence

III. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE (Sections 3 &4, Rule 128) 1. Requisites for the Admissibility of Evidence 1. relevancy 2. not excluded by law and the rules of court 2. Test for Determining the Relevancy of Evidence: relationship between the fact in issue and the offered evidence i. Bautista vs. Aperece (51 O.G. 805, 1954) ii. People vs. Galleno, 291 SCRA 761 3. Relevance of Evidence on the credibility of a witness i. People vs. Calumpang, 454 SCRA 719 ii. Ubales vs. People, October 29, 2008 IV. Exclusionary Rule: 1. Under the Constitution: i. Art. III, Sections 2, 3, 12 and 17

ii. Fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine iii. Morales vs. Enrile, G.R. No. L-61016, April 26, 1983; iv. People v. Sison, G.R. No. 119307, August 20, 1999, v. People vs. Alicando, 251 SCRA 293 vi. Stonehill vs. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 2. Under the law 1. Chain of Custody in Drug Cases: Section 21, Article II, RA 9165 i. People vs. Garcia, February 25, 2009 ii. Carino vs. People, 581 SCRA 388, iii. People vs. Llamado, March 13, 2009 2. RA. 4200- Anti-Wire Tapping Act i. Ganaan v. IAC, 145 SCRA 112 ii. Salcedo-Ortanez v. CA, 235 SCRA 111; 3. R.A. 9372- Human Security Act of 2007, 4. RA 53 as amended by RA 1477 i. A.M. No. 93-2-037 SC April 6, 1995 In Re: Emil (Emiliano) P. Jurado; V. Rules of Admissibility and Inadmissibility under the Rules of Court A. Documentary Evidence (Section 2, Rule 130) 1. Best Evidence Rule: original document (Sections 3 and 4, Rule 130) i. Tiu vs. Philippine Bank of Communications, 596 SCRA 432 ii. BPI vs. SMP, Inc. 609 SCRA 577 2. Introduction of secondary evidence (Sec. 5, Rule 130) i. Air France v. Carrascoso, 18 SCRA 155; ii. Villa Rey Transit v. Ferrer, 25 SCRA 845; iii. Magdayao v. People, G.R. 152 881, Aug. 17, 2005; iv. People v. Tandoy, 192 SCRA 98; v. De Vera v. Aguilar, 218 SCRA 602. vi. Manila Mining Corp. vs. Tan, 578 SCRA 577 3. Parole Evidence Rule (Section 9, Rule 130; Art. 1403, Civil Code) i. Madrigal v. CA, G.R. 142944, April 15, 2005; ii. Ortanez V. CA, 266 SCRA 561; iii. Inciong v. CA, 257 SCRA 578; iv. Cruz v. CA, 192 SCRA 209; v. PNB v. Seeto, 91 Phil. 756. 2

vi. Estate of Orlando Llenado vs. Llenado, 580 SCRA 546

4. Interpretation of Documents [Sections 10-19, Rule 130; Arts. 13701379, Civil Code] i. Lambert v. Fox, 26 Phil. 588; ii. Capital Insurance v. Sadang, 21 SCRA 1183. 5. Electronic Documents (A.M. No. 01-7-01 SC), meaning; requisites for admissibility (1) complies with the rules on admissibility and (2) authenticated in the manner prescribed by the REE

i. MCC Industrial Corp. v. Sasngyong Corp., 536 SCRA 408,Oct 17, 2007. ii. Torres vs. Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp, 661 SCRA 621 iii. Ang vs. Court of Appeals, 618 SCRA 592 iv. National Power Corporation vs. Codilla, 520 SCRA 412 v. Nuez v. Cruz-Apao, A.M. No. CA-05-18-P. April 12, 2005 vi. Garcillano vs. House of Rep. Committee on Public Info, 575 SCRA 170, 2008

B. Testimonial Evidence 1. Qualification of witnesses (Section 20, Rule 130) 2. Disqualifications: 1. Mental incapacity or immaturity (Sec. 21, Rule 130: Compare with Sec. 2, Rule 92) i. People v. De Jesus, 129 SCRA 4; ii. People v. Salomon, 229 SCRA 402; iii. People v. Mendoza, 254 SCRA 18). 2. Marital Disqualification or Spousal Immunity (Sec. 22) i. Alvarez v. Ramirez, Oct. 14, 2005; ii. Lim v. CA 214 SCRA 273; iii. Krohn v. CA, 233 SCRA 146; iv. U.S. v. Antipolo, 37 Phil. 726; v. People vs. Carlos, 47 Phil. 626; vi. Lezama, et al. v. Rodriguez, et al., June 27, 1968; viii. People v. Francisco, 78 Phil. 694 3. Dead Mans Statute or Survivorship Disqualification Rule (Section 23) 3

i. Icard v. Masigan, April 8, 1941; ii. Ong Chua v. Carr, January 17, 1929; iii. Goi, et al. vs. CA, Sept. 23, 1986; iv. Babao vs. Perez, 102 Phil. 756; v. Londres, et al. v. CA, December 17, 2003; vi. Naagas v. Mun. of San Narciso, 53 Phil. 719; vii. Tongco v. Vianzon, 50 Phil. 698 4. Privileged Communication (Section 24) 4.1. Husband and Wife (Section 24 (a) i. People vs. Carlos, 47 Phil. 626 [1925] 4.2. Lawyer-Client (Section 24 (b) i. Regala, Angara, et al. vs. Sandiganbayan, et al. September 20, 1996; [last link doctrine] ii. People vs. Sandiganbayan, July 16, 1997, 275 SCRA 505 4.3. Doctor-Patient (Section 24 (c ) i. Lim vs. CA, 25 September 1992, 214 SCRA 273; ii. Krohn v. CA, 233 SCRA 146 4.4. Priest-Confessant (Section 24 [d] 4.5. Public Interest Privilege (Section 25 (e) Operational Communications Proximity Test and Privilege Presidential

i. Neri vs. Senate, 549 SCRA 77, March 25, 2008: Executive Privilege ii. Senate v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1, April 20, 2006 iii. In re: Sabio vs. Gordon, et al. October 17, 2006; iv. Banco Filipino vs. Monetary Board, 142 SCRA 523 [1986]). 4.6. Parental and Filial Privilege (Section 25, Rule 130; Art. 215 Family Code; i. Emma Lee vs. CA 625 SCRA 66, July 13, 2010 4.7. Hearsay Evidence Rule (Sec. 36, Rule 130) Exceptions:

1. Dying declaration (Sec. 37) i. People vs. Maglian, 646 SCRA 770, March 30, 2011 ii. People vs. Serenas, 622 SCRA 485, June 29, 2010 iii. People vs. Cerilla, 539 SCRA 251, November 28, 2007 2. Declaration against interest (Sec. 38) i. Lazaro vs. Agustin, 618 SCRA 298, April 15, 2010 ii. People v. Majuri, 96 SCRA 472; iii. People v. Toledo, 51 Phil. 825; iv. Fuentes v. CA, 253 SCRA 430; v. Heirs of Miguel Franco v. CA, Dec. 11, 2003. vi. Cavile vs. Litania-Hong, 581 SCRA 408 3. Acts or declaration about pedigree (Sec. 39) i. Tison v. CA, 276 SCRA 582, ii. People v. Alegado, 201 SCRA 37; iii. Gravador v. Mamigo, 20 SCRA 742. iv. Tandog vs. Macapagal, 532 SCRA 550 4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree (Sec. 40) i. Ferrer v. Ynchausti, 38 Phil. 905 5. Common reputation (sec. 41) i. Ferrer v. Ynchausti, 38 Phil. 905; ii. City of Manila v. Del Rosario, 5 Phil. 227 6. Part of res gestae (Sec. 42) i. People vs. Jose, February 6, 1971 ii. People vs. Esoy, 617 SCRA 552 iii. People vs. Sace, 617 SCRA 336 iv. Talidano vs. Falcon Maritime & Allied Services, Inc. 558 SCRA 279 7. Entries in the course of business (Sec. 43) i. Jose, Jr. vs. Michaelmar Phils. Inc. 604 SCRA 116 ii. Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Monets Export and Manufacturing Corp. 618 SCRA 451 iii. Basay vs. Hacienda Consolacion, 618 SCRA 422 iv. Sapio vs. Undaloc Construction, 554 SCRA 148 8. Entries in official records (Sec. 44) i. Alvarez vs. PICOP Resources Inc. 606 SCRA 444 ii. Valeroso vs. People, 546 SCRA 450 iii. Llemos vs. Llemos, 513 SCRA 128 iv. Fullero vs. People, 533 SCRA 97 5

9. Commercial list and the like (Sec. 45) i. PNOC Shipping v. CA, 299 SCRA 402 10. Learned treatises (Sec. 46) 11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding (Sec.47) I. Tan v. CA, 20 SCRA 54 ii. Manliclic vs. Calaunan, 512 SCRA 642 12. Opinion testimony (Sections 48- 50) i. Tabao vs. People, 654 SCRA 216 ii. Manzano, Jr. vs. Garcia, 661 SCRA 350 iii. Verias vs. COMELEC, 612 SCRA 386 iv. Obando vs. People, 624 SCRA 299 v. Ngo Te vs. Yu-Te. 579 SCRA 193 vi. Lucas vs. Tuano, 586 SCRA 173 vii. Progressive Trade & Service Enterprises vs. Antonio, 600 SCRA 683 viii. People vs. Gragasin, 597 SCRA 214 ix. Pontaoc vs. Pontaoc, 552 SCRA 261 X. Libres vs. De los Santos, 554 SCRA 642 xi. People vs. Villasan, 603 SCRA 241 xii. People vs. Quebral, 606 SCRA 247 13. Independent relevant statements i. Bedol vs. Comelec, 606 SCRA 554 II. People vs. Gumimba, 517 SCRA 25

C. OBJECT EVIDENCE (Section 1, Rule 130) i. People vs. Alcuizar,647 SCRA 431 I. Demonstrative Evidence 1. DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) Evidence (A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC, October 2, 2007) i. People vs. Vallejo, 382 SCRA 192, May 9, 2002 ii. People vs. Janson, 400 SCRA 584, April 4, 2003 iii. People vs. Yatar, 428 SCRA 504, May 19, 2004 iv. People vs. Umanito, 537 SCRA 552, October 26, 2007 v. Estate of Rogelio G. Ong vs. Diaz, 540 SCRA 480, December 17, 2007 vi. Agustin vs. CA, 460 SCRA 315, June 15, 2005 vii. Lucas vs. Lucas, 650 SCRA 667, June 6, 2011 viii. Lejano vs. People, 638 SCRA 104, December 14, 2010 OTHER CASES (jurisprudential history) 6

i. Pe Lim vs. Court of Appeals, 270 SCRA 1 ii. Tijing vs.CA, 354 SCRA 17, March 8, 2001 iii. Tecson vs. COMELEC, 424 SCRA 277, March 3, 2004 iv. People vs. Cabigquez, 540 SCRA 480, December 17, 2007

2. Photographs i. Sison vs. People, 250 SCRA 58,75 3. Paraffin Tests See certain cases under expert testimony 4, Polygraph tests (Lie Detector Tests) i. People vs. Reanzares, June 29, 2000 ii. People vs. Carpo, April 4, 2001 VI. Admissions and confessions 1. Admission by a party (Section 26, Rule 130) 2. Offer of compromise (Section 27) 3. Admission by third party (Section 28) i. doctrine of adoptive admission (Estrada vs. Desierto, 356 SCRA 108) 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Admission by copartner or agent (Section 29) Admission by a conspirator (Section 30) Admission by privies (Section 31) Admission by silence (Section 32) Confession (Section 33)

VII. Similar Acts Rule (Sec. 34, Rule 130) VS. Character Evidence (Sec. 51, Rule 130) i. People v. Umabana, 402 SCRA 415; ii. People v. Soliman, 53 O.G. 8083; iii. People v. Babiera, 52 Phil. 97. . VIII. MATTERS THAT NEED NO PROOF 1. Mandatory Judicial Notice [Section1, Rule 129] i. Solidbank Corporation, (now Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company) vs. Permanent Homes, Incorporated [G.R. No. 171925 : July 23, 2010], or 2. Discretionary Judicial Notice [Sections 2-3, Rule 129]

i. State Prosecutors vs. Muro, A.M. No. RTJ-92-876 September 19, 1994; ii. People vs. Godoy, 250 SCRA 626; iii. City of Manila vs. Garcia, 19 SCRA 413. 3. Facts admitted or not denied if they are sufficiently alleged in the pleadings [Sec.1, Rule 8]. 4. Facts legally presumed [Sections 2 and 3, Rule 131]; i. Pornellosa vs. LTA, L-14040, Jan. 31, 1986; ii. IFC vs. Tobias, 78 SCRA 28]. 5. Judicial Admissions [Sec. 4, Rule 129]; 5.1. Extra-judicial confessions IX. BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS (Sections 1-4, Rule 131) 1. Civil i. Pornellosa v. LTA G.R. 14040, Jan. 31, 1986 ii. IFC v. Tobias, 78 SCRA 28 2. Criminal People v. Tampos, 408 SCRA 403 People Madera, G.R. 138662-63, Nov. 4, 2003 People v. Vergara, G.R. 160328, Feb. 4, 2005 People v. Cuadro, 352 SCRA 537 People v. Aca-ac, 357 SCRA 373 3. Presumptions People v. Cario, June 15, 2004; People v. Padiernos, 69 SCRA 484; Pascual v. Angeles, 4 Phil. 604; Ormachea v. Trillana, 13 Phil. 194 X. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE (Rule 132) A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES (Sections 1-18) 1. Examination in open court (Section 1) People v. Estenzo, 72 SCRA 428; Galman v. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 294 2. Rights and Obligations of a witness (Section 3) 3. Order in the examination of a witness (Section 4) 1. Direct examination by the proponent (Section 5) 1.1. Leading Question not allowed; exceptions (Section 10) 8

1.1. Judicial Affidavit Rule (A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC) 2. Cross Examination; its purpose and extent (Section 6) 2.1. Leading question allowed; but not misleading question (Section 10) 2.2. Dela Paz v. IAC, 154 SCRA 65; 2.3. Fulgado v. CA, 182 SCRA 81; 2.4. U.S. v. Mercado, 26 Phil. 127; 3. Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent (Section 7) 4. Re-cross examination (Section 8) 5. Recalling witnesses (Section 9) i. People v. Del Castillo, 25 SCRA 716; ii. Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Ong Su, 79 SCRA 207; iii. People v. Rivera, 200 SCRA 786. 4. Impeachment of adverse partys witness (Section 11) 5. Impeachment of own witness; exceptions (Section 12) 1. Unwilling or hostile witness 2. Adverse party witness 6. Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement (Section 13) i. Villalon v. IAC, 144 SCRA 443; ii. People v. Resabal, 50 Phil. 780; iii. People v. Mangahas, June 28, 1999; 7. Impeachment by other means i. U.S. v. Mercado, 20 Phil. 127 8. Exclusion of Witnesses (Section 15) i. People v. Sandal, 54 Phil. 883 9. Examination of Child Witness i. People v. Avendao, 396 SCRA 309 B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS 1. Classes of Documents (Section 19) 2. Authentication of documentary evidence 2.1. Private document (Sections 20 & 22; also Section 21) 2.2. Public document ( Sections 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30) C. OFFER OF EVIDENCE AND OBJECTION

1. Importance of offer (Section 34, Rule 132) 2. When to make offer (Section 35) 3. Objection (Section 36) Testimonial: 1st: When the offer is made 2nd: When an objectionable question is asked of the witness Documentary and object evidence When the document is offered in evidence i. People v. Cario, 165 SCRA 664; ii. Catuira v. CA, 236 SCRA 398; iii. Vda. De Oate v. CA, 250 SCRA 283; iv. People v. Yatco, 97 Phil. 940; v. PHILAMGEN v. Lines, Inc., 212 SCRA 194.

4. Remedy for evidence not formally offered: 1. By tender offer (Sec. 40, Rule 130) 2. By evidence on motion (Sec. 7, Rule 133) 3. Evidence that were duly authenticated and marked during the trial and form part of the record can be pointed out to the court for its consideration. XI. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE (Rule 133) Preponderance of evidence Proof beyond reasonable doubt Substantial evidence Clear and convincing evidence

10